Macbeth

Well it was certainly very artistic and certain parts were just gorgeous. However there is not much more to recommend Macbeth. The worst part to me was how the dialogue was spoken, or not spoken since it was mostly whispers and mumbles. Just mumbles and mumbles. Shakespeare's prose just begs to be enjoyed but here I couldn't understand what they were saying half the time.

Also they seemed to have no idea what to do with the talking parts and just tried to invent weird action scenes to go with them that felt out of place. Too theatrical is how I would describe this film. It tries to be realistic and set in historical times, but it just makes the theatrical stick out more in awkward ways.

Performance wise there is nothing to complain about as everyone did a great job. Overall there are sparks of brilliance here but I just get the feeling that the makers gave up before reaching the goal and the final product is hence mediocre.

For: Beautiful scenery, The actors were all terrific. Macbeth's descent into madness. The dark version of MacBeth.

Against: Maybe the actress playing Lady MacBeth could have been Scottish. The Shakespeare speak hard enough to understand usually, even more so here with the incoherence and muffled speak. Sometimes the movie drags like a go slow slug.

MVP: Michael Fassbender. ( He did a terrific job)

Elizabethan play-write William Shakespeare staged plays of great historical events. Necessarily limited by the stage-setting, these were the masterpieces of carefully crafted words and speeches that we now consider as Shakespearian English. Thus this reviewer considered the film version of Shakespeare's Scottish play as perhaps being too wordy and stagey to go and see. However, I was beguiled by the trailer, that seemed to suggest lots of action and battles. Alas, this was not to be. However, this dull, but worthy product, is a fine showcase for Shakespeare, Scotland, and the performing thespians of the film.

This Scottish-themed film does open up on the battlefield. There are some interesting scenes as the warriors prepare for battle and the battle itself is shown well. (A later battle also has some interesting two-sworded battle scenes). During the battle, witches appear, and make a prophecy about the King of Scotland. The film tells the story of an attempt to fulfil the prophecy and of the aftermath of that attempt.

The male lead is played by Michael Fassbender and the female lead playing opposite him is Marion Cottilard. They are superb in their roles and must have actually suffered hard for their craft. Location shooting for the film was in the Isle of Skye in Scotland. This reviewer has paddled in water there, and can assure readers that even in the height of summer, it is like putting your feet into buckets of ice. Yet, we have Mr Fassbender in water in a scene, and Miss Cottilard, far from her native France, is seen scampering about barefoot and lightly dressed. Bravo! it should be said that there is little sight of the summer in this story. There are many, many, scenes of bleak mountains and bogs and moorland. The climate is cold and wet, with swirling fogs often covering the rough terrain. The scenes are in fact very bleak and compare with those in the Viking film 'Valhalla Rising' (2009).

Elizabeth Debicki, who also appeared in this year of 2015 in 'Everest', here does a standout scene, as relevant to us now as it was in the era it was set in. Sean Harris, who like Michael Fassbender, also appeared in Prometheus (2012), here delivers a brilliant and powerful performance. There is a scene in the 1995 Scottish film 'Braveheart' where William Wallace is floored in shock when he encounters the English champion. Here, in this film, Sean Harris, similarly has his emotions plunged to the depths, more than once. His acting is superb throughout the film.

David Thewlis seems to have an ability to really inhabit his roles. The source material, (book), for the film 'Seven Years in Tibet' (1997) seems to show he got the part just right. So too, for his OTT role in the 2010 film 'Mr Nice' which again matched the source material in the book of the same name. In this year of 2015 though, his performances have seemed more subdued but still true to the source material. I found his portrayal in 'Legend' to be fascinating. Here, in this film, he takes a part and makes it very believable. The part he plays is very like one today and he seems to play it like that too. There are some obvious differences too in that role of course, but that is the essence of the plot of this Scottish film.

We also get good supporting roles from Paddy Considine, David Hayman and Jack Reynor.

Much of the location shooting is on the Isle of Skye in Scotland, though I did spot Bamburgh Castle too. Ely Cathedral is also featured. The cathedral scenes are spectacular as are the castle interiors, however the bulk of the film is shot in realistically grim surroundings. Our thespians spend most of their time wallowing in blood and mud, and the climate and terrain are both as gloomy and grim as the storyline. The use of hand-held cameras does detract though. As do some of the special-effects that take us out of the moment.

This film is a good introduction to Shakespeare and his Scottish play. Political students can learn lessons from this story today, just as they can from 'I Claudius'. For those interested in the subjects of assassination, conspiracy, politics and statecraft, then the writings of the Renaissance Florentine statesman and writer Niccolo Machiavelli may also be of interest.

This film of the Scottish play serves as a good way to engage a modern audience and as such has been a worthwhile project. 9/10.

Was actually really looking forward to seeing this 2015 film version of 'Macbeth'. The play is one of Shakespeare's best, most famous and most quotable and has leant itself to film, with Roman Polanski, Orson Welles and Akira Kurosawa all giving it splendid treatment. The cast is a talented one, having often admired Michael Fassbender, Marion Cottilard and David Thewlis and ever since seeing him in 'The Borgias' Sean Harris struck me as one to watch.

Not to mention the great reviews. Was a little worried though too, seeing that it was directed by Justin Kurzel who directed the big misfire and huge waste of potential that was 'Assassins Creed'. Luckily, this 'Macbeth' lived up to expectations on the whole if not exceeding them. It is not the definitive version of the play, either on film or filmed production, and did have room for improvement, but for all its flaws the film on the whole surprisingly impressed me.

This 'Macbeth' isn't perfect. It is agreed not always easy to understand the dialogue, which didn't need to be as hushed or as muttered. While the film a vast majority of the time looked absolutely great, there is a gratuitous overuse of slow-motion.

Especially in the first 10 minutes or so, which were more sluggish than arresting. There are cuts and some of the omissions do affect the drama where the storytelling becomes less coherent.

For all those drawbacks, there are a lot of positives with this 'Macbeth'. Other than the slow motion, it is quite an amazing looking film, with hugely atmospheric and grandiose visuals (from the suitably myterious fog early on right up to the boldly bloodthirsty climax). The photography to me was some of the best of that year, especially in the act and those locations are hugely effective in their atmosphere, uncompromising but also oddly beautiful and dark without taking it to extremes. The music is still haunting and Kurzel's direction is bolder and less muddled than it was in 'Assassins Creed' from the following year.

Moreover, although it would have been nice if it was more consistently intelligible, Shakespeare's text is still powerful and hard to forget. The story takes time to get going but does get more compelling and remarkably ambitious, at its most emotionally investable from the point where Macduff learning of his family's murder (which has always been a very moving part of the plot) up to the end. The action is both exciting and ferociously harrowing, pulling no punches without being too unnecessarily over the top (seeing as 'Macbeth' is already a dramatically brutal play).

Some interesting changes here. Really did like that the witches weren't portrayed in a way that was too reliant on witch cliches, and were spooky underneath their deceptive exteriors. Lady Macbeth is still an effective and steely manipulator but it was interesting to see a more conflicted side to her (very different as it is not what the play indicates) rather than her being completely villainous. This is not going to work for some, but to me it was interesting. The performances were on the whole great from all, Fassbender is searingly fierce in the title role without being too brutish and Cotillard contrasts with him effectively as a steely and imperious Lady Macbeth. Paddy Considine's Banquo is suitably noble and Harris proved in 'The Borgias' that he could do creepy but also tortured, and he is very moving here as Macduff. It is somewhat sad that Duncan's role in the play is not bigger because Thewlis, while perhaps a touch young, commands the part extremely well.

In conclusion, intriguing and well done but there are better versions of 'Macbeth' around. 7/10

I recently saw Macbeth with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard and directed by Justin Kurzel and is easily my number 1 film of the year so far. While the Shakespearean dialogue may be hard to follow at times, it doesn't matter as this film is a visual masterpiece and not only i the way of shot types but also in the use of colour (which the end scene uses in a truly jaw dropping sequence). The cinematography in Macbeth is truly something to marvel at and is perfectly accompanied by magnificent performances from the 2 leads and also the rest of the cast. Fassbender was born to play this role and portrays Macbeth in a powerful and emotionally engrossing way and Cotillard is a beautiful and faultless Lady Macbeth (she has a great monologue in one scene which gave me goosebumps). Another element that I loved was the score, wonderfully haunting and powerful and matches the scenery and setting of the film. Overall, Do. Not. Miss. This. It is spectacular and I've probably hyped it up too much now but what ever its great. If I had to fault it I would saw that there are some iconic lines from the original play that aren't used in the film which was disappointing but it probably wouldn't have fit with the tone so maybe it was for the best.