Last Film You Saw

Bigga said:
"The Tragedy of Macbeth"

My first watch of this version. I recommend this be avoided by those not used to the power of acting for acting's sakes.

Once you gets past feeling like you're at school again and then past the jarring accents that don't fit the stereotypical expectations, you begin to appreciate the actors offering of this piece.

I must say, very few of the actors embrace the Shakespearean work for what it is, but bring their stage play to the film work and it doesn't sit well with me.

I love 'Macbeth' and I've always pictured it spoken naturally as we speak now, but this is only the case in small parts, so maybe I'm biased in my view, on first watch.

In my view, because most of this piece is not spoken naturally, most of the acting follows suit.

For example, Washington's 'Macbeth' is brilliant in most ways by himself or when he speaks mostly as self with scant interaction and bounces well with Carvel's 'Banquo', but doesn't produce the same chemistry with McDormand's 'Lady Macbeth'. Hunter's 'The three witches' steals every scene she's in, though!

It's a mixed piece that director Joel Cohen does not quite master in spite of some lovely visual aesthetics on view.

A second viewing is a must for me.
Click to expand...

Forgotten that the language of Shakespeare can be so dense and difficult, but in the hands of great actors this becomes far less of an issue, as Brendan Gleeson demonstrates in the opening scenes. Not sure that I am as convinced by Denzel Washington so far, though.

Watched about a third of the film last night before I got too tired to carry on.

Visually I have never seen anything quite like it. Like the fact that it is shot in digital monochrome, with the reduced frame size suggesting that the walls are closing in

Not sure whether this is of any interest but my favourite movie adaptation of Shakespeare is Kozintsev's Korol Lir, which can be viewed entirely for free (with a decent picture and English subtitles) here:

 
ZenHalfTimeCrock said:
Forgotten that the language of Shakespeare can be so dense and difficult, but in the hands of great actors this becomes far less of an issue, as Brendan Gleeson demonstrates in the opening scenes. Not sure that I am as convinced by Denzel Washington so far, though.

Watched about a third of the film last night before I got too tired to carry on.

Visually I have never seen anything quite like it. Like the fact that it is shot in digital monochrome, with the reduced frame size suggesting that the walls are closing in

Not sure whether this is of any interest but my favourite movie adaptation of Shakespeare is Kozintsev's Korol Lir, which can be viewed entirely for free (with a decent picture and English subtitles) here:

Click to expand...


I will definitely check that out!

Yes, I like that you picked up on the claustrophobic visuals as I couldn't quite lay my finger on what it was, but that was it! Also, as you picked up on, I don't think Washington trusted himself to play the part of 'Macbeth' There are times he lets it go and relax and others where he stage plays it, so the performance isn't quite there.

Very odd to see an unsure Denzel on screen!

I will let you know what I think of Kozintsev's adaptation!
 
The Electrical Life of Louis Wain

New Benedict Cumberbatch biopic about a strange Victorian era (and later) artist who popularised cat drawings and cartoons, and latterly psychedelia, and was obsessed with something he called electricity (some sort of emotional current or some such).

Interesting story for sure of someone I have to admit I'd never heard of. Cumberbatch and Foy are pretty good, the first half is interesting but it tails off a bit in the second half.

Strange little film for something different, 7/10
 
Tragedy of Macbeth - Yes, very impressive. Joel Coen teased out a psychological edge to scenes that impressed me, but maybe it's the effect of seeing the same script so many time. We studied it for GSCE for heaven's sakes, yet I still find so much stuff that I don't remember.

I really liked Justin Kurzel's 2015 version - a gritty and realistic setting with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cottilard, who are both right up my street. It got a bit of a kicking because the dialogue was delivered naturally, often in hushed tones, and along the mixing left some people totally unable to dig out what they were saying, but that worked really well for me. In fact I was slightly disappointed with Alex Hassel as Ross in Joel Coen's version, he gave a performance that seemed steeped in what is to me a cliched, mannered style ("Thespian") and I felt this applied to the whole cast at times.

Having said that, yes, hell yes, it really looked incredible. Ross in the fields with Fleance... holy moly. The night skies. Brendan Gleason's murder and the scenes that follow his discovery. Hamlet's consultation with 'the witches'. Nothing real about any of it... but blimey. A new vision of what noir/expressionism might look like in the wholly digital age. And it's a very solid and rewarding adaptation with a character of it's own. Denzel tearing up the screen on multiple occasions, and Frances McDormand gave us a convincingly whole person, yet palpably a nightmare... the sort of immutable nightmare that whole, normal, real people can be.

Still, it's Shakespeare, and all that means - jarring transitions and introductions of characters. Scenes that fall pretty far below others. Despite this, I'd watch pretty much nothing else if I could.
 
Summerbuzz said:
Tragedy of Macbeth - Yes, very impressive. Joel Coen teased out a psychological edge to scenes that impressed me, but maybe it's the effect of seeing the same script so many time. We studied it for GSCE for heaven's sakes, yet I still find so much stuff that I don't remember.

I really liked Justin Kurzel's 2015 version - a gritty and realistic setting with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cottilard, who are both right up my street. It got a bit of a kicking because the dialogue was delivered naturally, often in hushed tones, and along the mixing left some people totally unable to dig out what they were saying, but that worked really well for me.
Click to expand...
Kurzel’s version is available to see on All4 at the moment. Am planning to give it a go.

Quite liked Polanski’s adaptation.

Am also intrigued by Welles’s Macbeth. It’s on YouTube but I need subtitles as I am a bit deaf so may have to try getting it on dvd or something. His version of Othello is first rate.

Finished watching the Coen today. Still reckon Denzel wasn’t quite up to snuff but was still impressed on the whole.

I am left with a question: watching Shakespeare plays inevitably - for me at least - entails getting a bit overwhelmed by all the lyricism, so much so that I can’t process adequately what’s being said in real time, and so I often end up rewinding scenes in order to take more in. Not sure whether this is the best approach or whether you should just let everything wash over you to avoid stopping and starting.

Just wondering how others deal with this issue.
 
Summerbuzz said:
Tragedy of Macbeth - Yes, very impressive. Joel Coen teased out a psychological edge to scenes that impressed me, but maybe it's the effect of seeing the same script so many time. We studied it for GSCE for heaven's sakes, yet I still find so much stuff that I don't remember.

I really liked Justin Kurzel's 2015 version - a gritty and realistic setting with Michael Fassbender and Marion Cottilard, who are both right up my street. It got a bit of a kicking because the dialogue was delivered naturally, often in hushed tones, and along the mixing left some people totally unable to dig out what they were saying, but that worked really well for me. In fact I was slightly disappointed with Alex Hassel as Ross in Joel Coen's version, he gave a performance that seemed steeped in what is to me a cliched, mannered style ("Thespian") and I felt this applied to the whole cast at times.

Having said that, yes, hell yes, it really looked incredible. Ross in the fields with Fleance... holy moly. The night skies. Brendan Gleason's murder and the scenes that follow his discovery. Hamlet's consultation with 'the witches'. Nothing real about any of it... but blimey. A new vision of what noir/expressionism might look like in the wholly digital age. And it's a very solid and rewarding adaptation with a character of it's own. Denzel tearing up the screen on multiple occasions, and Frances McDormand gave us a convincingly whole person, yet palpably a nightmare... the sort of immutable nightmare that whole, normal, real people can be.

Still, it's Shakespeare, and all that means - jarring transitions and introductions of characters. Scenes that fall pretty far below others. Despite this, I'd watch pretty much nothing else if I could.
Click to expand...

I like your review. I don't agree with it as a whole after first watch, but it's all about opinions. Interesting that you think Washington did a good job, where I saw him as hesitant in many scenes and flowing in others.

Both and you and Zen rightfully laud Brendan Gleeson who naturalised the King's character. We will definitely disagree on McDormand's performance!

Interestingly enough, I happened upon Charlie Brooker's review and his view is very much like my own. He doesn't agree it deserves a 5 star rating other journos have deemed it.

I have 3 versions of this play to screen adaption to take in from 1971, 2015 (thanks for that drop in), this to watch again as well as Zen's 'King Lear'!!

Be a busy week for me!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.