Hamlet: Best Procrastinator Ever?

In general, I think it is better to act on impulse rather than to think things out over hours or even days, since when you think things through to that extent, you just end up screwing things up in the end (Because nothing ever goes exactly as  planned). Hamlet is basically a personification of why I think that. While he is waiting and being very careful with his actions, he is simultaneously over-thinking things as well as not seeing the blatantly obvious. As Hamlet makes quite clear in Act 3 Scene 4, he is perfectly capable of extremely well executed murder on impulse, and only by pure coincidence was it Polonius and not Claudius. Nonetheless, we don't see this impulsiveness anywhere previously, especially not when it comes to Claudius.

In terms of over-thinking, Hamlet missed a major chance at killing Claudius because he decided to have a several minute long soliloquy instead of just stabbing him. During the "Hamlet's Dilema" scene, as it will be called from here on, Hamlet has the perfect chance at achieving his goal, but instead thinks things through a bit too much. He doesn't just want his uncle/father's death, he wants revenge, an equal exchange of souls. That being said, he is about to go through with the murder before he realizes "Oh crap, he's praying. His sins are absolved. I have to wait for him to sleep with my mom again so he can go to hell." Fun fact, involving religion in murder NEVER ends well.

On a side note, we learn in this scene that Claudius expresses remorse for what he did to the king, but refuses to stop reaping the rewards. This seems incredibly selfish, and it's kind of like a parody of a modern day stereotypical murder: "Yeah, I killed him, I'm sorry I did, but SCREW THE RULES, I HAVE MONEY NOW!" Replace money with a throne and your brother's wife, and you have Claudius in this scene.

And no Claudius, you can't be pardoned of your sins and retain "th'offence."

As for missing the blatantly obvious, has he even considered how he is going to prove that there even WAS an original murder? All he has is that his uncle/father didn't like a play he was putting on for some unclear reason. it's obvious to us that he's guilty, but not the characters in the play, except for Hamlet and MAYBE Horatio. Other than that, I invite you to imagine how an explanation would go in your own minds. I know I did:

(Insert person questioning Hamlet here): Why did you kill your uncle!?

Hamlet: He killed my father, the king.

(same person): How do you know?

Hamlet: Guys, its okay. A ghost told me about when no one else was around and conveniently only certain people can see this ghost.

...

I think it's obvious why this would seem really bad. Yes he has the reaction to the play as some leverage, but it's really vague.

As for ethical concerns, to be blunt about it, Hamlet just doesn't care. He has no problem with murder, since in his mind, it's justified. Granted, he also thinks he can just kill Polonius, say "Oh crap. You aren't Claudius," and then move on with his revenge plot. Honor, ethics, previous respect due to family, all of it goes out the window for Hamlet. As I said before, for all his thinking, he misses the obvious, which is most likely the case here.

Overall, in terms of execution, Hamlet is an excellent killer, as he has proven, but he thinks too much to really do so to the fullest potential. Now that I've ranted a lot, enjoy these pictures joking about the plot.