Macbeth

Although this is a rather dark film, Macbeth was written as a dark play and therefore is very fitting.

The way that this film was done reflects the difficulties of converting a successful and ageless stage production into a filmic production. It is filmed and acted in a way that expresses the actors' stage presence and ability while exercising the many capacities that cameras have.

It is worth watching. I have had to view many different versions of Macbeth for many classes in the general ed and collegiate levels and this version does justice to the original text and to the stage origins of the play.

Nicol Williamson obviously belongs to the "Macbeth is Nuts" school of the Bard because he's virtually a drooling lunatic by the time he spits out "Tomorrow, and tomorrow...".

A shame that no one sought fit to sign up a rational human for the role, especially because the BBC series is so popular--this was the first word-by-word Shakespeare performance I saw...thank God I've seen others since.

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.

'Macbeth', known too as the Scottish play (have also heard Verdi's opera coined the Scottish opera), is one of my favourite Shakespeare plays, with some of Shakespeare's most deservedly famous characters and lines/solliloquies. It is one of his most quotable/oft-quoted plays and one of his most accessible to study in schools, from personal experience and studying it twice (no other Shakespeare play had me studying it more than once at school).

The BBC Television Shakespeare series is of great interest and a must see for anyone wanting mostly faithful productions with talented casts, even if the quality of the production values throughout the series is variable and some productions are better than others. This 'Macbeth' has garnered a mixed response and that is understandable, particularly in regard to Nicol Williamson's Macbeth. To me it is neither among the best or worst of the BBC Television Shakespeare series, and is solid enough while a long way from being perfect.

Can completely understand the mixed reactions to Williamson's performance. For me, it was an inconsistent one, with some disengaged interaction early on and some intense moments veer on blustering. Worst of all agreed is the "Tomorrow" solliloquy, delivered far too slowly and is so under-acted that he looks bored. There are though fine moments, especially later on. He looks and acts genuinely spooked in the Banquo's Ghost scene and it's thrilling and did feel a lot of tension in the chemistry between him and Jane Lapotaire. The standout though was the "is this the dagger I see before me" solliloquy, one of the most chilling renditions of that part of 'Macbeth'.

Did feel that the witches were over-acted and not frightening or mysterious enough. The production would have benefitted from a tighter pace, it can drag and more detailed and more engaged interaction would have helped it.

On the other hand, to me 'Macbeth' is one of the better-looking productions of the series. The costumes and atmospheric lighting (especially at the beginning for the latter) are particularly good and while some may not share this opinion the austerity of the sets were perfectly fitting and didn't look cheap. The direction is not always consistent, but the scene where Macduff learns of his family's murder is very moving and the final scene is intensely vivid. The Banquo's ghost scene is problematic, have seen some amateurish staging of that scene and with touches that don't make sense but this production did a decent job with it, the psychological element of that scene is important and that was brought out. In fact, that the production has more of the psychological element of the play more than some other productions works in its favour.

There are some nice little things too, like the genuine terror in Lady Macduff's eyes (hugely telling and adds so much to the terrifying and emotional impact of that scene and something that one can't see on stage), Lady Macbeth's hands covered in blood as she pushes Macbeth towards the bedroom and Macbeth clearly showing nervousness with his hands behind his back. The sleepwalking scene is also spooky and the often brought up touch, also garnering a mixed response from viewer, didn't feel too gratuitous to me, and gratuity is a pet peeve of mine.

Music score is suitably haunting and the camera work is professional. Shakespeare's text is iconic and has a lot of impact throughout, this 'Macbeth' is notable for being near complete in its treatment of the drama and text, more so than most 'Macbeths', and is one of the more faithful in adaptation productions of the BBC Television Shakespeare series. The little that is omitted doesn't harm the production at all, and are some of the weakest parts of the play itself anyway. Forget to mention the rest of the cast. Jane Lapotaire is a bloodcurdling bat-out-of-hell Lady Macbeth, on the other end of the spectrum we have a noble Ian Hogg and very moving Tony Doyle. James Bolam is amusing as the Porter, the only "bad" performance was Tom Bowles' Donalbain but that was not enough to bring the production down.

Summarising, a solid if patchy 'Macbeth'. 6.5/10

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.