Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead

1991 "A man talking sense to himself is no madder than a man talking nonsense not to himself."
7.3| 1h57m| PG| en
Details

Two minor characters from the play "Hamlet" stumble around unaware of their scripted lives and unable to deviate from them.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

ThiefHott Too much of everything
CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.
DipitySkillful an ambitious but ultimately ineffective debut endeavor.
Claire Dunne One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.
SnoopyStyle Rosencrantz (Gary Oldman) and Guildenstern (Tim Roth) are two minor characters in William Shakespeare's play Hamlet. Here they are the main characters. Rosencrantz flips coins which constantly comes up heads and Guildenstern assumes a problem with reality. They come upon a traveling troupe of actors led by (Richard Dreyfuss). Rosencrantz and Guildenstern suddenly find themselves in the castle at Elsinore and they encounter the characters from the Hamlet play.As a comedy, the jokes are wordy and eventually wears thin. There is a fascination with taking the two side characters and watching the play from slightly off center stage. The verbal tennis game is fun at first. One must also be familiar with Hamlet. This is a fascinating concept but it does not really work as a movie.
oniraptor This, along with Almost Famous, is the best movie I've ever seen. The writing, directing, acting, costumes, sets, cinematography; Perfection. It makes me laugh, it makes me sad, it makes me think. There is a gem to be found in every scene. Roth, Oldman, and Dreyfus are consummate in what they bring to the film. The idea of the back to front view of Hamlet is where it's real brilliance lives and knowing Hamlet gives you everything to understand the subtleties in the film. The prefect compliment of one to the other. Okay, there is one flaw to me. The top of the third act has a needless bit of slapstick which does pull you out of the moment. That being said it does also show you how good the rest truly is by comparison. That's also why it is only 9/10.
Ethan Kaiser Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead blends the laws of nature with the principles of existentialism; Through this 'comedic' duo of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, Tom Stoppard gives the audience a clear understanding of the existentialistic lifestyle: no matter what choices they make, they are trapped under the predestined death that awaits them both on the stage and in the film.The similarities between the stage and the cinema can be compared with the similar devices that are used: The camera, much like a stage, is an instrument that is used to see exactly what is placed before it. The objective now becomes not necessarily what to show the audience, but what not to show them. The audience is in full awareness that you have the power to show them anything you want at any given time, and in this case, what not to show them is Hamlet.The film is started with Pink Floyd's soundtrack 'Echos'.And no one showed us to the land And no one knows the where's or why's But something stirs and something tries And starts to climb towards the light -'Echos' by Pink FloydThis musical choice of Stoppard's soundtrack for the film could not be better. 'Echos' begins with faint sounds of radar, which exemplifies Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's search for themselves; however, they are yet do discover that through their inevitable fate, their constant search for identities will never matter. The lyrics (although instrumented for the film) furthermore develops Stoppard's relationship to The Theatre of the Absurd of not knowing how, why, or what they were doing there. This instrumental version of the track shows how Stoppard (knowing that the lyrics are absent) still took on the great integrity to the song's meaning. As far as the echoes go in the film (pun intended), Rosencrantz and Guildenstern shout several different words throughout the movie, and in turn, are faintly heard by the other characters. This phenomenon might just be Rosencrantz and Guildenstern near the edge of breaking through the script, but as much as they try, they are unable to: they simply reverberate and fade back into their state of nothingness: they cannot escape. Guildenstern seems to have an interesting approach to this dilemma, saying that simply choosing 'what you want' overrides the agony of this universal determinism. "There's a logic at work–it's all done for you, don't worry. Enjoy it. Relax. To be taken in hand and led, like being a child again" (Pg 40). This philosophy was distinguished by Davd Hume, commonly referred to as Compatibilism. Compatabilism says that if your not 'enjoying' life, then what's the purpose of living? Stoppard seems to take a stab at Hume's philosophy with this play, showing that regardless of their fulfillment or enjoyment. Throughout the plot, their inevitable death's give them misery and anguish to constantly worry about. The Theatre of the Absurd is not just about existential philosophy, it establishes and questions all the different philosophies as well. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead addresses types of comedy like low, high, farce and even the more philosophical Comedy of Ideas. Between scenes of the film, pages are seen flying across screen, both before and after the scene change. These pages are commonly believed to be script pages; however, when taking a closer look, one would notice that the text originates from the Roman Missal, quite contrary to the anti-religious consistency the play develops. Here, Stoppard is adding yet another element to the play's determinism. Now, it becomes not what is controlling their fate, but who. When adding this religious context, the characters may indeed be controlled by God, and in result may be predestined to death by God himself: He leads us where we are destined to belong. Ros and Guil constantly question their existence throughout the time-frame of the play. With the many layers of philosophical inquiries and comedic ideas, one could agree that the final piece to this existential crisis lies in its many layers of reality. When the tragedians perform the play to King Claudius, Stoppard adds yet another level of existence to this play in the film. The first level, being the story of Hamlet, to the second plot of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern,then on to the Tragedians performance to Claudius, and the final, being the puppet show inside this performance of the Tragedians. This play-within a play-within a play-within a play-within a play exemplifies the many levels of existence and questions the reality of each: which is the real reality? Stoppard uses this clever approach to existentialism to show the true agony and misery Rosencrantz and Guildenstern face throughout their redundant lives, repeating each time the play commences. Both the film and play portray the existential lifestyle Ros and Guil are destined to face. No matter what they do, what they try, or what they don't do for that matter, all result in the same outcome. Even if they decide to enjoy their multi-layered cheeseburger and sail away on boats, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern truly cannot be free, regardless if they are trapped behind the stage, or'boxed' in the screen. Throughout the story, Stoppard ingeniously brought these characters to life–only to let them discover that they ultimately must die.
bob the moo Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are on the road to somewhere, although they are not entirely sure where to. They feel like they are in some sort of limbo, a feeling only encouraged by the fact that a tossed coin has just come up heads consecutively over a hundred times. A travelling theatre troop offers them entertainment for money but no sooner have they stepped on the stage than they find themselves in a ballroom of a palace. While they try to work out what is happening they find that they are ever more being drawn into the middle of events that are bigger than them.A mixed curiosity this film, that has some great moments but doesn't work that well as a total product. The narrative throws up some interesting ideas of fate and the roles of minor characters but unfortunately the scenes where it has to overlap with Hamlet that it is not so good and doesn't work. I'm sure he was not making a point but it is hard to ignore that the scenes that are all Stoppard are the best while those that are lifted or adapted from the Hamlet text are weak and appear to be there just because they have to be. It is a shame that the interweaving with the Hamlet narrative doesn't work better because the original scenes have a delicious playful tone to them in regards language and the nature of minor characters; I found these specific scenes to be fun and engaging and only wished the film could have maintained this energy and approach.A big part of these scenes working is down to the delivery and both Oldman and Roth are really good not only with the fast pace of the dialogue but with the "out of it" attitude and sense of detached bewilderment that they need to carry for the majority. It is telling that their scenes are by far the strongest and the supporting cast are not as good in Glen, Roth, Sumpter etc, although I did enjoy Dreyfuss' turn in it.An interesting movie with some great dialogue driven scenes that gives the viewer a lot of fun with language and character. Unfortunately these scenes do not make up the whole film and it has many scenes that are wooden and drag. Still quite fun but not as good as the strongest bits made me think.