Hamlet

A number of critics noted the pared back and somewhat raw qualities of the production. Carlhåkan Larsén writing in Sydsvenska Dagbladet:

Ornamentation has been stripped away, what remains is the bare stage, the empty void. Beams of light sculpt various acting spaces, other props appear only sparsely. Gradually one notices the dark walls that encompass the wide stage. It is like being at the bottom of a cistern.

Peter Stormare received praise for his powerful and dynamic performance, a worthy combination of hot and cold. His interpretation of the role was seen as multi-dimensional, with warmth and authenticity alongside 'sarcastic verbal artistry' and furious outbursts. Not least the particular warmth in the meeting with Ophelia. 'Stormare has a naked, almost skin-less presence that gives vigour to the production.' (Sverker Andréasson, Göteborgs-Posten)

But not everyone was equally impressed by Stormare's Hamlet. Palmqvist described his performance as lacking in rhythm, devoid of the nuances and of the charm that Hamlet nonetheless possesses. Stormare himself ought to learn from the advice that Hamlet gives the players: not to 'saw the air too much' with his hands, nor to 'split the ears of the groundlings' with his booming voice. Most negative in her criticism was Tove Ellefsen writing in Dagens Nyheter,– a review which sparked off a debate about the very nature of drama criticism. Ellefsen thought the production was highly conventional, concluding that, 'No, this is not a Shakespeare worthy of Bergman. Nor indeed a Bergman worthy of Shakespeare'.

Italy, Florence, Pergola Theatre, 10-12 January 1987
The electricity needed for the performance made the electric company in town shut down the lights in two villages outside of Florence, as well as at a fashion show. The reception of the performance was mixed, but it was a great audience success. There was a critical consensus in that this was Bergman's Hamlet as much as Shakespeare's. 'This was the same Shakespeare that mixed magic and death in Fanny and Alexander,' one critic wrote.

UK, London and Edinburgh, Lyttleton stage, National Theatre, 10-15 June 1987
One critic wrote, 'This is the most vital production of Hamlet I've seen in years. Though I speak no Swedish, it kept me at the edge of my seat throughout a marvellous evening […...] Bergman and his actors have revived, in Swedish, a play on the British stage which we have come to regard, in the last decade, as a tiresome exam test.' Other reviews were more critical and echoed the Swedish reception. One stated, 'Why the National Theatre invited (Bergman) to bring this vulgar and pretentious production of Hamlet …is a mystery to me.'

USA, New York, Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM), 10-17 June 1988
There were a total of eight performances at BAM. The performance was visited by the Swedish King and Queen because of the New Sweden jubilee, celebrating the 300th anniversary of the Swedish founding of a colony in America in present-day Delaware. The reviews were mixed, from the remark, 'I can't think of any modern director who has turned words into flesh so consistently, and with such obsessive force, as Bergman does here', to negative responses of Bergman's 'mish-mash' of styles and time periods.

Japan, Tokyo, The Globe Theatre, 2-3 and 5-9 July 1988
Seven performances were given and although the audience was very attentive, the actors found the response tame.

The Soviet Union, Moscow, Stanislavsky's Artistic Theatre, 27 September-1 October 1988
In Moscow the Hamlet production was part of a double bill with Bergman's staging of Miss Julie. Bergman's approach was considered that of a daring traditionalist turned radical man of the theatre. One critic called the performance 'a shattering theatre experience'.