I haven’t read the book that Hamnet (2026) was based on, but I have a lot of thoughts about the film’s plot and production. The novel and film tell the (fictionalized) story of William Shakespeare’s son’s death (1596); the film emphasizes the experience of Shakespeare’s wife, Agnes as she’s called here (apparently she went by Anne as well as Agnes). The author/filmmakers are going with the idea that the names Hamnet and Hamlet (as in the play and character) were interchangeable in the period, which I’ve read conflicting things about. In the story, Shakespeare writes his play Hamlet as a means of dealing with his son’s death.
Actress Jessie Buckley just won the best actress Oscar, and very deservedly so — she’s a REALLY talented actress who gives an emotional and haunting and real performance. But, the story as shown on film: I was just so conscious of the fact that this was purportedly about the Real Life William Shakespeare — and, moreover, his wife — that the fictionalizations and dramatizations just didn’t work for me.
I think I would have loved it if it was about a random 16th-century family dealing with a child’s death. But instead, I spent the whole time thinking about the fact that Agnes is portrayed as an herbalist/healer/basically pagan, and thinking “But was she really?” Especially when there are details like: she will go to church but refuses to speak there — that’s not a 16th century understanding of herbalism/healing/even (white) witchcraft. Most “cunning women” were perfectly Christian and saw no dichotomy between the two; when witchcraft persecutions started getting underway (which they barely were in this period), they were still seen as operating in a VERY Christian framework (in league with the devil, not “pagan” as we would understand it today).
Also, okay, so Hamnet/Hamlet is an interesting draw, and Shakespeare potentially writing one or more of his plays about his son’s death is also interesting. But the film is about AGNES, so I found the titling and sales pitch to be weird, and also the few scenes shown from William’s perspective to feel awkward and shoehorn-ed.
Now, let’s get to the costumes, which were designed by Malgosia Turzanska (The Green Knight), and nominated for an Oscar as well as a Costume Designers Guild award. And here’s again where I had problems, because not only was there the whole we-only-have-mud-for-dye and MENSTRUAL BLOOD issues that I ranted about during Snark Week, but also:
Starting with the color issue, no I’m not going to rehash my Snark Week rant, but not only is Agnes in red throughout, her shifts (aka chemises aka undershirts) are also red, except for when she sleeps she has a long white shift (she’s also married in a light color that I think is white). Which annoyed me, because purity of white linen was a HUGE deal in this period; it represented not only how good your housekeeping/laundry skills were and your ability to afford high quality fabric, but also the whiteness of your linen was supposed to reflect the purity of your soul.
Yes yes, Agnes is a witchy woman and totally doesn’t give AF about society. But it leads me to…
Most characters wear the exact same thing for THE ENTIRE MOVIE. Which starts with Agnes and William meeting and marrying (1582) and goes through the production of Hamlet (c. 1599-1601). That’s TWO DECADES. WEARING THE SAME THING. The only variation is when Agnes is mourning her son, she gets an outfit in an even darker color of red.
Furthermore, as you can see from this Instagram video, the costumes aren’t just dull colors, they were made of some kind of neutral fabric and then PAINTED:
View this post on Instagram
Which could be really cool in a The Favourite-esque arch, theatrical production (see also: the recently-reviewed Molière’s Last Stage, which took a very artificially theatrical approach to the staging/cinematography, so its theatrical costumes worked). Instead we get this:
On top of all of this, more minor characters ARE dressed like relatively normal 16th-century people, like Emily Watson as Shakespeare’s mother:
To all of it, I say:
What did you think of Hamnet?
Find this frock flick at:
The white body-linen thing wasn’t only about cleanliness and moral purity: it was because when all the dyes available to you are vegetable ones, and the only way you have of degreasing garments that have been worn next to the skin or hair is by soaking (“bucking”) it in stale urine, if those garments are dyed the very first wash will start taking the colour out of them.
The trailers for Hamnet didn’t appeal to me. I’m very picky about my Shakespeare adaptations. I’d rather rewatch Throne of Blood than the mud and menstrual blood show.
I thought it was a beautiful story, but now I need to read the novel. Jessie’s performance was impressive. I agree though that her red outfit (and long loose hair) bugged me and was inappropriate.
I kept yelling at the characters to cover their hair and lace up their shirts.
I kept muttering this to my friend in the theatre. A lovely looking, and unconvincing, movie, although I did like Buckley’s visit to the Globe. The costuming was ridiculous, because of course we’re supposed to relate to Agnes and Will, not to Ms. Shakespeare Sr., an old and therefore boring character.
I loved the novel, and was moved by the emotional story of the film BUT it was so hard to watch her hair dangling into her herbal simples. And yes, boring clothes
Thanks for taking one for the team, Kendra! I’m going to give this one a pass– it doesn’t sound like something I’d enjoy.
I avoided this because, although I’ve loved all of Chloe Zhao’s other films I’ve seen (Nomadland, The Rider, Songs My Brothers Taught Me, Eternals) it sounded too much like “grief porn” and I just don’t fancy that at the moment. Cinemas seem to have been full of either sad sad SAD “Oscar Bait”, horror, or children’s films recently – I was so relieved to go watch upbeat sci-fi blockbuster Project Hail Mary.
Thanks for the write-up, sounds like I didn’t miss too much…
I think that it’s deeply surprising you didn’t mention the Theatre scene – which offers up something of a visual feast of Elizabethans after a film full of light snacking (and more junk food than is strictly helpful).
On the other hand, I suspect that variegated audience will be easier to admire once you can play-pause-play at discretion.
On the other hand I did cry “Master Will, where is thy HAT? Theatre people DRESS, you know, even when not in costume.”
Sadly I had mostly given up by then and only half-watched, I was too busy overthinking all the threads mentioned above!
That picture of three people in a forest has almost nothing in it to say they’re in the sixteenth century. The blokes’ trousers all look as though they are held up by the belts.
I gave up on the book about twenty pages in, after someone was frying potatoes at the market and Agnes went bee-keeping in her smock (which is like doing it in your bra and knickers). Fellow re-enactors mentioned a serrated breadknife and that was it.
Honestly, a writer could spend an hour with a re-enactor and learn most of the basic errors to avoid.
Good advice re. writers and re-enactors.
serrated knife — HHAHAHHAHAHAH
After Hamnet in boots (page 1) I stumbled across the potatoes as well. But a swift and superficial google research led me to believe that they might actually not have been completely unheard of and may infact have been a subtle not to the Shakespeare’s remnant catholicism? Which probably is adhering too much sublety to the book. I don’t know. Any more academic experts on the atter round here?
Linens were all washed together, so sheets, shifts and shirts, and they were boiled. Any dye would affect anything else and wouldn’t last long. I get that they did it for effect, but it wasn’t practical to have coloured linen in that period. That went right through until the 20th century, when synthetics and twin tub washing machines were brought in. In our old house we had a “copper” that had been in the outhouse forever. It had a mangle on top. Mum used to use it to dye fabrics, but originally it was for boiling the linens.
I still have Grandma’s copper tub. She also made apple butter in it.
The portrayal of Agnes as witchy/herbal/pagan is from the book. It was a profoundly moving book, so I’m sorry to hear the costumes weren’t well done.