When I type “Hamnet” into my computer, the little red line appears, because it thinks I should be writing “Hamlet” instead. But according to the title card of Chloe Zhao’s “Hamnet,” the names were considered interchangeable in Shakespeare’s time.

Regardless of how you spell it, or whether the alternate spelling is being used as an attention device, Zhao’s moody, thoughtful film is a welcome return to form for the director of 2020’s award-winning “Nomadland.”

At its core, “Hamnet” is the story of how William Shakespeare produced what may be his most famous and enduring play. Based on a work of creative non-fiction by Maggie O’Farrell (who co-wrote the screenplay with Zhao), the narrative traces Shakespeare’s early family life: his courtship of his wife, their efforts as rookie parents, and his early efforts to become a successful playwright.

The allusions to Shakespeare’s works are clear and early. Will (Paul Mescal) and Agnes (Jessie Buckley) are not that far removed from Romeo and Juliet, and their relationship is only a little less tragic. Living far from London in rural England, Will’s talents aren’t exactly practical, and Agnes’s reputation as a witch’s daughter isn’t helped when she gets her pregnant out of wedlock. But their love endures, and after a time Will is spending long stretches in London working on his plays while Agnes tends to their three young children at home.

The little family has its joys, but doom, disease and premonition constantly loom over the household until a tragedy worthy of Shakespeare’s own hand arrives while the Bard is away on business. The event, which won’t be detailed here, is both a threat to the fragile marriage and the inspiration for the (sort of) titular play that follows.

“Hamnet’s” story will be interesting enough for anyone interested in the man or his celebrated works, but it’s the craft of the film itself that really makes Zhao’s effort memorable. “Hamnet” is dominated by powerful and resonant performances, none as much as Buckley and Jacobi Jupe, who more than holds his own at such a young age. 

Elsewhere, Lukasz Zal’s cinematography is dramatic and emotive, using the mystery of the British woods and the crooked rural England architecture to play with light and shadow as it frames the actors and the action. Two favorites: the narrow shaft of light that penetrates the top floor bedroom, illuminating whoever is sitting on the edge of the bed, and (even better) a birds-eye image looking down on a stage and a group of patrons at the Globe Theater.

Fans of “Nomadland” will recognize these and other stylistic cues from Zhao, and to be fair, sometimes the deliberate pacing feels a little more like slow and meandering, but the ending is good enough to forgive some imperfection along the way. Altogether, “Hamnet” has a lot to offer, but you have to be a little patient with the experience.

—

“Hamnet” is rated PG-13 for intense scenes and adult content, including one sex scene that feels like it’s pushing that rating.

The post Moody ‘Hamnet’ offers a possible view into Shakespeare’s backstory appeared first on Utah.Film.

If you fall asleep about halfway through “Gladiator II,” you wouldn’t be faulted for feeling like you’d just seen a weak rehash of the 2000 original film. Up until that point, Ridley Scott’s sequel pretty much hits all the same notes he did the first time—a steely warrior with a clouded past loses his wife and freedom, winds up a gladiator, and works his way toward revenge against the Roman authority responsible.

This time around—16 years after the events of the first film—the steely warrior is Lucius (Paul Mescal), who we meet in Africa just as he’s about to lead a shoreline defense of his people against Roman invaders. The invaders are led by Marcus Acacius (Pedro Pascal), who orders the death of Lucius’s wife Arishat (Yuval Gonen) (who to be fair, is part of a detachment firing arrows at the Roman forces). Lucius survives the assault, but is captured and shipped off to Rome be a gladiator. There he meets Macrinus (Denzel Washington), who manages the sword-and-sandal cannon fodder the same way Oliver Reed did in the first movie.

The good news is that things don’t play out the same way, and after a modest twist or two, “Gladiator II” pushes into enough unique narrative territory that you start to feel the film was worth the effort. Granted, enough threads connect back to the original that, unless you were a passionate fan of the first film, Scott’s sequel will feel too derivative. Of course, as a non-passionate fan of the original film, I could be wrong—maybe the passionate fans will call this derivative, too.

Beyond the story, you have to look at the performances and the action, and both criteria deliver mixed results. Mescal is a solid lead, though he’ll come up short in the inevitable comparisons to Russell Crowe. Washington is more memorable in his role, even if it doesn’t feel like an especially unique role for the actor; here he’s mostly doing what he does best, and that’s plenty to get the job done.

One of the more intriguing comparisons is between the original heavy Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix), whose equivalent here is a brotherly duo of decadent Roman emperors (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger). They serve their roles well, but even combined they lack the violent and childish charisma Phoenix imbued in his character.

The action scenes are pretty solid—the opening battle is good enough that you come away wishing you’d see more of that than the hand-to-hand gladiator stuff to come. Some bizarre CGI monkeys that show up in one battle look too alien to be real, but most of the efforts look effective.

Overall, “Gladiator II” works as a watchable movie, but it doesn’t do quite enough to justify its status as a sequel. Just make sure you stick around past the first hour, or it won’t work in either case.

“Gladiator II” is rated R for some graphic bloody violence, as well as some sexual content.

The post Scott’s ‘Gladiator’ sequel avoids rehash status…eventually appeared first on Utah.Film.