Hamlet has been produced in a variety of ways, but making a movie out of Hamlet is very different. When producing Hamlet on film there are some liberties that are taken for either artistic benefit or to keep it shorter. These liberties are up to the director's interpretation of Hamlet. The director's interpretations make each Hamlet production different. Unique differences make each Hamlet interesting.
             When I watch a production of Hamlet I find myself looking at the dialogue. I try to remember how Shakespeare wrote it and then compare it to how the actors are performing it. The dialogue in Hamlet is key and the success of a production depends on having it performed successfully. In the Mel Gibson production they add a lot to the dialogue especially in the beginning. The film begins at the funeral of King Hamlet rather than on the watch with Marcellus and Bernardo. The Mel Gibson version also takes a lot of dialogue out of Hamlet including the whole idea of Fortinbras. He is not in the 1990 production so that it is shorter. As for the 1964 version where Anthony Hopkins plays Claudius, the dialogue is almost exactly the way Shakespeare wrote it. In the Laurence Olivier version the dialogue is very near the original. The production is artistically narrated rather than all being said aloud. I think this production was very interesting and provides more explanation of Hamlet as you hear some of his great speeches as his thoughts rather than speech. The 1948 and the 1964 production were very near the actual dialogue while the 1990 version with Gibson had several differences. All three were very good but the dialogue in the Laurence Olivier production was much better.
             Character portrayal can make one Hamlet production better than another. In the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet Laertes seems like he is weak. The actor playing him d
             ...