World's Greatest Draft (1 Viewer)

[HERBERT THE HIPPO]

Oh and like last draft if a drafter wants some advice, outside of religious figures, I'll be glad to lend a nudge here and there. Anyone else I will gladly trade commentary with over PM.

I'll add you to my speed dial.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Well, it looks like I won't be picking today. But that's okay, no hurry. Anyways, I've been thinking and a question I have for everyone is: How many women do you think will be drafted? Plenty of women went in the greatest American draft (and rightly so), but I'm struggling to think of women worldwide who could be drafted. At this point, I can only think of two women. Maybe I'm just forgetting some...

I could probably see at least two in every category maybe more.

Really? I can't think of one female leader that could be drafted.

You should probably think harder.ETA: FWIW I think there are 2 in the top 20.

 

[BobbyLayne]

...I think you're seriously underestimating Shakespeare's worldwide renown. Although he may not be THE top poet/playwright when polling certain parts of the world (and I can think of at least a couple of clear examples), I'm pretty sure he'd still come out on top when taking the whole world into account.

FWIW - In the opinion of the Playwright/Poet judge (Krista4), there is a 1B that goes with the one everyone assumes is 1A (Billy the Bard).

Your poet/playwright judge approves. I currently have a 1a) and 1b) in this category, with everyone else at least a tier below, and certainly Bill S. makes it into this tier.

YMMV

Hmmm...

Yeah, I guess I shouldn't have posted that given our new instructions on not ranking anyone. I'll probably just join everyone else and not comment on my categories until the end.

Oh, no - sorry, I didn't mean that to sound like a chastisement related to the pre-lunch post. That would be

But since it is out there - and you posted it more than half a day before the guidelines ruling - I just think it's an interesting one off exercise to see how many can guess who you had in mind. The Bard is #1 or #2 overall on a lot of cheatsheets, yet within the category, merely 1A.

Anyway, sorry for the unintentional indictment.

 

[DCThunder]

Can we still switch picks between categories like we did on the GAD? I sort of remember a prohibition against this, but I need to be sure.

 

[NCCommish]

Oh and like last draft if a drafter wants some advice, outside of religious figures, I'll be glad to lend a nudge here and there. Anyone else I will gladly trade commentary with over PM.

$ Rate per PM?
$ Rate per pick?
$ Rate per hour?TIA

Everything is negotiable.

 

[Fennis]

Well, it looks like I won't be picking today. But that's okay, no hurry. Anyways, I've been thinking and a question I have for everyone is: How many women do you think will be drafted? Plenty of women went in the greatest American draft (and rightly so), but I'm struggling to think of women worldwide who could be drafted. At this point, I can only think of two women. Maybe I'm just forgetting some...

I could probably see at least two in every category maybe more.

Really? I can't think of one female leader that could be drafted.

You should probably think harder.ETA: FWIW I think there are 2 in the top 20.

I can think of a few that belong in the discussion, but none would make my own personal list.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

Well, it looks like I won't be picking today. But that's okay, no hurry. Anyways, I've been thinking and a question I have for everyone is: How many women do you think will be drafted? Plenty of women went in the greatest American draft (and rightly so), but I'm struggling to think of women worldwide who could be drafted. At this point, I can only think of two women. Maybe I'm just forgetting some...

I could probably see at least two in every category maybe more.

Really? I can't think of one female leader that could be drafted.

You should probably think harder.ETA: FWIW I think there are 2 in the top 20.

I can think of a few that belong in the discussion, but none would make my own personal list.

If not for the fact that the military category is likely to pare down leaders considerably that might be the case for me too.

 

[FUBAR]

Well, it looks like I won't be picking today. But that's okay, no hurry. Anyways, I've been thinking and a question I have for everyone is: How many women do you think will be drafted? Plenty of women went in the greatest American draft (and rightly so), but I'm struggling to think of women worldwide who could be drafted. At this point, I can only think of two women. Maybe I'm just forgetting some...

I could probably see at least two in every category maybe more.

Really? I can't think of one female leader that could be drafted.

You should probably think harder.ETA: FWIW I think there are 2 in the top 20.

Given the criteria, I know I'll expect to see one who will rank fairly well with me (I think, off hand). I'm honestly not sure where I'll rank the 2nd.

 

[Big Rocks]

Well, it looks like I won't be picking today. But that's okay, no hurry. Anyways, I've been thinking and a question I have for everyone is: How many women do you think will be drafted? Plenty of women went in the greatest American draft (and rightly so), but I'm struggling to think of women worldwide who could be drafted. At this point, I can only think of two women. Maybe I'm just forgetting some...

I could probably see at least two in every category maybe more.

Really? I can't think of one female leader that could be drafted.

You should probably think harder.ETA: FWIW I think there are 2 in the top 20.

Given the criteria, I know I'll expect to see one who will rank fairly well with me (I think, off hand). I'm honestly not sure where I'll rank the 2nd.

Okay, after doing some more research, I have found a few, including one I didn't realize was a leader.

 

[NCCommish]

Since I don't want to spotlight I won't get specific but some pretty big empires have existed and many of them were matriarchal. I have a bad feeling this draft is going to be to Eurocentric, to popular media driven and not look back far enough.

 

[larry_boy_44]

What we do know is that a huge percentage of the entire world still believe in the teachings of Jesus 2,000 years after his death.

Good morning. Once again, I have to point out that this is not only inaccurate, the fact that it's inaccurate has great bearing on whether or not this pick really deserves the high praise it's getting.

Earlier, I posted the essence, as summarized by Wikipedia, of Jesus' Sermons on the Mount and Plains. Very little of it has ever been practiced by human beings. What is practiced instead is a series of beliefs about Jesus, rather than from Jesus. These practices, which comprise the religion of Christianity, was set up by other people years after the death of Jesus Christ. That does not mean these other people should have been selected in front of Jesus- Jesus is clearly the most important person with regard to Christianity. But these facts do subtract from his overall importance with regard to the top people on this list.

For instance, since Jesus' teachings have not been practiced, how do we measure him against some scientists and thinkers, the greatest ones, whose teachings HAVE been practiced and have led to tangible and measurable advancement of mankind?

you are both greatly exaggerating how possible it is to actually do what Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount and very much underestimating how much Christians do work to follow those commands...You are also ignoring much of what Jesus said... The Sermon on the Mount is not all that Jesus taught... In fact, the Gospels don't even contain all that He taught (and they admit that)...

 

[Fennis]

Is Xena real?

 

[timschochet]

Hi, just got back.

You can change the category your pick is in anytime during the draft, no problem.

Da Vinci is a great pick, though a bit problematic. His two paintings are masterpieces, but probably not in themselves enough to put him as the greatest painter of all time- at least one or two others, possibly more, deserve that title over Da Vinci. And it's difficult to know what other category to place him.

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

 

[NCCommish]

Is Xena real?

Yes. Yes she is.

 

[larry_boy_44]

What do the first three picks have in common? The answer is, we're not sure ANY of them actually existed.

Basically, all we've got on Sun Tzu is The Art of War. Modern scholars are skeptical that any such person existed (which makes Mario's placement of him as "leader" rather baffling to me.)

As everyone knows, Jesus' life is related in the Gospels, but nowhere else. It is generally now believed that Josephus' references to Jesus were inserted by Christian editors after his death, since they don't seem to match the style of his other writings.

Many modern day scholars believe that William Shakespeare's plays were actually written by Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford.

Tim...unless something major changed in the last 3 years...

there is no scholarly doubt that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person... The question is how much of what we believe is true...

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Since I don't want to spotlight I won't get specific but some pretty big empires have existed and many of them were matriarchal. I have a bad feeling this draft is going to be to Eurocentric, to popular media driven and not look back far enough.

That's me. Eurocentric, beholden to popular media and having no interest in any history before 1776. Rock on!

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

I think measuring strictly by IQ is the wrong way to go about measuring intelligence, in this case anyway.

 

[larry_boy_44]

All right. I see I'm offending Christians here, which was not my intent. Larry drafted Jesus not as God or the Son of God (though I know he believes both of these to be true) but as a human being, who needs to be compared to other human beings. So this is what I was doing, minus discussions of his divinity. But there seems to be no way to really discuss this without offense. I apologize to the Christians reading this; again, that was not my intent.

I'm not offended at what you say, I kinda expected it from someone...I just don't see how anyone can think that he isn't the most influential person ever to live... It honestly baffles me (and not because I'm a believer) that you think he isn't...

 

[NCCommish]

Since I don't want to spotlight I won't get specific but some pretty big empires have existed and many of them were matriarchal. I have a bad feeling this draft is going to be to Eurocentric, to popular media driven and not look back far enough.

That's me. Eurocentric, beholden to popular media and having no interest in any history before 1776. Rock on!

Actually I have high expectations of you. Just following the women discussion and it has me worried if that's the mindset.

 

[NCCommish]

All right. I see I'm offending Christians here, which was not my intent. Larry drafted Jesus not as God or the Son of God (though I know he believes both of these to be true) but as a human being, who needs to be compared to other human beings. So this is what I was doing, minus discussions of his divinity. But there seems to be no way to really discuss this without offense. I apologize to the Christians reading this; again, that was not my intent.

I'm not offended at what you say, I kinda expected it from someone...I just don't see how anyone can think that he isn't the most influential person ever to live... It honestly baffles me (and not because I'm a believer) that you think he isn't...

Larry an argument can be made for several people. Not just Jesus. Whose leadership btw is based on a book we readily admit we don't know all the authors of. And we can't really define exactly what the subject of that book said. Not saying he won't end up at number one in his category. Just saying it ain't a done deal.

 

[timschochet]

Regarding Yankee's statement earlier that any list of religious figures that does not have Jesus at #1 is worthless:

There is a well known historian and author named Michael Hart, who years ago wrote a book listing the most influential people of all time. He made the argument that Muhammad is more influential than Jesus Christ, based on two factors: first, that Muhammad was both a spiritual and political leader, whereas Jesus was only a spiritual leader. Second, that Christianity was developed by two people (Jesus being one) while Islam was developed by one person, Muhammad.

I've always found this argument quite fascinating, and I've never been sure that I agree with it, frankly. However, it raises enough question in my mind that I can't go along with the idea that Jesus HAS to be #1.

And of course there might be at least one other guy that I haven't even alluded to here that needs to be considered for that top spot, as well...

 

[Fennis]

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

I think measuring strictly by IQ is the wrong way to go about measuring intelligence, in this case anyway.

Besides Da Vinci wouldn't have a #2 pencil.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

I think measuring strictly by IQ is the wrong way to go about measuring intelligence, in this case anyway.

Besides Da Vinci wouldn't have a #2 pencil.

Not a problem... he would just invent it.

 

[NCCommish]

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

I think measuring strictly by IQ is the wrong way to go about measuring intelligence, in this case anyway.

Besides Da Vinci wouldn't have a #2 pencil.

Not a problem... he would just invent it.

 

[Fennis]

I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

I think measuring strictly by IQ is the wrong way to go about measuring intelligence, in this case anyway.

Besides Da Vinci wouldn't have a #2 pencil.

Not a problem... he would just invent it.

The helicopter, Mona Lisa and the #2 pencil. Eat that Einstein!

 

[DCThunder]

Hi, just got back.You can change the category your pick is in anytime during the draft, no problem.Da Vinci is a great pick, though a bit problematic. His two paintings are masterpieces, but probably not in themselves enough to put him as the greatest painter of all time- at least one or two others, possibly more, deserve that title over Da Vinci. And it's difficult to know what other category to place him.I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

That's why I wanted to be sure I could shift categories if necessary. Leonardo fits in several others too, not to mention the Cartoon Character category. I also don't agree that his artistic reputation only rests on the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper. His drawings alone are masterpieces, and he created many more paintings and his journals are rightly regarded as artistic tripumps by themselves.As for Einstein, could he write backwards and left-handed and in Italian and did he ever try to design a 70 ton giant bronze horse statue? All he did was try to reconcile space and time. Advantage, Leonardo!

 

[thatguy]

 

[Andy Dufresne]

DaVinci could write on two separate subjects at the same time. One with each hand.

Einstein couldn't even comb his hair.

 

[timschochet]

Hi, just got back.You can change the category your pick is in anytime during the draft, no problem.Da Vinci is a great pick, though a bit problematic. His two paintings are masterpieces, but probably not in themselves enough to put him as the greatest painter of all time- at least one or two others, possibly more, deserve that title over Da Vinci. And it's difficult to know what other category to place him.I don't agree, though, with Andy D's comment that Da Vinci is smarter than Einstein. Both men are geniuses in very different ways; however, I'm betting that Albert has the higher IQ.

That's why I wanted to be sure I could shift categories if necessary. Leonardo fits in several others too, not to mention the Cartoon Character category. I also don't agree that his artistic reputation only rests on the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper. His drawings alone are masterpieces, and he created many more paintings and his journals are rightly regarded as artistic tripumps by themselves.As for Einstein, could he write backwards and left-handed and in Italian and did he ever try to design a 70 ton giant bronze horse statue? All he did was try to reconcile space and time. Advantage, Leonardo!

The last time I was in Tijuana (about 15 years ago) some guy sold me a "Last Supper" on a paper plate, made out of those little sticky stars teachers use. It was actually a very impressive work of art. I think I bought it for a quarter.

 

[BobbyLayne]

What do the first three picks have in common? The answer is, we're not sure ANY of them actually existed.

Basically, all we've got on Sun Tzu is The Art of War. Modern scholars are skeptical that any such person existed (which makes Mario's placement of him as "leader" rather baffling to me.)

As everyone knows, Jesus' life is related in the Gospels, but nowhere else. It is generally now believed that Josephus' references to Jesus were inserted by Christian editors after his death, since they don't seem to match the style of his other writings.

Many modern day scholars believe that William Shakespeare's plays were actually written by Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford.

Two things:
krista4 can follow up if she feels it is necessary; while there was at a point in time questions regarding the validity and existence of the Bard were relevant, I think the issue is settled in most experts minds
You have nearly everything about Josephus wrong (more below)I won't bother with traditional apologetics from a Christian website; rather, here is a compelling article from an atheist website called Internet Infidels. The title of the article is "How Not to Argue Against the Historicity and Resurrection of Jesus".

The author of that atheist website puts forth some compelling arguments. First, before you summarily dismiss the first 4 books of the New Testament, you should at a minimum acknowledge that four contemporaneous biographies represents prima facie evidence in and of itself. Since the four independent works are prima facie evidence, there is no need for extrabiblical confirmation. Again, this is not my statement, this is the contention of one atheist criticizing another atheists weak argument.

Regarding the Josephus references, scholars do not believe Christians inserted the entire passage, but rather embellished it with descriptive additions. Same URL as above, the portion relating to Josephus is about halfway down.

The most famous passage from Josephus that is cited by Christians as secular evidence for Jesus' historical existence:

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.

The blue is believed to Josephus, the black is the embellishment by other presumably Christian writer(s). It would see the additions do not refute the historical Jesus, but rather call attention to his divinity. That is a country mile away from your declarative statement:

It is generally now believed that Josephus' references to Jesus were inserted by Christian editors after his death

Anyway, I have no desire to engage you on this, I don't have a dog in the fight either way, but I do have an interest in seeing broad brush swipes held accountable.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

I'm going to be another to pile on Mario Kart here.I had Sun Tzu pegged for the 4th round.Jesus & Shakespeare were in my top 6.I don't think Jesus is the clear No.1. He's definite top 3My No.1 is still on the board

We have all ready had two people come forward saying they would have picked him with their first round pick (10 & 11) so having him slated as picks 61-80 is way out in left field more than picking him at #1.

Fair point.If more than 1 person wanted him and you HAD to have him, then fair do, but I'm not alone in thinking this was poor value.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

1.07 Christopher Columbus, Explorer

Yes I know he has warts. I know he wasn't first, and I know he died not knowing what he accomplished.

But when you think explorer, this is unquestionably who comes to mind. He was willing to take the biggest risk, and in doing so, earned the biggest reward. He made Europe aware of the Americas. There's not just water between Europe and Japan, there's two continents full of resources. He essentially doubled the size of the known world. Four journeys acroos the Atlantic in wooden ships, not to mention discovering and implementing the trade winds to his benefit.

See, I think this is a reach, but I look at it from the angle of someone who didn't have Columbus shoved down his throat as a schoolchild.Still think he's a top 30 pick

 

[Ozymandias]

DaVinci could write on two separate subjects at the same time. One with each hand.Einstein couldn't even comb his hair.

Maybe not the first time. But he could go back verrrryyy fast and do it the second time.

 

[timschochet]

Now that Jesus, Da Vinci and Shakespeare have been selected, the truth behind the conspiracy can be revealed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7xw6uvfDpE

 

[Andy Dufresne]

DaVinci could write on two separate subjects at the same time. One with each hand.Einstein couldn't even comb his hair.

Maybe not the first time. But he could go back verrrryyy fast and do it the second time.

But in that case, he wouldn't know the location of his hair.

 

[timschochet]

Thanks for the clarification, BobbyLayne.

 

[Thorn]

1.07 Christopher Columbus, Explorer

Yes I know he has warts. I know he wasn't first, and I know he died not knowing what he accomplished.

But when you think explorer, this is unquestionably who comes to mind. He was willing to take the biggest risk, and in doing so, earned the biggest reward. He made Europe aware of the Americas. There's not just water between Europe and Japan, there's two continents full of resources. He essentially doubled the size of the known world. Four journeys acroos the Atlantic in wooden ships, not to mention discovering and implementing the trade winds to his benefit.

See, I think this is a reach, but I look at it from the angle of someone who didn't have Columbus shoved down his throat as a schoolchild.Still think he's a top 30 pick

Interesting. I figured it was my best chance to "win" a category.

 

[Ozymandias]

DaVinci could write on two separate subjects at the same time. One with each hand.Einstein couldn't even comb his hair.

Maybe not the first time. But he could go back verrrryyy fast and do it the second time.

But in that case, he wouldn't know the location of his hair.

Maybe not. It might not even be curly, but it would be wavy.

 

[timschochet]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

 

[NCCommish]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

Midsummer Nights Dream.

 

[krista4]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

 

[Abrantes]

1.Hamlet

2. A Midsummer Night's Dream

 

[DCThunder]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

You mean The Scottish Play, right. No theatre person ever says the full name, it's supposed to be bad luck.I'm a Henry V, guy, myself.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,

This day shall gentle his condition:

And gentlemen in England now a-bed

Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

If we do this draft in China, Sun Tzu isn't the first pick, so that kinda destroys the rest of your point, which I don't agree with anyway. Look, I get that you are thinking outside the box, so to speak. Problem is that the box doesn't need too much outside thought here. The reason the top guys are known is because they really are the top guys. In India, Sun Tzu isn't in the first round. In Japan, same thing. In Russia, they don't even think of him. If you want to play that game with every pick we can. The criticism with the pick isn't the pick itself but the placement. In a conversation of the World's Greatest, he doesn't rank with some already drafted and many yet to be.

I completely disagree with you. Like I stated in a previous post, he does not make it back to #20, so I either take him or lose him. I'd rather take him. And, there are different mindsets with each of those countries but with 20 knowledgeable people from each of those places with knowledge of each category, even if remedial, Sun Tzu is a first rounder in each of them. Many cultures do not rest on the final result of something while Western thought lives on the results of most things. So far, I have seen much Western ways of thinking in this thread, and thats okay, but don't make the claim that Sun Tzu is not better known because some may have little knowledge of him.A billion people in China will learn about Sun Tzu in school while ~80 million in America will not. How known in Sun Tzu in the world?

You'll have to head over to pingpongguys.com to find out

 

[timschochet]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

You mean The Scottish Play, right. No theatre person ever says the full name, it's supposed to be bad luck.

Yeah, I've heard that. There's all sorts of bad luck around it. But I'm not in theatre so, it's OK.I know everyone considers Hamlet to be the best, but doesn't he kind of strike you as a wimp? I mean, the guy's so wishy washy, I just wish he'd make up his mind, already...

 

[krista4]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

You mean The Scottish Play, right. No theatre person ever says the full name, it's supposed to be bad luck.I'm a Henry V, guy, myself.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,

This day shall gentle his condition:

And gentlemen in England now a-bed

Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

You mean The Scottish Play, right. No theatre person ever says the full name, it's supposed to be bad luck.I'm a Henry V, guy, myself.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he to-day that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,

This day shall gentle his condition:

And gentlemen in England now a-bed

Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Prettiest man I ever saw.[/curlybill]

 

[timschochet]

Yeah, the St. Crispen's speech is great, but compared to THIS inspiring speech, Henry V pales in comparison...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRGUqd_M6Mg

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

While we're waiting, interested to know your favorite Shakespeare play. So many great ones to choose from. My personal favorite is MacBeth.

I'm a Hamlet fan, with Macbeth second.

You mean The Scottish Play, right. No theatre person ever says the full name, it's supposed to be bad luck.

Yeah, I've heard that. There's all sorts of bad luck around it. But I'm not in theatre so, it's OK.I know everyone considers Hamlet to be the best, but doesn't he kind of strike you as a wimp? I mean, the guy's so wishy washy, I just wish he'd make up his mind, already...

Depends on how it's played and how much of the content is taken out (Hamlet is almost always scaled down or it is 4+ hours long). You should watch the Kenneth Branagh Hamlet from 96 or 97 - he plays him like a raging bull, it's awesome.

 

[FUBAR]

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;For he to-day that sheds his blood with meShall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,This day shall gentle his condition:And gentlemen in England now a-bedShall think themselves accursed they were not here,And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaksThat fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

I loved Renaissance Man, but what's that got to do with Shakespeare?