Commentaires des utilisateurs

William Shakespeare's classic gets a re-telling and new setting to the 1950s in Joe Macbeth. How to make the bloodbath accessible to a modern audience? Make the main characters gangsters, of course! It was a great concept, and since I love the lead actor, Paul Douglas, I was very excited to see it. For the most part, it was a really valiant effort. The plot was pretty close, but with some substitutions that would make more sense in 1955. Instead of three witches, there's a Thelma Ritter wannabe who tells fortunes with tarot cards. Instead of Macduff and Banquo, the characters are renamed Duffy and Banky. King Duncan of Scotland is instead Duncan, kingpin of the American crime gang. Towards the end, it did get a little melodramatic (like the end of Scarface), but I'm sure there are some folks who won't mind. After all, it's a re-telling of Shakespeare - isn't it supposed to be melodramatic?

Ruth Roman, who shows off her lovely figure in some great gowns, plays the evil Lily Macbeth who encourages her husband Paul Douglas to bump off the head of the crime syndicate so he can replace him. She does a great job, reminiscent of Joan Crawford or Eleanor Parker, who could have also played Lady Macbeth. Paul is perfect casting, with his softie demeanor making him an easy target for his wife to manipulate.

Paul Douglas fans will love this movie, although they'll probably wish it had been made with a little bigger budget. I'm always interested in seeing "understandable" versions of Shakespeare stories, since in their native language, I usually can't understand what the characters say. As an unexpected treat, I got the biggest kick out of seeing Sidney James (from the hilarious Carry On series) in a drama, and with an American accent!

Before his befuddled attempt to rework Shakespeare's tragedy into an urban mob movie, Philip Yordan had more than an honorable career as a screenwriter: When Strangers Marry, Whistle Stop, Suspense, The Chase, Reign of Terror, Edge of Doom, Detective Story, Johnny Guitar, The Big Combo (to cite only titles in or near the noir cycle). Perhaps Joe Macbeth's production in the United Kingdom proved the impetus for its being adapted from the ill-starred 'Scottish play,' adding one more element originating in Great Britain to satisfy all the codicils in the deal. But Yordan's writing is far from the major shortcoming in a movie that, despite occasional spurts of interest, falls short of satisfying.

For starters, it's hard to buy the usually sympathetic Paul Douglas as a plausible pretender to the throne, even a weak-kneed and vacillating one (Douglas was nearing 50 – as well as the end of his life – at the time). True, his striking at the king is prompted (if not prodded) by his ambitious wife – Ruth Roman, here steely and matronly (she was a sadly underused actress). But both are upstaged by Bonar Colleano as a smoldering agent of revenge and retribution – in much too underdeveloped a role.

Then, the milieu, which seems to be New York City and an estate on Long Island, strikes an inauthentic note, having been filmed on sound stages across the big pond (the street scenes are shabbily Victorian rather than raffishly New World). In a genre where atmosphere ought to be preeminent, Joe Macbeth stays imprecise and generic.

Last, the direction fell to the workmanlike Ken Hughes, who had some experience in British suspense thrillers, including some that might now be termed 'Britnoir:' The House Across The Lake and The Long Haul are two of the more notable of them. But he really doesn't have much to bring to the party, and once or twice stoops to low-comedy touches grindingly at odds with the tone of the movie.

The most arresting aspect of Joe Macbeth (and aspect, alas, which becomes an albatross), is a misguided fealty to the Bard of Avon. Lest anyone overlook its Elizabethan pedigree, Joe Macbeth piles on the homages. Banquo becomes 'Banky' (the ever watchable Sid James) and MacDuff 'Duffy;' the three witches are downsized to one, a has-been actress reduced to telling Tarot cards (Minerva Pious, in a delightful turn; her cauldron becomes a kettle where she boils chestnuts on a pushcart); we even have Roman doing the 'Out, damned spot' scene (luckily, Douglas was spared 'Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow'). The trouble is, when you start noticing all the literary allusions and waiting for the next one to pop up, the movie you're watching has ceased to engage you on its own terms. Nice try, but no cigar.

I have always confounded this film with Russel Rouse's NEW YORK CONFIDENTIAL; I don't know why, maybe because plots are rather close and because I have always also confounded Paul Douglas - here - and Broderick Crawford - NEW YORK CONFIDENTIAL; both actors had more or less the same kind of face and played the same kind of characters too. So this explains that. This Ken Hughes' film is excellent, a gritty, violent crime movie, the rise and fall scheme concerning a ruthless and ambitious gangster and his moll. I would have never imagined Paul Douglas in such a role, and Ruth Roman is excellent in his gun moll role. Best film from Ken Hughes, besides CROMWELL.

A fortune teller predicts a rapid, bloody rise to the top for a mid- level mobster and it soon comes to pass with a little help from the goon's ambitious wife...

I'm sure it sounded like a good idea at the time (still does, actually) but this underworld updating of Shakespeare's MACBETH was criminal in more ways than one and reminded me of those "Classics Illustrated" comics I had as a kid. "Simple" sums it up and a too-old Paul Douglas hammed it up shamelessly, coming off more like "Curly" from THE THREE STOOGES than the Bard's vacillating thane. The idea that the Chicago syndicate (at least I think that's what it was since I heard "the Detroit mob is moving in" at one point) could bump each other off left and right with impunity was only one of the film's many preposterous conceits but this low budget Brit noir (a Columbia picture filmed at Shepperton Studios) still had its moments, nonetheless, albeit few and far between.

The classic tale's all there from "Banky"s ghost to the damned spot on Lady, er Lily, Macbeth's hands trotted out in "Cliff's Notes For Dummies" fashion and Ruth Roman as the power behind the crime kingpin's throne was, well, Ruth Roman. She's like Arlene Dahl, Faith Domergue, Rhonda Fleming, Debra Paget, and a host of others from that era: they knew their lines and didn't bump into the furniture but their acting rarely rose above "competent". "Decorative" was the operative word for these gals and most faded away once their looks went but Ruth actually made a pretty good character actress later on in her career. I understand an underworld-set MACBETH was tried again with MEN OF RESPECT in 1990 and it's gotta be better than this.

What better setting for Macbeth than a bunch of gangsters? Joe Macbeth stars Paul Douglas and Ruth Roman as Joe and Lily Macbeth, directed by 22-year-old Ken Hughes in this 1955 British production.

This bunch is pretty ruthless - it begins with Joe late for his wedding to Lily because someone took too long to die. Lily is ambitious for Joe to move up in the gangster organization.

With this crowd, there is generally only one way to do that, and though Joe moves up, it's not high enough or fast enough for Lily. Ruth Roman does a dood job as the tough and glamorous Lily. Paul Douglas, usually such a nice guy, plays a mean gangster here, but soft enough that Lily can push him.

This follows the Bard's story pretty well - there's even a dinner where Joe freaks out because he sees a murder victim sitting in a chair.

Fellow gangsters include Bonar Colleano, Sidney James, Gregoire Asian, Harry Green, and Bill Nagy, among others.

Mobster Joe "Mac" MacBeth (Paul Douglas) kills the second in command for his boss "Duke" Duca. He marries Lily (Ruth Roman) who is anything but an angel. She keeps pushing him and pushing him to rise up in the organization. He is given a mansion and a new job. Fortune teller Rosie gives him his fortune.

This is inspired by William Shakespeare's MacBeth. I spent most of the movie trying to remember my high school Shakespeare. I remember the trees marching on his castle as part of the prophecy. Maybe the movie could do more with the prophecies. There are some delicious moments. I love our first scene with Lily. I would like her role to be younger. That would make the juxtaposition of her supposed innocent age and her ruthlessness more interesting. I love the food loving mobster. It's too bad that he gets killed so quickly. Maybe a switcheroo would be in order. All in all, I like the idea of a MacBeth gangster although it could be more Shakespearian in some ways.

In this British made crime thriller the makers attempt to apply pedigree with an updated version of Shakespeare's Macbeth but from the outset it becomes clear that this dog does not hunt. Working with a bare bones outline the the film for the most part relates in name only.

Joe Macbeth (Paul Douglas) is a respected strong arm man for "Kingpin" Lennie, more than happy with his situation. Wife Lily (Ruth Roman) is ambitious however and she begins to hector Joe about moving on up which would entail removing Lennie in a permanent sort of way. Joe vacillates but Lily remains steadfast.

The possibilities are plentiful with this modern day version of one of Shakespeares most accessible plays but more than likely due to budget and time the makers of the film never even attempts to elevate Bill's words; a bit galling given he's a hometown boy. Director Hughes is either too clueless or lazy to hone scenes into a decent hybrid. If we need further proof just look to his abysmal leads as mouthpieces. Bombastic likable lug Douglas is too soft from the outset and his descent into paranoia shrill. Roman's Lady M shows some early promise as she slaps Joe into line on her wedding day for running late from a whack but director Hughes doesn't seem to want to trust her with more than a sentence or two at a time and Roman who has the look and cynicism in her voice never gets a chance to deliver the memorable lines of as good a female character you would find in all of drama.

Mac does have an imaginative moment or two with a flower hag representing the three witches and a smug butler making short work of the gatekeeper scene to go along with a cold offing of the "Kingpin" as well as Ms. Macbeth's exit but overall given the original material and its author this film is not only bad it insults English Literature along the way.

This 1955 version of Shakespeare's 1606 play was a project to be directed by William Dieterle from a script by Phillip Yordan and starring Robert Cummings. But Orson Welles filmed "Macbeth" (1948) and Kurosawa soon followed with "Throne of Blood" (1957). It's what directors do when their careers are on thin ice. Welles and Kurosawa managed fealty to the original, but this attempt to make the story appealing for the film noir-relishing masses by updating it to a Chicago gangland yarn is distinctly inferior. The actors are fine, but the audience is not committed--or even sensible--to concepts like the divine right of kings or the Elizabethan chain of being, so it loses it's power to involve and move us. At times silly, it's easy to see why Dieterle moved on.

Although there are some similarities to Shakespeare's MacBeth and this film, there really isn't a lot of reality involved in the actual events.

Shakespeare is fine for royalty and the behavior of royals, but it does not translate very well for the lowlifes of crime.

Paul Douglas is too sympathetic an actor from his other roles to transition to a ruthless and brutal killer he plays in this one. It is too much of a stretch for him. Ruth Roman, however, is just fine as the scheming wife who eggs him on to climb the mountain of slime and crime.

As in MacBeth, however, there are no sympathetic characters in this film as well, but that is about the only comparison that holds up well. In real life, decisions by crime families are made by committee, not by individuals. There is seldom a succession of one hood taking over from another, after rubbing him out. The syndicate is far more sophisticated than that. The movie is interesting to watch only in parts where there is more than a surface examination of any of the characters. Too heavy-handed and predictable,

I have only seen this ONCE about 10 years ago and have been furiously searching for it ever since!! It thoroughly broadened my perspective, perception and understanding of the original play. From what I remember the performances were mesmerizing, most notably Paul Douglas and Ruth Roman who positively SIZZLED as Lily Macbeth and is easily the best thing I have ever seen her in. When I find it I definitely plan to capture it. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND!!

A tightly plotted noir based on one of the most tightly plotted of all of Shakespeare's plays. Joe MacBeth is a hit man for the mob, mean and ruthless and not only good at what he does--very good--but also perfectly content with where his skills have taken him; his ambitious young wife is the voice in his ear, urging him to claw his way higher, all the way to the top if possible, and by any means necessary--including murder. Paul Douglas is a big, intimidating bear of a man, all business all the time; a young Ruth Roman--gorgeous, interesting as always, and costumed in a whole slew of eye-catching gowns--is his won't-take-no-for-an-answer bride. Great performances all around, including from as impressive a gaggle of tough guy types as the movies have ever seen. A "Godfather" for its time, pared down, amped up, and without all the bells and whistles--that still works today. One of the best gangster films ever made. See it.