Hamlet & Cheese

It was just this morning that I was asked by the dishy Michelle how I knew certain things. The "certain things" in this case being movies and directors and reviews and such. I explained it away by saying, everyone has his or her area of expertise and interest.

What I didn't say was that we also have our areas of ineptitude.

I don't guess there's any real harm in my admitting that I'm hopelessly non well-read. It's not that I don't like to read. I do, from time to time. It goes in phases, where I'll read something voraciously till it's over, or I'll read here and there, when I'm alone in the doctor's office, or the restaurant, or waiting for the movie to start.

The problem is, I just read what I like. Basically essays, with the occasional novel thrown in for good measure. But I've never had any great yen to read The Classics. "War and Peace?" Nope. "Les Miserables?" Nuh-uh. "The Cherry Orchard? Pride and Prejudice? Nicholas Nickelby?" Nip, nip, nip. "Anna Karenina?" Nyet. Well, you get the idea. I haven't even read the modern classics, like "Catcher In The Rye" or "Catch-22." Or any other book with "Catch" in the title, I daresay.

Which brings us to Hamlet, that melancholy Dane. Now, I'm not a total boob where Shakespeare is concerned, I got through some in school, "Romeo & Juliet," "Julius Caesar," and "MacBeth," the last of which I really liked as a story and a play. I discovered "Henry V" and "Much Ado About Nothing" in a much more pleasant way, via Kenneth Brannagh films. And "Richard III," I knew the story of anyway, and have seen treatments of it as well.

But Hamlet. Where were you, sweet prince?

(As an aside: After seeing "Henry V," still a great film that bowls me over, I actually went back to read the play. I flipped to the St Crispian's day speech, read it a few times, and that's as far as it got.)

For some reason, I was never introduced to Hamlet in school. High school or college. I knew all the soundbites, the one-off lines, the dead father and his ghostie, you know, the basics. But for some reason, recently I've been wanting to get to know my Hamlet.

A while back I saw Brannagh's screen version of the play. But, apparently after having some of those great successes with Shakespeare plays, the studio gave Ken free reign in filmmaking. And the result was an overly long, overly bloated, overly visual, overly expensive, overly everything type of a movie. I didn't like it, I didn't pay attention to it, and not even that charming Brannagh face could get me interested. I zoned in and out. Mostly out. And I forgot about Hamlet for a while.

Imagine my surprise and excitement when I saw that one of our movie channels was showing the original "Hamlet," the Laurence Olivier one, last week. Wow, I thought, this was 1948. There's no way this can be a big overbloated extravaganza of boredom! And I'll get to see good old Larry in the role he's probably most known for amongst all others, if you don't count the Nazi tooth-puller in "Marathon Man."

I snuggled into the Comfy Chair, got a water and a blankie, and started watching the movie. I didn't get far. How far? Well, I was dozing before I even got to see Lord O. I woke up at one point to see the stepfather and new king harking and forsoothing to the court, and it was back to dozing. Oh, well.

Damn you, Hamlet! You're one tough nut to crack!

I even went so far as to, last weekend, suggest to Mr M watching a movie that he likes and I don't like. I really really don't like. "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead," a Tom Stoppard play that takes a really skewered roundabout stab at Hamlet. So much so that it's not about Hamlet at all. It's one of those what I call "paper movies." Good idea on paper, just sucks on film. (Baz Luhrmann makes lots of paper movies.) And alas, I wasn't happy with this, and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were dismissed in very short order.

And so today, I went for broke. "Hamlet 2000," well, I think it was actually just called "Hamlet." It was made in 2000. But it's the "Hamlet" that stars Ethan Hawke and Julia Stiles and takes place in 2000 New York City. Now, here's a "Hamlet" for me! A pop culture "Hamlet!" A schlock "Hamlet!"

When the movie started, I must admit I was reticent. Oh yes! I was reticent. This was because Hawke's Hamlet started to sililoquize, and it was in the original text. I wasn't expecting this. I was expecting "To blow my brains out or not. That's the fuckin' question." I was getting the original stuff.

And it was a little hard to get used to. To see people traipsing around New York City speaking Shakespeare, to see Bill Murray and Steve Zahn speaking Shakespeare.

It was surprising, though, how easily it all fell into place. In fact, the whole movie did. It was cool and stylized, and, I don't know, I just found it quite endearing. And the "To be or not to be" speech takes place as Hamlet is walking around - Blockbuster video! Hey! I've felt like that looking for a movie too!

Anyway, I did make it through a "Hamlet" tonight, even if it was "Hamlet Lite." It's OK, though. I'll think of it as my starter "Hamlet." My "Hamlet" with training wheels. Now I'll go back and see if I can find Larry's version again. And if I can't, I'll seek him out as the tooth-pulling Nazi.

But for now, goodnight, sweet prince.