Macbeth

WARNING: if you do not know the play Macbeth, I refer to the ending, so please do not read this if you wish to keep the ending a surprise!*****

Most of the later, stylized BBC Shakespeare TV-films have impressed me to some degree. Not so, Macbeth. While the highly stylized setting was effective in parts, the actors seemed to misunderstand much of the play, the ironies and character development. Lady Macbeth was especially guilty of this, during the speech in which she asks the "spirits which tend on mortal thoughts" to unsex her. The point of the speech is that Lady Macbeth is asking to be made sexless, remorseless and resolute. This Lady Macbeth, however, throws herself onto the (convenient) bed, legs spread wide in an almost masturbatory speech. I began to wonder at this point if she had actually read the play, or was being given her lines scene at a time! Sadly, the performance only got worse. Macbeth was marginally better, although the use of the "evil" rasping voice for his murderous thoughts, contrasted with the "manly" voice in the parts where his conscience is awakened makes for a very two dimensional tragic hero. Yes, that's right, Macbeth is a tragic hero, who is bought to downfall by his ambition and paranoia. Instead, the interpretation Jack Gold has given the play turns it into something resembling a 19th century melodrama, with an evil villain, pious king and Malcolm, and a heroic Macduff, completely ignoring the irony of Malcolm's statement of Macbeth as a butcher (Macduff, carrying Macbeth's head is visually the only butcher on stage) and the fiend-like Lady Macbeth (who we last saw wracked with guilt, sleep walking, only to kill herself later out of despair in the knowledge of what they have done). The introduction of the Weird Sisters, who rise out of stone was impressive. It is a pity the rest of the production did not follow suit.

Ambrose video 1984. Part of "The Complete Works of William Shakespeare" Produced by the BBC & Time-life Films. Produced by Shaun Sutton. Directed by Jack Gold.

There are many versions of this product and several beautifully illustrated and annotated books. Everyone has their favorite. Yet the only way to be a true favorite is to watch other versions.

This just happens to be one of my favorites as the actors do not outshine the characters. This is close to a minimalist stage production. This is close enough to the writing that it makes for a good classroom presentation.

It is best to know the story before watching the presentation. It starts with three witches that tell a Scottish general Macbeth (Nicol Williamson) that he will become king. Macbeth's wife eggs him on as suggesting that he kill the existing ruler and cousin Duncan to move the process forward. Little did Macbeth and Lady Macbeth (or we for that matter) suspect at the time that they would encounter more blood and supernatural forces to correct the situation.

You may find this a tad more layered than you think as we must decide if the hero Macbeth is the bad person as suggested by Malcolm and Angus.

Do not overlook the politics of the time as they are sometimes overlooked in other presentations.

We also get some of our best quotes as in Act IV, Scene 1" Double, double toil and trouble, fire burn, and cauldron bubble."

Though Nicol Williamson performs outstandingly in quite a few scenes, his overall performance is somewhat uneven. Much of the time he delivers his lines with brio or with subtle astuteness, but he occasionally comes across as disengaged and bored. Especially disappointing is his delivery of the great "Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow" soliloquy. It is indeed, the worst rendition that I have ever beheld. Perhaps Williamson was seeking to convey Macbeth's ennui through his lackluster recitation of the soliloquy, but it falls badly flat.

Jane Lapotaire is excellent in her opening scene and in her final scene, but somewhat less impressive in the intervening scenes (especially in the scene with Banquo's ghost). She pretty badly misjudges a few of her lines, and she is too highstrung. Still, her overall performance is at a high level.

Tony Doyle is generally excellent as Macduff, and James Hazeldine is quite good in the difficult role of Malcolm. James Bolam is considerably less entertaining as the porter in this production than as Touchstone in "As You Like It" (though the fault may lie with Shakespeare more than with the actor).

Most of the other performances are pretty good, though there are quite a few other instances of misjudged renderings of lines. The sets and lighting are fine, and the production is to be commended for including most of the text. (The spurious III.v and the spurious bits of IV.i are of course omitted, as is the paean to Edward the Confessor in V.iii. Only a handful of other lines are omitted -- though I should note that all of those remaining omissions are gratuitous.) There are some pointless rearrangements of the text, but they are not confusing.

There are several directorial oddities, of which I will mention two here. First, in the third scene -- where Macbeth and Banquo encounter the witches -- the witches simply amble away after they have delivered their prophecies to Macbeth and Banquo. Contrary to what Macbeth and Banquo declare, the witches do not suddenly vanish. Given that the sudden disappearance could have been effected easily in a production made for television, the directorial decision to have the witches simply walk away is strange indeed. Second, during the scene with Banquo's ghost, there are two empty chairs rather than only one. There is the empty chair across from Macbeth, where Banquo's ghost appears. Clumsily, however, there is another empty chair at the very part of the table where Macbeth is standing. Quite unclear is why the director included that second empty chair, especially given that its position makes rather ludicrous Macbeth's question about the location of a vacant seat.

In short, this production is well worth watching even though it is marred by some shortcomings.

I actually prefer Nicol Williamson's Macbeth to Sir Ian McKellen. He is far more believable in the role. I believe Williamson to be one of the better Shakespearean actors. Even Jane Lapotaire's Lady Macbeth is better than Dame Judi Dench's performance. Perhaps Dench and McKellen just lacked the physical chemistry Williamson and Lapotaire appear more likable to me. I believe them more as a couple. While I enjoy all the actors mentioned above, this version is more than just a stage version. There is no audience. The costumes and art direction could be better overall. Still the BBC kept true to William Shakespeare's words. This version could do well in high school classrooms since this play is part of the curriculum. I prefer this version overall to the recorded Stratford version. If I had to choose between this version and Roman Polanski's film for the classroom viewing experience, I would take this version because it is more faithful overall.

Jane Lapotaire is a superb Lady Macbeth, as those who've seen her on stage would expect. Although the jury is often out on Nicol Williamson's acting in anything, I think he is brilliant in this - particularly in the banquet scene where Banquo's ghost returns. I'd probably bracket him with Ian McKellen when it comes to TV movie portrayals of what is essentially the portrait of a usurper gone mad.

It has to be said though that the towering presence of these two actors somewhat overshadow the others in the cast. Special mention must go to Ian Hogg as Banquo, and the late Tony Doyle as Macduff, however, as they are both excellent.

Jack Gold's production looks done either on the cheap, or in a minimalist way (or both!) but that would be my only quibble. This is my favourite of the BBC Shakespeares. Let's hope the whole series of them will be made available on video or DVD widely in the UK again soon.