KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Greenes Please don't spend money on this.

Teringer An Exercise In Nonsense

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

mhk11 Though Nicol Williamson performs outstandingly in the final scene, his overall performance is extremely uneven. At times he delivers his lines with brio or with subtle astuteness, but often he comes across as disengaged and bored. He too frequently resorts to snarling or to expressionless recitation, and only occasionally does he convincingly convey the tortured psyche of Macbeth. His delivery of the great "Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow" soliloquy is the worst rendition that I have ever beheld. On the whole, his performance drags down this production.Jane Lapotaire is excellent in her opening scene and in her final scene, but less impressive in the intervening scenes (especially in the scene with Banquo's ghost). She pretty badly misjudges a few of her lines. Still, if her overall performance had been matched by Williamson's performance, this production would have been better than it is.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 omitting very little of the text (apart from the spurious III.v and the spurious bits of IV.i). In short, this production is certainly worth watching but is disappointingly short of what it could and should have been.

Alain English After a battle to repel Irish and Norwegian invaders, Scottish warrior Macbeth (Nicol Williamson) is named Thane of Cawdor. But a chance encounter with some demonic witches sets on him on a course, encouraged by his voracious wife (Jane Lapotaire), to seize the Scottish crown with bloody consequences...As a Scotsman, I always find it odd to hear the words of "Macbeth" being spoken in RP English accents. It doesn't hurt the text but it adds so much more hearing Scottish vowels enunciate Shakespeare's words.So is it here, with Nicol Williamson giving a suitably schizophrenic performance as the main character and Lapotaire evincing an electric sexual energy as his wife. The two head up a strong cast who who carry the story very well.They are helped by a great musical score and some strong direction. The stage fighting in this piece is easily among the best in the series, and the story in each fight is told with clarity and realism. The absence of gore effects for the supernatural elements of the play might have been a cost-cutting factor but it actually helps. When Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo at his dinner table, we only see an empty chair but it's cut together and scored just right that the audience still gets Macbeth's panicked sense of guilt.A fine rendition of a still hugely-popular play.

tonstant viewer The good news is that the sets, costumes and lighting are close to the top of the BBC Shakespeare series. Simple, powerful and expressive. The witches are shown at the Callanish Standing Stones in the Western Isles, and the castle is distinctly Highlands. Wonderfully evocative.The bad news is, everything else.Macbeth has the shortest text of Shakespeare's tragedies. But not here. This is endless. Much of the line reading is slow and straight into the camera, presumably on the assumption that American schoolchildren need underlining. No thanks. In this series, only the "Pericles, Prince of Tyre" is delivered more slowly. And that one's unbearable.Theatrical tragedy is defined as a man or woman with noble qualities who is brought down by an act of hubris. Nicol Williamson is unable to convey any positive qualities to the character of Macbeth even when mouthing noble sentiments, and gives us a psychotic thug who just deteriorates. Unlike Lear or Othello, he has no transfiguring flash of insight when facing death - in defiance of the text, this Macbeth appears to have learned nothing.Williamson gave interviews at the time of his calamitous Hamlet saying he got no joy at all from performing Shakespeare. Indeed his Macbeth is glum, trapped and looking like he was being forced to take some very nasty medicine. He makes the verse sound as ugly as possible, and his rudimentary classical acting technique consists of opening his eyes very wide and counting up to 257 under his breath.Jane Lapotaire's Lady Macbeth is a simpler matter. She oscillates between orgasm and tantrums, with occasional rest stops at wheedling. She is every bit as baroque as he. Things got so weird that by the time we got to Banquo's ghost at the banquet, I thought I was watching the Pod People - I fully expected their heads to pop off and little "Mars Attacks" heads to rise up out of their shoulders.Ian Hogg is a sympathetic Banquo, but he's no warrior. Tony Doyle has a good, solid moment as Macduff when he gets the news of the murder of his wife and kids. But he is unable to sustain interest, and the rest of the cast is notably weak, ranging all the way down to a pitifully incompetent Donalbain. Just about any other BBC Shakespeare video has a more effective supporting cast than this.The major value of the BBC Shakespeare series is in less familiar plays. "Much Ado About Nothing," "Cymbeline," "Twelfth Night," "Henry IV," "Troilus and Cressida," "Love's Labour's Lost," "Henry VIII," these are great, life-enhancing experiences and are worth seeking out. It is a pity that so many people will never see these, only a middling "Julius Caesar," a weaker "Hamlet," an oddball "Lear," a clumsy "Romeo" and this outright disastrous "Macbeth."

hush-4 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.