To Be Or Not To Be...

Mel Gibson:
     This version of "To Be Or Not To Be" is by far the best expressed as it only uses emotional tension.  Hamlet is placed in the dreary basement-like room filled with those who have passed on which gives the audience the feeling of on-coming and depression he truly is feeling.  The stone walls that enclose him add a suffocation effect on the audience that has everyone letting out a sigh of relief.  This scene is done with only Mel himself and the casket/bodies scattered about the room.  Not one prop is put into Mel's hands, but he takes this soliloquy to an all-time high with emotion alone.  The power of words, facial expressions and tone are the only "props" Mel needs - according to the director.

   Though this scene is done well emotionally and location wise, something else is needed.  A prop, like the dagger used in the next two versions.  A dagger would make the scene more theatrical.  As of now, Hamlet is all talk; but with the addition of a dagger, he may just do it.

Lawrence Olivier:
      Here, the famous soliloquy has a visual tension.  Hamlet sits on the edge of a cliff while contemplates suicide.  The rustling waves battering against the jagged rocks at the bottom are screaming the likes of a horrible death to the audience.  The haze that slightly lingers on the solid ground behind Hamlet is like a false silver lining - the safety he chooses is just as cloudy as the ending he could've chose.  He uses one prop only, a dagger.  The dagger makes the scene as it is the only method Hamlet refers to in his speech.  

   Once again, the scene is done well in it's own way, but is still missing something.  A key part to any role is emotion.  It seemed as though Mr. Olivier wasn't even talking at certain points throughout this scene.  There was no tone to his voice, either.

Kenneth Branaugh   Last but not least, this scene has no tension to it at all.  The giant white room gives nothing but calmness to the audience.  The addition of people who are able to see and hear Hamlet take away from the "soliloquy" and make him vulnerable.  The way in which he speaks makes him seem too calm about envisioning his own death.  Not even the use of a dagger made the awaiting tension rise to the occasion.    I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Stories can change anything

The Beatles - I Wanna Hold Your Hand
Across The Universe - I Wanna Hold Your Hand

We all know The Beatles and their hit I Wanna Hold Your Hand which “remains the best-selling Beatles single in the United States.”  Do you know Across the Universe’s version of I Wanna Hold Your Hand?  In the videos posted above, the same song is sung, but the meanings behind them are in two different worlds. 

The Beatles’ version of this song is a lot less stressed than it is in Across the Universe.  For The Beatles, it’s a song about love.  There is nothing that they have to overcome within this song.  “Paul McCartney wrote this in Jane Asher's basement. Asher was an actress who became Paul's first high-profile girlfriend.”  This song was written for Sir McCartney’s girl whom he later dated.  He had no trouble getting the girl and there was no reason they couldn’t be together. 

In Across the Universe, this song is sung by a girl, Prudence, who is in love with one of her friends which is another girl.  She knows the risk of telling others about her secret love, but she wants to be with her.  This version has a lot more behind the words than The Beatles’ version.  Prudence has a lot of feeling hidden behind the lyrics.  There’s suffering, lust, love, hurt, etc.  She can’t go out and get the girl as Sir Paul did; there are lists of reasons why the relationship couldn’t work.

The difference in these songs is created through writing.  The Beatles’ back story behind this song is Jane Asher.  Across the Universe’s back story is forbidden love. 

The Beatles may not have a full story available for everyone to read and go gaga over, but you can imagine.  Sir Paul and Ms. Asher were living in the same house.  Sir Paul plays guitar and has a dreamy voice.  Ms. Asher was probably swooning over him.  Sir Paul might play with her feelings for a bit before starting to date her.  The two would live happily together.  No outside drama, no outside violence, nothing unexpected.  I Wanna Hold Your Hand, to them, is just a common love story written by Sir Paul to Ms. Asher.

Across the Universe has the story setup within a movie.  Prudence is in love with her fellow cheerleader friend.  She cannot tell the girl because of what the outcome might bring.  The two are close to each other each day, yet Prudence has to keep her feelings in hold.  The friend never shows any interest in Prudence and eventually walks off with one of the football players.  There is heartache in this song that is absent in The Beatle’s version.  Much more feeling is added to this version because of the story behind it. 

I’m not saying one version is better than the other; one just has more emotion behind it than the other.  The Beatles’ version is good in its own story just as Across the Universe’s is as well.  The one filled with love and happiness, the other with lust and disappointment.

One song, two meanings.     

Lyrics to I Wanna Hold Your Hand
Facts about I Wanna Hold Your Hand

The Paper Market

The Paper Market is an interview with our good old friend Nick Mamatas, a former term paper writer.  He talks about writing term papers a bit more in depth than in his other article,  The Term Paper Artist.

Mamatas' definitely has a tone that shows he didn't care about this job.  It seems as though he only did it for the money.  He continuously bashes the dumb clients with sarcasm or outright harsh comments.  His tone make all of his comments that much better for people who catch them.  

He wasn't very showy with his vocabulary, which can slightly let us know he's just your average guy.  His diction is normal, like everyday people.  This shows us he's not super smart or above the rest of us; it just is a sign of how stupid his 'dumb clients' must have been.

When I first read his written article, I expected a little nerdy guy.  When I saw his picture, I expected Kevin Smith's voice.  Then, finally, when I heard the interview, I was kind of upset.  There was no Kevin Smith voice.  To be honest, though, hearing him did change my opinion of him.  Before, I only saw him as some smart guy who stuck his nose up to everyone with bad grammar.  Now I can see he's just like us, an average joe.  

The fact that is was audio instead of print is a game changer.  In print, you would've missed all of his sarcasm.  No one would know that Mamatas liked to screw around just like the rest of us do, or that he couldn't care less about his old job.  Print can never really catch the tone of people.  I mean, imagine joking with your friend on AIM, "Hey, guess what I did tonight!"  "I don't know...what?"  "I killed a guy."  "...I have to go..."  "NO, it was a joke!"  Tell me that never happened to you before.