Films rarely make a comeback during the runtime. Sure, they can contain both good scenes and bad scenes, but the feel of any given movie rarely changes mid-film. And, yet, here we have Hamnet, a film whose first half was so boring and indulgent, I was all set to pan it, but whose second half was so moving and inviting that I could see Oscar nominations ahead. Which is the correct analysis? Both. And while the second half certainly explains what the first half was doing, it doesn’t compensate for it entirely. So don’t go there.
The film will sell itself on the biography of William Shakespeare (Paul Mescal) and how he came to pen Hamlet, arguably the pinnacle of his impressive portfolio. Yet, Hamnet is not about who Will is, but instead of who Agnes (Jessie Buckley) is, the Stratford falconer daughter of an accused witch who attracted a Latin tutor named William Shakespeare and bore him three children, whom they both loved immensely. Most of this film is shown from the perspective of Agnes -who is never referred to as “Anne Hathaway” in the film. However, everybody she is familiar with swallows the “g” in her name as if it’s a silent letter. Is this an En(g)lish thin(g)?
I like Jessie Buckley, sure, but the first half of this film is pure indulgence. Writer/director Chloé Zhao saw fit to put all three (3!) of Agnes’ live births on film in excruciating detail. Perhaps it is easy for me to be critical here; I am just a man, after all. So, my women readers, what do you think? Have you ever seen a director give separate time to each of three live births? And, would you again? I’m thinking I’m not alone in calling this teeth-gritting indulgence. And it exists entirely to show the pains Agnes goes to for her children. I’m pretty sure that part could have been written sharply, right William Shakespeare?
The first half of Hamnet establishes “Will” (just “Will” here for the vast majority of film) as a frustrated writer, frustrated son, but loving and devoted father – when present. Will spends a lot of time in the theater in London for some reason. And, I am very sorry, but loving, devoted parents are dull parents. Blandly, unquestionably dull parents. Aside from a few smiles with child interaction and weird devotion between
twins Judith (Olivia Lynes) and her titular brother Hamnet (Jacobi Jupe), there is precious little to recommend about the entire first hour of film.
When the film captured both my attention and emotion, we were too far in for spoilers, so, quite frankly, if I haven’t said anything nice yet, it’s your own damn fault, Hamnet. Maybe that’ll learn ya to spell “Hamlet” properly. Seriously, this film is likely to get minor Oscar appreciation; maybe a nomination for Jessie Buckley and an undeserved one for adapted screenplay. Hard to say, but call that my over/under baseline.
We already had a popular film telling us how William Shakespeare wrote Romeo and Juliet. And now we have a film telling us how Williams Shakespeare penned Hamlet. So what’s next? A film about how he met some witches in Scotland? How he got conned by a black trader? Or maybe one about how his household had a rodent problem so large that it had to be trained? Who knows? It took me a while to warm to Hamnet, but I got there eventually. Maybe you Will as well.
Once a woman we all know as “Anne”
Delivered three kids for her man
He always went away
Cuz that thing with the play
And she protected them as best as she can
Rated PG-13, 125 Minutes
Director: Chloé Zhao
Writer: Chloé Zhao, Maggie O’Farrell
Genre: Re-examining Shakespeare
Type of being most likely to enjoy this film: Those who love William Shakespeare enough to put up with a chick flick
Type of being least likely to enjoy this film: Three (3) FULL births on film. THREE. Good luck to anybody who wants to indulge that
