Uta Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard textbook in many college theater courses. In the book, Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. In the Presentational approach, the actor focuses on realizing the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. In the Representational approach, the actor tries to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational approach to acting was still partially in vogue when this Hamlet was made. British theater has a long history of this style of acting, and Olivier could be said to be the ultimate king of the Representational school.

Time has not been kind to this school of acting, or to this movie. Nearly every working actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern eye, Olivier's highly enunciated, stylized delivery is stodgy, stiff and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that would have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the movie creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines unintentionally funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of note in this Hamlet, putting in a good essay at the Queen, despite the painfully obvious age differences (he was 41; she was 26). The other actors in this movie have no chance to get anything else of significance done, given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the camera! on him! at all! times! 

Sixty years later, you feel the insecurity of the Shakespearean stage actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it."

Did this review think positively or negatively of the movie?
OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive
negative
Uta Hagens "Respect for Acting" är standardläroboken på många collegeteaterkurser. I boken presenterar Hagen två fundamentalt olika förhållningssätt till att utveckla en karaktär som aktör: Presentationssynsättet, och Representationssynen. I Presentationssynsättet fokuserar skådespelaren på att förverkliga karaktären så ärligt som möjligt, genom att introducera känsloinslag från skådespelarens eget liv. I Representational approach försöker skådespelaren presentera effekten av en känsla, genom en hög grad av kontroll av rörelse och ljud. Representationens inställning till skådespeleri var fortfarande delvis på modet när denna Hamlet gjordes. Brittisk teater har en lång historia av denna skådespelarstil, och Olivier kunde sägas vara den ultimata kungen av representationsskolan. Tiden har inte varit snäll mot den här teaterskolan, eller mot den här filmen. Nästan alla arbetande aktörer använder idag en presentationsmässig metod. För det moderna ögat är Oliviers högt uppsatta, stiliserade leverans stenig, styv och stiliserad. Istället för att skapa en internt konfliktfylld Hamlet, gjorde Olivier ett deklamerat, självviktigt tjurhorn av den melankoliska Dane -- en skådespelarstil som skulle ha burit väl till ryggen på de större London teatrarna, men är alldeles för stärkelserik för att bära bort en modern Hamlet. Filmen knarrar osedvanligt i dag. Oliviers tendens att e-nun-ci-ate gör några av Hamlets repliker oavsiktligt roliga: "I stället måste du ac-quire och bli-få en tem-purr-ance som kan ge det... Smidighet!" Istället för att gråta över att träffa sin fars spöke (som någon riktig skådespelare kunde) ger det intrycket att det är starkt fyllnadsljus i Oliviers elever. Eileen Herlie är den enda andra tongivande skådespelaren i denna Hamlet, som sätter in en god essä hos drottningen, trots de smärtsamt uppenbara åldersskillnaderna (han var 41; hon var 26 år). De andra skådespelarna i denna film har ingen chans att få något annat av betydelse gjort, med tanke på Oliviers tendens att vilja behålla! Kameran! På honom! - Nej, över huvud taget! Det är många gånger! Sextio år senare känner man osäkerheten hos den Shakespeareanska scenskådespelaren som saknade självförtroende för att gestalta en brytbar, bristfällig Hamlet, och istället valde att gestalta ett slags elisabetanskt tjurhorn. Slutlig analys: "Jag skulle låta piska en sådan karl för oer-göra Termagant; det ut-herdar Herodes: be dig, undvik det." Tyckte den här recensionen positivt eller negativt om filmen? ALTERNATIV: - negativ - positiv
Uta Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard textbook on many college theatre courses. In the book, Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the presentation approach, and the Representation view. In the presentational approach, the actor focuses on realizing the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. In Representative approach, the actor attempts to present the effect of a feeling, through a high degree of control of motion and sound. The attitude of representation towards acting was still in part fashionable when this Hamlet was made. British theatre has a long history of this acting style, and Olivier could be said to be the ultimate king of the representation school. Time hasn't been good to this theater school, or to this movie. Almost all working actors today use a presentational method. For the modern eye, Olivier's high-ranking, stylized delivery is rocky, stiff and stylized. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaimed, self-important bullhorn of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that would have carried well to the back of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry away a modern Hamlet. The film is creaking unusually today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines unintentionally funny: "Instead, you need to ac-quire and become-get a tem-purr-ance that can give it... Smoothness!" Instead of crying about meeting his father's ghost (as any real actor could) it gives the impression that there is strong fill light in Olivier's students. Eileen Herlie is the only other instrumental actor in this Hamlet, who inserts a good essay with the Queen, despite the painfully obvious age differences (he was 41; she was 26). The other actors in this film have no chance of getting anything else of importance done, given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! Camera! Get him! - No, at all! That's a lot of times! Sixty years later, one feels the uncertainty of the Shakespearean stage actor who lacked confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead chose to portray a kind of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a man whipped for uner-do Termagant; it out-herder Herod: beg you, avoid it." Did this review like the film positively or negatively? ALTERNATIVE: - negative - positive
negativ
negative