The Hamlet film was excellent, as far as book-films go. I believe it was produced with care, reason and logic. The characters were also portrayed with good acting. There were several changes in the play compared to the book, though the movie was made in such a way that they didn't feel particularly missed, movie-wise. Although, from my point of view, after reading the book, there were several rather important scenes and elements missing. The first scene in particular was missing. This played a role in the stage setup and was part of the entire theme throughout the entire play. It was in this scene that the ghost of Hamlet Sr. was first seen and where much of the plot developed. Hamlet Sr. told Hamlet Jr. that he had been killed by Claudius and that he must take revenge, Hamlet Jr. being the person who would avenge him. In the book, this continued throughout the rest of the work and without it the plot wasn't as concrete to begin with. The stupid game and the game for the king and the court were compressed. In the movie, it mostly consisted of a silly show and then the king getting angry. He should have included it earlier and still had an entire play, in which special lines inserted by Hamlet Jr. had to be read. This did not have a dramatic effect on the way the plot was presented in the film, but it was simply noticeable. As for the casting and setting, I think the director did a great job. Obviously, this fact coming from Hollywood offers advantages over all previous presentations. Mel Gibson was a great choice for Hamlet because he is a good actor and played his part wonderfully.