Romeo and Juliet Review

Theater Gets By

Before analyzing the underlying intentions of the Shakespeare Theatre Company’s production of Romeo and Juliet, it is necessary to define exactly whom the company wanted to attract to the play, and for what overall tangible goal. Based off of my personal experience watching the play (I found it easy to digest), I would say that the company desires to attract an audience with a novice, or intermediate knowledge of Shakespeare’s work (which I myself hold). Such a large target group is necessary to fulfil the goal of any artist(s) – to stay in business – and in this particularly case, to compete with the modern medium of a cinema (modern in respect to live theater). In order to appeal to such an audience, the production has to do, and in fact intends to do, these three things: dispel the misconception that a play is more restrictive than a movie, engage the audience as part of the story (most effective when done live), and assist those who express difficulty understanding Shakespearean language/dialogue.

In terms of restrictions for a play, one generally questions how a production can accommodate for a large amount of scenery, in only one fixed location – the stage area. The Shakespeare Theatre Company’s production not only answers that question, but also attempts to demonstrate how few props are actually needed to portray a recognizable setting. Aside from providing a balcony, the stage itself does not convey a specific environment, as its design is artistically abstract. Therefor, the company utilizes lighting to establish the time of day, and a vague location – which a minimal amount of props help to define. To give an example: for the night scenes, the background lighting is tinted a deep blue to create the illusion of a moonlit sky; in the foreground of the stage, several small, yellow lights are lowered down from the ceiling to represent stars. From this arrangement alone, one is able to deduce that the scene is taking place somewhere outdoors, and during the night. With the additional presence of only four flower pots on the stage, and a fully lit balcony above, it becomes clear that the scene occurs in the garden below Juliet’s bedroom. The play’s simplicity mainly derives from the company’s recycling of these props [as well as others throughout the various acts]. The yellow stage lights are reused to represent candles in the final scene, and since a dungeon is an unnatural location for a balcony, it ceases to be illuminated. In addition, the flower pots below Juliet’s bedroom are double sided: they are flipped to the flower side only after being used in the previous ‘Caputlet party scene’, as indoor decorations.

A minimal, yet creative approach to the setting, is just one of many ways the production engages the audience’s imagination. At times in the play, the stage extends into the audience’s realm, as actors occasionally enter and exit using aisles situated in the ground floor seating. Actors also directly address the audience during certain monologues, and musical scenes. There are even moments when the performers pause for laughter, a sign that they recognize the audience’s presence; one such occurrence was when Juliet anxiously shouted, “what say Romeo!” Furthermore, there exists a pattern in the structure of the play, that prevents the performance from becoming dull: the play begins and ends with all the actors on stage reciting their lines in unity; the scene transitions are more often than not accompanied by music (three minstrels), and the acts typically open with song and dance. As a result, the changing of scenes can go unnoticed, since ensembles cleverly disguised as servants, rearrange the props while the audience fixates on the music/dancing. The production clearly does not want to disrupt the audience’s imagination, and thus incorporates the changing of the set as part of the play. Lastly, there is a three-dimensional aspect to the production, that a film cannot replicate (for the obvious reason that it’s live). Actors engage with various fixtures on the set, and pace, run, or roll back and forth between the foreground and the background (creates depth). Mercutio, for example, constantly swings on the metals bars that are fastened on the stage walls; this also helps to convey his energetic, mischievous character.

Body language is not only used by the performers to accentuate character personality, but also to cue those in the audience who have difficulty understanding Elizabethan English, when a joke is being told. The best such example is in the opening scene of the play, where two servants of the Capulet family exchange sexual puns about ‘conquering’ Montahue women. To ensure that the audience reacts to the jokes, one of the servants enacts his pun by ‘riding’ a barrel; later in the play, Mercutio mocks Romeo’s love for Juliet by pretending to orally pleasure him. Such gestures seem fairly modern, but if not, there are still various other minute adaptions in the story/plot – like Tybalt’s death. I had forgotten how he originally dies (stabbed), so when I found his drowning was an adaption, I became intrigued as to why this choice was made. Overall, the play stays true to the text, allowing for even Shakespearean experts to enjoy the performance. More important, this is an indication that the company intends to educate, as well as entertain, those with a novice familiarity of Shakespeare’s work. The production is indeed successful in achieving its goals, especially in denouncing misconceptions about plays, and I am glad to see that an entertainment medium has gone on for so long.

Heavy Metal Hamlet

Ok, so it's obvious they're joking around, but there actually does exist a thoughtfully composed metal album that 'summarizes' each scene of the play with an individual track. Though I'm not a big fan of metal, the musicians and producer should be acknowledged for their effort to creative a new and unique approach to the play.

"William Shakespeare's Hamlet is an album by Brazilian band Hamlet released in 2001. It was a one-time project sponsored by Die Hard Records involving many musicians, including guest Andre Matos."

"Track listing

1. "From Hades to Earth" - Delpht
2. "Sweet Flavour of Justification" - Santarem
3. "The Happiness of the Queen" (Voice Vignette)
4. "Visions of the Beyond" - Hammer of the Gods
5. "Villainy" (Flute Vignette)
6. "The King's Return" - Krusader
7. "The Truth Appears" - Nervochaos
8. "The Play" (Guitar Vignette)
9. "A Letter to Ophelia" - Vers'Over
10. "Dagger of Worlds" - Sagga
11. "Prayers in the Wind" - Imago Mortis
12. "Stormy Nights" - Symbols
13. "Hands of Fury" (Keyboard Vignette)
14. "Hidden by Shadows" - Hangar
15. "Mandate for Freedom" - Torture Squad
16. "Trap" - Fates Prophecy
17. "Cood by my Dear Ophelia" - Eterna
18. "The Last Wolds" - Tuatha de Danann
19. "To Be" - All previous singers plus André Matos"

Track Number Four


The lyrics of this particular track focus on the moment Hamlet first encounters his father's apparition:
http://www.angelfire.com/trek/hmlyrics/hamlet/hammer.htm

More info on the making of the album:
http://www.metal-rules.com/review/viewreview.php?band=Various+Artists&album=William+Shakespeare%60s+Hamlet

Romeo and Juliet Play

I had several questions pertaining to how a set could be transformed during a live play (modern and Elizabethan), and just how elaborate they could be. The Romeo and Juliet play really helped to fill me in, as I have never been to a professional theater's play before.

To briefly list what I observed:
- lighting had a huge role in establishing the setting
- there were lights that controlled the color of the backdrop (behind the stage), lights for the balcony, lights for the front of the stage, and even dozens of little lights that could be raised and lowered to represent stars and candles.
-for night scenes: the backdrop lighting was dark blue, the stage lights were cut, and the main source of light came from the balcony and the 'star/candle' lights.
-for the dungeon the backdrop lighting was made green, while the main source of light came again from the candle/star lights
-there was a really neat silhouetted pattern created by the lighting during some of the musical scenes
- I can go on and on about how the lights were changed to accommodate each setting.

- cleverly disguised servants were used to remove and add props to the set as the scenes changed
-since music often accompanied at the opening of a new act, I was too busy observing the musicians to even notice the sets being changed.
-overall, the changing of the set was creatively incorporated as part of the play

-though the stage was a fixed structure, the actors made great use of what it provided, often climbing on bars, lying on sculptures, and tripping down the steps.
-the painting/design of the set was very aesthetic
-I was impressed at the dungeon door that was lowered in the final act; I did not even consider that there was one built inside the set, ready to be lowered.

Aside from the lighting, I think that everything done in this play (pertaining to the set) could have been achieved during the Elizabethan era as well.

Where Is Everyone?

A castle isn’t occupied by just a King and Queen. There have to be guards, servants, cooks, guests, etc., yet Shakespeare only mentions three in the opening act. I suppose it’s all implied, but I would still like to know what Shakespeare envisioned the setting of Hamlet to look like, and how much of a role he had in the actual designing of the set (I’ve found descriptions of the Globe Theater’s layout, but not of what Shakespeare’s sets looked like). Did he intend the fictional Elsinore to be viewed/imagined exactly like Kronborg Castle, in Helsingor, Denmark?

To take a guess, I would say he kept his sets minimal, since that is how most modern play adaptions are. Modern movie adaptions on the other hand, place great detail into set design, so perhaps it’s just a matter of what the medium allows for (changing the background for every scene during a live performance seems like a daunting task). I’ve only been able to find one film adaption that keeps the set minimal, and that is the 1969 British adaption by director Tony Richardson.



“a small budget and a very minimalist set, consisting of Renaissance fixtures and costumes in a dark, shadowed space. A brick tunnel is used for the scenes on the battlements. The Ghost of Hamlet's father is represented only by a light shining on the observers.”

Hamlet on the Web

Language Spins Hamlet Into Two Webs

After surveying the internet for Hamlet related content, I have reached the conclusion that the play is polarly situated in the culture of the world wide web, between those who understand its language, and those who don’t. When I started my search, I initially employed the immediacy of popular engines, such as Yahoo! and Google, and expected my basic queries for ‘hamlet’, ‘hamlet blog’, and ‘hamlet on the web’ to yield a fair amount of interesting results. What the engines actually came up with frustrated me; the first couple of result pages were filled with links (in order of occurrence) to Hamlet study guides, movie synopses, teaching guides, link collecting sites, blogs dealing with show reviews, and dead blog domains; thehamletweblog.blogspot.com was one of the few working blog links on the first page of various engines’ results, so I have a hunch it will be cited in other papers. If engines are intended to display the most relevant and useful links for queries, then does that mean that the majority of people only seek out links to “short cuts” and summaries when they search for Hamlet? This seems likely, as students account for a large percentage of internet users. However, that is not to say that all guide/summary sites market themselves as a substitute for studying the text, or even that they lack original interpretations of the play. With that in mind, I categorize a very large portion of Hamlet’s internet presence, as content that relates to simplifying the play for those who are willing, unwilling, or unable to understand its language.

It makes no difference whether one types hamlet.org or shakespeare.com into the address bar, both urls redirect to sections of enotes.com; this means that enotes bought/registered ownership of those domains for the likely reason of drawing more people to their summaries. I guess I was expecting to find from such a distinctive url, a fan site or forum that offered multiple interpretations, rather than a spoon-fed analysis. Another guide site that caught my attention was sparknotes.com, with its distinctive No Fear Shakespeare section. Although no site that wants to be taken seriously would openly market itself as a substitute for studying the text, such a purpose comes to mind from that specific title. For certain, the sites own description of the section, “No Fear Shakespeare puts Shakespeare's language side-by-side with a translation into modern English – the kind of English people actually speak today,” attests to the fact that the internet provides readers with more than just the original dialogue that many struggle with. One Hamlet study site that makes a conscious effort not to spoon feed an analysis, is Pathguy.com. I only discovered its url after expanding my search beyond the initial engine recommended links. The site provides at least two dozen images of Hamlet in art and cinema to accompany the text, and explains how to go approach the play, rather than dictating an analysis – “to discern an author's intent, look for material that does not specifically advance the plot, typify the genre, or have strong mass-audience appeal.” In addition, Pathguy.com immediately addresses the initial “difficulties posed by the language,” but does not encourage one to avoid them, assuring that “once you get past [them], you'll probably enjoy Hamlet, and not just for its action.” The internet is not just a place for students to better understand Hamlet, but teachers as well. I stumbled across sites such as teachwithmovies.org and teachervision.fen.com, which share methods of teaching Hamlet, and claim that its “message about the moral and practical pitfalls of revenge . . . maximizes [its] relevance to teenagers.”

Though all of the sources I have cited so far direct their focus on analyzing the tragic implications of Hamlet, there are still sites to be found on the web that pay attention to the more ‘concealed’ aspects of the play – specifically the humor. Clicknotes.com is one such site that contains an advanced section (in addition to its summary of scenes), where you can find explanations for every pun and paradox that Hamlet recites. Rather than being an all around, school oriented study site, clicknotes is specifically dedicated to works of Shakespeare; I’ve noticed that these types of web sites tend to be less appealing in design, and therefore there is a tendency to overlook them. In addition to offering insight about the humor in play (for those who know where to search), the internet enables those familiar with the text to share their own jokes/satires about the play. More often than not, the jokes acknowledge the difficulties of comprehending Elizabethan English, and therefore require one to have undergone the experience of reading/analyzing the original text to fully appreciate them. I had to surf through several links until I found Fox in Socks, Prince of Denmark (www.seuss.org/seuss/seuss.shakes.html), a rewriting of the play that fuses together the writing styles of Dr. Seuss and Shakespeare. The end result is harder to follow than Elizabethan English, but very fun to read – “O that these too too solid six sick bricks would tick, thaw and resolve these six sick chicks which tock.” Green Eggs and Hamlet, is yet another rewrite I came across that does basically the same thing (www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/97/May/geandh.html) – “Could I, should I end this strife? Should I jump out of a plane? Or throw myself before a train?” To me it seems as though there are those people who desperately want to avoid confronting Shakespearean language, and then an even fewer number of people who are glad they did, and now can share their interpretations and experiences of the play with others over the web.

Hamlet and Facebook

Even Hamlet appears to have found a small niche in Facebook’s popularizing social network. Though there weren’t many results after querying ‘hamlet’ into the Facebook search bar, what I did find [some] gives insight on highschool/college students’ reception of the play.

There are at least a dozen groups with Hamlet in the title, but most were created to review/advertise a specific modern [play] adaption of the story. Only two groups are oriented toward discussion: Hamlet = <3, which has 526 members, and Hamlet: The Elizabethan Emo, which has 292. From these small numbers, one could derive that students don’t discuss Hamlet outside of class, or just not over Facebook. After browsing through both groups’ discussion board, it seems that members of the groups (students) enjoyed reading the play for its humor, rather than Hamlet’s angst nature, which some say (teachers) they will relate to. Well maybe on a subconscious level, as Hamlet’s angst is what they find funny:

I was reading the line from Hamlet describing his misery and laughing at how poetically Bill was describing the Prince of Denmark's emo qualities, and I decided to point it out to the world through a Facebook group.

I've been advocating a reading of the play with Hamlet the angsty teenager who feels OMG so misunderstood 'cause his mum's remarried and his girlfriend hates him.

I thought it was funny

As for reception of modern adaptions, there seems to be a 50/50 split between Kenneth Branagh’s portrayal of Hamlet, and Mel Gibson’s.

Here is one person’s review of all the adaptions they’ve watched:

Mel Gibson:
Hated it. Too much of an Oedipan approach and too much skipping of important scenes. This movie dates from his action-hero-era and I think it shows. He's too aggressive, not at all troubled or brooding.

Derek Jacobi:
Didn't like it too much. I liked Gertrude a lot, but Ophelia was a bit TOO frail, and Derek Jacobi overdid it.

Kenneth Branagh:
I loved him. The mirroring of him to Claudius(Derek Jacobi, who I DID adore in this film) was very smart and the entire movie has this complete and grand feel to it. Kate Winslet as Ophelia was a stroke of genius. Also the rest of the cast is very convincing.

Ethan Hawke:
Very convincing in the 2000 Michael Almereyda film. The play is moved to our own era, consumer society, and Denmark becomes the Denmark Corporation.
A lot of cutting, that much is true, but a very very clever approach. Hawke is brilliant, as is Julia Stiles (Ophelia) and Bill Murray (Polonius).

Richard Burton:
Watching that one now, and I think this Hamlet will be my favourite!

X Hamlet

After Tyson raised the question in class today as to whether there exists Hamlet porn, I just had to find out for myself (for the sake of humor!). To be honest, I already knew the answer -- no, not because I've seen it, but because the internet simply has everything.

After one Google query I came up with:

From the pages, never read before of Shakespeare's masterpiece, here it is the other side of Hamlet, the most famous prince of literature. You must absolutely watch this great movie- an unusual mix of humor and eroticism.

(http://xploitedcinema.com/catalog/x-hamlet-p-5559.html)

I wonder how the Elizabethans would have reacted to this modern adaption of the play; if they were truly as embracing of human sexuality as historically attributed, maybe this film is right up their alley (along with overly enthusiastic Shakespeare fans).

Based off of the cover, it appears as though the director wants to focus on the background story of Ophelia's and Hamlet's relationship. . . judging from the back cover, it looks as though he agrees with Freud's analysis of Hamlet. . .