Macbeth (1971)

[K1stpierre]

Discuss

[Jake Gittes]

Speaking of Polanski... this gets my vote as his second-best film after Chinatown. A true adaptation: respectful without being slavish, and beautifully cinematic all the way through; this is as far from filmed theater territory as it could possibly be. Bold, bloody, dynamic (the 140 minutes fly by), gorgeously shot, and acted with both fury and subtlety. Really a film that needs to be much more widely seen; now that Criterion has put out a Blu-ray, hopefully it will be. 

[Master Scottb]

My 9th grade English teacher showed this in class after we read the book. It was a pretty good movie, and we all liked the violence and brief nudity. Our teacher was pretty cool.

[Goffe]

I'm watching this now, why is the dialogue so bad?

I'm guessing this is a Shakespeare thing

[Jake Gittes]

What?

[4815162342]

It was definitely a unique spin on Macbeth, with Polanski's twisted vision of it.

[Goffe]

it could have been so much better without the insufferable poetic dialogue. Still, a big step up from Polanski previous film, the godawful The Fearless Vampire Killers 55/100

 

If it wasn't for the amazing Chinatown and the really good Rosemary's Baby, I would have given up on Polanski

Edited October 12, 2014 by Goffe R Swanson

[ddddeeee]

'Mother... he has killed me.' sent my Year 11 English class into hysterics.

 

Really good adaption though, one of the better Shakespeare movies.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Fifdddeee Shadddeees

[4815162342]

Once Cinderella is done I want Branagh to go back to some Shakespeare. He can make Macbeth and co-star as King Duncan, and then make King Lear a few years later in the title role.

[Jake Gittes]

I want someone to do a major Shakespeare film, period. We're getting Macbeth with Fassbender and Cotillard soon, which is cool, but I'd like to see someone like PTA or Andrew Dominik adapt Shakespeare with a well-sized budget and a killer cast and great production values. 

[Jake Gittes]

it could have been so much better without the insufferable poetic dialogue. 

The dialogue makes it what it is. I'm certainly not against Shakespeare adaptations that don't keep the dialogue, but I can hardly comprehend criticizing those that stay faithful to it. It's like saying Tarantino's films would be "so much better" without all the witty speeches and digressions and references, or classical Hollywood noirs would be "so much better" without all the wit and innuendo and cool one-liners. 

Edited October 12, 2014 by Jake Gittes

[Goffe]

The dialogue makes it what it is. I'm certainly not against Shakespeare adaptations that don't keep the dialogue, but I can hardly comprehend criticizing those that stay faithful to it. It's like saying Tarantino's films would be "so much better" without all the witty speeches and digressions and references, or classical Hollywood noirs would be "so much better" without all the wit and innuendo and cool one-liners. 

It's easy to understand, most of time the dialogue was either unnecessary, barely comprehensible or even laughable at times. Macbeth was any good because of splendid visuals, good acting and great execution of its themes.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Goffe R Swanson

[Goffe]

of course, that's just my opinion.

[TalismanRing]

It's easy to understand, most of time the dialogue was either unnecessary, barely comprehensible or even laughable at times. Macbeth was any good because of splendid visuals, good acting and great execution of its themes.

 

The fault dear Goffe lies not in Shakespeare's words but in yourself.

[Goffe]

The fault dear Goffe lies not in Shakespeare's words but in yourself.

haha true.  

[luna]

shakespeare is useless. sad to hear polanksi took his prose directly.