Shakespear: Writing style of Hamlet

I was reading Hamlet, (as part of a drama assignment) and the writing style surprised me. Shakespear's writing sounds beautiful, but the words are hard to understand. It's not just the old english, but mainly the description is baffling. Said aloud, it is much more easily understood,but reading in your head is confusing, and it can seem like each character says something longer and more complex than the last one.

The thing I did like about Hamlet, was the description. The picture you are left with is lasting and expressive. I loved the metaphors and similes, and everything was intricately written, with a lot of care and it was very illustrative. One image that I remember is:

 "A mote is to trouble the minds eye. In the most high and palmy state of Rome, a little ere the mighty Julius fell the graves stood tenantless and the sheeted dead did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets, and stars with trains of fire and dews of blood, disasters in the sun and the moist star, upon whose influence Neptune's empire stands, was sick almost to doomsday with eclipse. And even the like precurse of feared events, as harbingers preceding still the fates and prologue to the omen coming on have Heaven and Earth together demonstrated unto our climates and countrymen."

In other words:
A little bit of dust can bother you. In Rome, right before Julius Ceaser's empire fell, the dead came back to life and comets fell and the sun and moon looked scary and there were eclipses, which was like this whole big omen that said the end of the world was coming, and a ghost said it would happen, so this ghost might have an important message for us.

The difference between the two paragraphs is drastic, but the two paragraphs mean the same thing. I like Shakespeare because event though the second paragraph is easier to understand, the first paragraph leaves a  lasting impression and keeps a reader remembering the message of the book.

The thing I don't like about Shakespear is that his characters don't portray as many human qualities. Of course, Shakespear didn't write books, he wrote plays, and factoring unique traits for the character isn't as important. But in comparison to Stephen King, William Shakespear's characters are bland and repetitive. You end up trying so hard to understand what the characters are talking about, that your focus on the story fades. The focus of the story isn't so focused on the characters are it is focused in the writing. It's interesting  how a writing style is adopted in that matter.