Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2000: Kyle MacLachlan, Liev Schreiber & Sam Shepard in Hamlet

Kyle MacLachlan did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Claudius in Hamlet.

This version of Hamlet revisions itself as a time capsule of the 2000's, to the point this almost feels like a period piece of the period through sheer intensity of the period in perhaps a most perfunctory way. I mean the ghost of Hamlet's father drifting through a Pepsi Zero vending machine pretty much summed it up.

Compared to the nearly unwatchable Romeo + Juliet, which is as mid 90's as this film is early 2000's, I did prefer this film, though all modernized versions, that retain the original language, are naturally a kind of oddity, as they are unnaturally a merging of the text which was written to denote a particular period, and it has never been blasphemy to change the setting and the language in an adaptation, just ask Akira Kurosawa. Now a major improvement within this film, rather than that previous film, is most of the cast thankfully doesn't treat Shakespeare as a foreign language that they just learned and feel they should deliver it like an infant having a tantrum. There is still a challenge in how exactly to broach the dialogue within the setting which will be naturally out of place to the setting, and actually most seem to have an idea here. One such is Kyle MacLachlan, who honestly is an actor who the weirder the part he is playing typically the better. Claudius isn't necessarily that weird on his own, however refashioned as a corporate executive who took a most aggressive manner to take over his company we do get something rather unlikely. MacLachlan in turn I think finds just the right kind of not quite traditional, but not too direct delivery within his Claudius within the opening scene of the film. MacLachlan carries in his speech the words in their form, yet refashions it appropriately with a different kind of corporate bravado in his words, rather than that of a kingly decree. 

MacLachlan's performance seeks, I'd say successfully, in creating the part of Claudius that mines the strengths of the role, while also reinventing for this particular style of Hamlet. This as his portrayal is specifically as a corporate executive. In turn he ideally plays the moments of Claudius, as the king, with the smiling face of the corporate head. This with really a smile that is a little more than the smile should be. In turn speaking the words as though he is dealing with public relations of a deal more than anything. Now within that though we see Claudius when as the more overt villain within the piece, such as when he is manipulating Laertes to kill Hamlet, or trying to persuade various powers to rid him of his nephew. MacLachlan delivers none of that phony charm in these moments rather fashioning a cutting intensity fitting a man with a specific kind of power seeking. MacLachlan is excellent because the way he portrays these moments and speaks them is as a merciless CEO not as some attempt to be King. In turn his performance manages to create the right merging of the style of the text to the style of the piece, offering a real bridge where this idea comes to life within his performance. He's especially terrific in a moment of brokering a deal right after the play "confession" scene where MacLachlan is portraying the sense of desperation but also viciousness of the character in equal measure as he tries to rid himself of Hamlet, and of his guilt. The language never interferes with the emotion, rather MacLachlan artfully finds the emotion within the language in a new context. 

Of course this is also with MacLachlan delivering on the strengths of Claudius as a role, which is evident in the text, however I always see the strength of a turn if they pull that out. This is because Claudius is in fact a complex role and isn't this one note fiend for Hamlet to kill. MacLachlan in the moment of the play, here fashioned as a short film, the sense of emotional shame is palatable in the moment, and isn't just of some kind of surprise. More so though this is in the finale, where there really is a key moment that I think kind of defines any portrayal of Claudius and separates the good ones from the less than adequate ones. This being his work during the final duel, here rather unimaginatively still shown as just a fencing duel...I mean that was the best guys...I mean laser tag would've been really bad, surely there could've been something. Anyways MacLachlan brings the right sense of vile determination in his eyes as he watches Hamlet and eyes each moment of treachery as he tries to leave nothing to chance in killing his nephew. This though against the moment of poisoning a cup of wine for Hamlet that Hamlet's mother Gertrude drinks instead, here actually rather brilliantly shown as a purposeful suicide. MacLachlan simply makes the right choice here that Claudius does indeed love Gertrude and it was never just some power play. MacLachlan shows this throughout, but in the moment of Gertrude drinking he is outstanding. This is as he makes the villain's reaction genuinely devastating as he depicts just a straight horror and heartbreak in the man as he sees the woman he loves essentially kill herself. As much as the overall film I think is an inconsistent effort, MacLachlan's performance reveals the great potential of it. This as not only does he make the language tangible, he refashions to recreate a well known role in a new way, that delivers on that role as not just an evil fiend, but as something more complex, as he is a villain but also a man.

Liev Schreiber did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Laertes in Hamlet.

I feel I must cover this performance as this is the only time I've seen an actor deliver a good performance in the role of Laertes, the brother of Ophelia and son of Polonius, who Hamlet accidentally causes the deaths of both. Every other performance as the grieved brother has either been an over the top performance or just a completely forgettable one. What I find so odd about this, is that Laertes actually is a good role even on paper. The mistake I think is that most portrayals choose to play him as a villain and just an obstacle to Hamlet, where in fact, the character, though guided in the wrong direction by the villainous Claudius, is actually righteous in his indignation towards Hamlet, and is largely a victim of circumstance. Schreiber's performance does, what every performance as Laertes should do frankly, is portray the character as a basically good man brought down by a terrible situation. We see this as in his portrayal he shows a brother who genuinely loves his sister, and he brings a nice warmth in his moments with Ophelia (Julia Stiles). He even in his reactions conveys a quiet sympathy for his goofy father (Bill Murray) accepting the old man's advice, though largely with a bit of humor reacting to a man who is overly loquacious. When Laertes returns from his travels Schreiber doesn't overplay the character's anger at the death of his father and the immediate troubles of his sister. He rather conveys genuine discontent of a wounded son, and real heartbreak of a wronged brother as he looks upon his sister in such a dire state. The pivotal scene of Laertes and Hamlet fighting around Ophelia's grave, is usually time for some overacting by Laertes's actor, however Schreiber is honestly heartbreaking in showing the intensity of the grief in the man, and even showing it as greater than his anger towards Hamlet in the moment. Schreiber's performance depicts a man gripped by his grief that leads him to make the wrong decisions, unlike other Laertes who frankly show the man too culpable in the final treachery, or just too ridiculous in the depiction of the anger. Schreiber finds the additional tragedy of the character that frankly should be in every version of Laertes, as the character is in microcosm taking the same journey as Hamlet himself. 

Sam Shepard did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the ghost of Hamlet's Father.

Now let's talk about Sam Shepard, who plays the small role of Hamlet's father's ghost, which is always a small part of any adaptation by nature, however can leave a large impact. This is one of the most impactful depictions of the ghost because of Shepard's performance. Shepard delivers the Ghost monologue with such a ferocity. There is such a sense of anger over the betrayal in his performance that creates both this powerful sense of his own sense of a duty left unfulfilled, and towards Hamlet towards bringing about the exact revenge for the betrayal he suffered. Shepard brings over every word such a viciousness as he shows his ghost is not happy in his state, he's not even exactly out of the world, rather he seems in this kind of purgatory as defined by the betrayal. Shepard's whole presence dominates the screen even as brief as his screentime here, it is hard to forget him within the proceedings through that power of his work. Shepard largely has just one major scene with Ethan Hawke as Hamlet, where he delivers the essential exposition of the accusation of his death with that ferocity. His impact remains so when he appears again as Hamlet speaks to his mother, it is a tremendous moment as Shepard embodies a true specter defined by vengeance. It is overall a brief performance, but a substantial due to just how striking Shepard is in every second he is onscreen. This is a performance that truly doesn't waste a second, and is the most impactful ghost I have seen in any adaptation.