A comparison of at least two specific scenes in the film to the corresponding scene in the original play. How is the scene represented or interpreted on screen? Describe and quote from both the film and the play. Avoid superficial similarities and differences, such as setting and costume. Instead, focus on substantive themes and characterization differences between the source and the adaptation

Now we come to Act V, scene II, the end, where all characters must meet their end, in honor, or dishonor.

List of differences: A longer fight scene The loyalty of characters to Hamlet is emphasized more His struggle and story are the end notes of the movie Furthermore, Claudius is much more a central villain – in just one mannerism, where everyone

else seeks redemption. And finally, Fortinbras is not there

First, let us refer to text where The scene (in the folger edition) which is merely described as:

“Laertes wounds Hamlet. Then in scuffling they change rapiers, and Hamlet wounds Laertes”

Is a rather prolonged battle in which Hamlet, ever observant, notices the blade given to Laertes is sharpened (“Nay come again”), and perhaps, he even notices the venom on it.

Characters are portrayed as more foul and some as more forgivingLaertes:In the movie, when Osric says “nothing neither way” (ln 329), the scuffle between Hamlet and Laertes pauses, as if it is a time out after acknowledging Hamlet has the upper hand. Yet afterwards, Laertes hits the back of Hamlet’s neck, sealing Hamlet’s fate AFTER a pause in battle – not noble indeed.

Horatio:The loyalty he has for Hamlet is much more palpable. He weeps at the death of Hamlet, cradles his dead body, and is part of the end scene the audience is left with.

Gertrude: Even her sacrifice to try and save hamlet from Claudius is much more apparent in the play. Though the line “I pray you pardon me” may seem so, other adaptations of the play, like Mel Gibson’s show

Osric:Heck Osric, from the play, almost seems as he is in on the plan, acting normally and not bewildered at the deaths.

Claudius: I wish to focus on one moment, just one moment, on Claudius, because I think it shows everything about him that is important.

There isn’t even the slightest hint of emotion from Claudius. There is the natural fear of death and a wish to save himself, that foolish man, but at the end, he SHRUGS in the face of death. Only an evil man can do that.

Important characters who have even the slightest shred of good in them, when they die, have death speeches. Claudius does not. He has nothing to lose, and nothing to say. There is no more pleading. The chaos from the result of his actions is more than a just ending

Pulling this all together culiminates in NO Fortinbras – the ultimate difference between the text and the film

We must address the question of why the film must end this way.

Because there can be no more of a continuation in this story of a Danish prince. Fortinbras is succession. Fortinbras is a future to the Danish helm. Thus, in the sense of continuation, Tennant’s Hamlet is far darker than the text, for Horatio does not have a man to whom he can tell Hamlet’s story. Instead, we are left with the sight of Hamlet’s lifeless body in Horatio’s arms, never to rule Denmark.

And you see this in the cut of some of Hamlet’s dying words:

I cannot live to hear the news from England.But I do prophesy th’ election lightsOn Fortinbras; he has my dying voice.

That scene must not be allowed into this version

END QUOTESVs the text: Take up the bodies. Such a sight as thisBecomes the field but here shows much amiss.Go, bid the soldiers shoot

Line 397-398 “Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince, and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest.”

The melancholy, betrayal, and murder central to the story of Hamlet are thus accentuated.