A Sequel?

That was the idea with the 2008 film, Hamlet 2.  It depicts the efforts of Dana Marschz, a Tucson high school drama teacher, who attempts to stage a play that will save his soon-to-be-shuttered program.  His masterpiece is "Hamlet 2," a muddled concoction that involves the characters from Hamlet, Jesus and a time machine.  Hamlet goes back in time to save all of the characters who die at the end of his story, including himself.  (Jesus apparently was a stowaway in the time machine.)

The film, a comedy by description, fails to live up to its billing.  It has its mildly amusing moments, but overall it really does not do much for the genre or for the Hamlet oeuvre.  To quote the father of Octavio, one of the high school students, I found myself "simultaneously horrified and fascinated."

I would not go as far as Octavio's father, who objected to the play on literary grounds.

"We merely expressed our absolute distaste for a sequel to what is arguably the greatest play in the English language.  Not to mention the quality of the writing, which is quite low."

Indeed, that point of view has merit.  Instead, though, I find myself allied more with Noah Sapperstein, the high school drama critic who panned consistently the school's dramatic productions.

"Sometimes an idea could be so bad, it starts to turn good again."

Hamlet 2, unfortunately, is not that bad.