Hamlet (1948) Review: The Good, The Bad & How to Watch

 Hamlet (1948) Review: The Good, The Bad & How to Watch 

British Film, Drama, Tragedy

BAFTA AWARDS, 1949- Winner: Best Film from any Source, Nominee: Best British Film
Venice Film Festival, 1948- 5 wins including: Grand International Award
Academy Awards, 1949- 4 wins including: Best Picture, 3 nominations including: Best Actress in a Supporting Role
National Board of Review, 1948- Winner: Top Ten Films
Golden Globes, 1949- Winner: Best Foreign Film, Winner: Best Actor

When we talk about Shakespeare on the big screen, there is a "before" and an "after" Laurence Olivier’s 1948 production of Hamlet. While Hollywood was busy perfecting the Western and the Film Noir in the late forties, Olivier was across the pond proving that the Bard’s most complex tragedy could be a genuine cinematic powerhouse. It wasn't just a filmed play; it was a psychological thriller that captured the imagination of audiences worldwide, eventually becoming the first British film to snag the Academy Award for Best Picture. More on Wikipedia or Mubi 

Laurence Olivier’s Hamlet: The 1948 Masterpiece That Brought Shakespeare to the Masses 

The first thing you notice about this version is the atmosphere. Olivier opted for a high-contrast, black-and-white aesthetic that feels more like a haunted house movie than a stuffy classroom assignment. The camera roams through the cavernous, foggy halls of Elsinore Castle with a restless energy that perfectly mirrors Hamlet’s own fractured state of mind. By leaning into a moody, German Expressionist style, Olivier stripped away the stagey feel that had plagued previous Shakespeare adaptations, making the story feel immediate, visceral, and genuinely spooky.

WATCH TRAILER 

As for the performance, Laurence Olivier remains the gold standard for many. He chose to bleach his hair blonde for the role—a bold move at the time—to give Hamlet a more ethereal, ghost-like appearance. His delivery of the famous soliloquies is nothing short of iconic. Instead of shouting to the back of the theater, he often uses voice-over for Hamlet’s internal thoughts, allowing us to get inside the prince’s head in a way that only cinema can provide. It turns the "To be, or not to be" moment into a private, agonizing meditation rather than a public speech.

Of course, purists will always point out that Olivier took a heavy pair of scissors to the original script. He famously cut out characters like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to keep the focus tight on the family drama and the "man who could not make up his mind." While some might miss the political subplots, this streamlined approach transformed a sprawling four-hour play into a tight, focused narrative that feels surprisingly modern. It focuses on the Freudian undertones and the crushing weight of grief, themes that resonate just as strongly today as they did in 1948.

Decades later, this film stands as a testament to the power of artistic vision. It proved that you don't need a massive color palette or digital effects to create a world that feels massive and intimidating. Whether you are a die-hard Shakespeare fan or just a lover of classic cinema, Olivier’s Hamlet is essential viewing. It’s a moody, brilliant, and slightly eccentric take on the greatest story ever told, and it still manages to chill the bones and stir the soul.

The Good: Cinematic Innovation and Atmosphere

The greatest strength of this film is that it refuses to be a "stage play on camera." Laurence Olivier used deep-focus cinematography and long, sweeping tracking shots that move through the winding corridors of Elsinore like a restless spirit. This creates a sense of claustrophobia and dread that fits the story perfectly. By filming in moody black and white, the shadows become characters themselves, heightening the "Film Noir" feel that makes this version so unique.

Furthermore, the decision to use voice-over for the soliloquies was a stroke of genius. It allowed Hamlet’s internal struggle to feel intimate and psychological. We aren't just watching a prince talk to himself; we are eavesdropping on a mental breakdown. Olivier’s own performance is athletic and commanding, bringing a physical energy to the role that was rare for the time, especially during the final, high-stakes duel which remains one of the best choreographed sword fights in cinema history.

The Bad: Radical Cuts and Freudian Overtones

On the flip side, if you are a Shakespeare purist, this movie might frustrate you. Olivier famously cut nearly half of the original text. The removal of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern—and the entire political subplot involving Fortinbras—strips the play of its larger social context. Without these characters, the world of the film feels smaller, focusing entirely on a family drama rather than the "rotten state of Denmark."

Then there is the interpretation of the characters. Olivier leaned very heavily into Freudian psychology, specifically the Oedipus complex, in the scenes between Hamlet and his mother, Queen Gertrude. For some modern viewers, these choices feel a bit heavy-handed or even uncomfortable. Additionally, the film’s opening narration explicitly tells the audience that this is "the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind." Many critics argue this is a massive oversimplification of Hamlet’s complex character, essentially telling the audience what to think before the movie even begins.
Full Film