Quick Synopsis: There once was a playwright called Will
Whose son became unfortunately ill
His death caused his family a shook
400 years later, a book
And many reviewers said it was brill

Thoughts Going In: This is going to be incredible and moving. I’d heard it was very good, so I was looking forward to it.

There are times when my viewpoints don’t align with those of most reviewers. This may be one of those times. At the time of writing, Hamnet has an 84 score on Metacritic, which means on average, reviewers see it as an 8.5 out of 10 (as opposed to RottenTomatoes, where it would mean 84% of reviewers have given it a 3/5 or more). Many reviews have described it as one of the best films of the year. Don’t get me wrong, I liked it, but I’d be disappointed if this ended up among the best of the year. It’s emotional, perfectly acted, and looks beautiful. But it feels so hollow; two actors in search of a script. It feels like it spends most of its time just spinning its wheels, trying to think of a justification for itself before it reaches the end.

The end is superb, though. When Agnes realises the pain William is in and how he’s channelling it through his work, it’s incredibly powerful. The entire film is building towards this moment, and it doesn’t disappoint. It reminds you just how great an actor Paul Mescal is. For most of the film’s runtime, every scene belongs to Jessie Buckley, who owns every moment she’s in, but the ending is where Mescal shines.

Maybe it’s because I haven’t read the novel it’s based on. It seems like readers of it have appreciated the film a lot; whereas those who haven’t read it are a little more lukewarm. Or I just found it a bit too Oscar-bait, overly artsy at times, where I would have preferred it to be a bit simpler. There’s a high chance it was my expectations that ruined this; I expected Hamnet to die earlier, and for the film to be mostly about the aftermath of that. Nope, we spend most of the film building up the relationship between the characters; setting up the situation, etc., THEN he dies. I get that, it makes a lot of sense. It just wasn’t what I expected, and it’s not what I would have preferred. It feels somewhat cheap to criticise a movie just because it’s not what you personally would have liked, but in the end, isn’t that what all reviews are? If there were a movie called “All Daily Mail Journalists Should Be Shot In The Face”, and it was 90 minutes of justifying why everybody who works for, or even reads The Daily Mail should be shot in the face, I don’t think that paper would give it a positive review, no matter how well-written it is.

In summary; Hamnet is a superb film that’s expertly made and performed. It’s a film that will be studied and discussed for decades, and will rightfully win a lot of awards. It’s also a film that, for whatever reason, I didn’t connect with at all until the final scene. I left the film not knowing more about Shakespeare, and not feeling any closer to him or his work.