Too much of everything

Pretty Good

For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

I keep reading about the shoestring that this movie was made on. Orson Welles is a cryptic figure and director. We all know the story of the Thane of Cawdor who listens to some witches, who predict he will be king. Of course, his decisions after that direct his life and affect the lives of others. Lady Macbeth is instrumental in his decision making (she introduces peer pressure into Shakespeare), and when he kills the current King, there is no going back. Welles, himself, has that dark quality about him. His piercing eyes glare at his opponents. Of course, after the death of Banquo, he begins to exhibit some odd, suspicious behavior. There are so many Macbeth's to choose from (I've always liked the Polanski), but as a curiosity, this is worth the effort, even though it drags at times and there's the brogue.

Ever since first reading about it, I've always wished I could see Orson Welles' stage version of Macbeth, set in the 19th century Caribbean, with Voodoo priestesses as the witches and an all-black cast. I've wished that that was the vision Welles had brought to the screen, and saved "Voodoo Macbeth" for generations to see. I also would have wanted a black actor to play Macbeth rather than Welles in blackface, which is how he made his film of Othello. However, in terms of what we do have, having a Welles film of Macbeth is better than none at all, and he was a skilled actor and director, making his take on Shakespeare's masterpiece irresistible to see.Even removing the Voodoo and Caribbean and returning to Medieval Scotland, Welles creates a rich atmosphere. The first scene is arguably the best of the whole film; he has moved "Double, double, toil and trouble" to the opening and given it a lot of thunder, lightening and rain. The rest isn't as good, but still boasts costumes and sets that match the moody direction, and Welles is an able Macbeth. The way he moves around pieces of the story works in some ways but not in others. Not my favourite adaptation of The Scottish Play, but still a must-see.

Macbeth (1948) was directed by Orson Welles and stars Welles himself as Macbeth, and Jeanette Nolan as Lady Macbeth. The immensely talented Welles was famous for thinking up ambitious projects that he could not fund. Macbeth fell into that category.With inadequate funding, Welles was forced to patch together his cast, his props, and his location. Although most of the important scenes of the play take place in a castle, Welles didn't have a castle. His set was an amorphous rock formation, with steps that apparently led nowhere.I saw this movie as part of an honors seminar (Shakespeare in Film) that I'm auditing. The students were scornful about the movie. They got tired of the obvious Christian (good) Pagan (bad) symbolism. They got tired of Macbeth lurching around the set as if he were drunk. (Could he have been drunk, or did he want us to think Macbeth was drunk?) They got tired of a new character that Welles introduced--the Holy Father.Welles was a great actor, and his interpretation of Macbeth as a glowering medieval lord covered in sweat is as valid as other interpretations. Jeanette Nolan was not a great Lady Macbeth, but she was creditable enough.What ruined the movie for me was the lower-than-low budget appearance. Sometimes, you just can't fake it with papier mâché and shadows. For example, in one of the most dramatic scenes in world theater, Lady Macbeth comes sleepwalking into a hall and continues to wash her hands. (That's where "Out, out, damned spot" comes from.)In this version, Lady Macbeth, her maid, and the doctor seem to be on a platform of rock, with no roof. Shakespeare meant this to be a tight, intimate, indoor scene. It loses its effectiveness in this setting.We saw this film on the small screen. It might work a little better in a theater, but it works well enough on DVD. This is a flawed, unsatisfying film, but it's not without its merits. Welles is a genius. Even a lesser movie by a genius has some great moments in it. My suggestion--watch it and decide for yourself.

I'll always have a soft spot for the play as it was one of my first Shakespeares, and I really liked this Macbeth. It is not my favourite film version of the play, Polanski's film and Kurasawa's Throne of Blood I just preferred. However, despite some scenes that suffer from a lack of momentum and some indifferent sound quality in a number of scenes excepting the soliloquies, this is very good if not quite on par with Welles' other Shakespeare adaptations Othello and Chimes at Midnight. I loved how dark and expressionistic the sets and lighting were and the cinematography shows thought and accomplishment. The score by Jacques Ibert is a haunting one and matches the expressionistic, brooding tone of the film very well, the story is still the dark and compelling one, complete with an atmosphere of intensity and great unease, I know and love and the script especially the soliloquies is wonderful. Orson Welles' Macbeth doesn't quite match his extraordinary Othello but nonetheless he gives an commanding, sometimes intense, sometimes moving performance. The last twenty minutes are especially mesmerising. Of his supporting cast, the best were the scheming Lady Macbeth of Jeanette Nolan and the delicate Malcolm of Roddy MacDowell. Banquo is also quite good. The rest of the cast are not bad, and the accents were a nice touch when the sound wasn't so indifferent, but I didn't get the sense they were living the parts as well as Welles in particular did. Overall, not perfect and the least of Welles' Shakespeare adaptations but thanks to Welles' performance, how it was made and its atmosphere it is a film worth seeing. 8/10 Bethany Cox