Review of Shakespearean FU - Macbeth (1971)

There’s a line in Macbeth which really explains Shakespeare’s appeal to all audiences; “it provokes the desire, but takes away the performance”, referring to alcohol’s inducing of erectile dysfunction, and showing how Shakespeare uses a mixture of five-dollar words and lowest common denominator jokes to appeal to his audience. This line is also appropriate for my reactions to this movie; it provoked the desire to walk out, but took away my performance through sheer boredom.

1971’s Macbeth adaptation, directed by child molester Roman Polanski, tells Shakespeare’s shortest story, of a man who finds that if he commits an act of great evil he will become king, with violence and hallucinations following. The play is a grim meditation on guilt, how evil affects the world around you, and the benefits from loyalty to the true king. The movie, on the other hand, is just grim. And that’s it.

What I mean is, Polanski takes the ultra-realism of the movie to the next level, where the movie is so realistic that it’s either boring or just gross. We go to movies for difference, not to see cold Scottish hills, dimly lit castles where we can barely see, or brutal murders/weird nudity without any sort of meaning. Polanski is normally very good at setting a sense of realism alongside an engrossing story (just look at Tess, or The Pianist), but here the realism is so integral that the film just lacks any energy.

Looks grim now? Wait until you see the actual movie!

Macbeth has all the makings of a great movie, but it is hampered by its realism, its excessive violence and some really bad directorial decisions. The camera movement, the costumes and the performances could be part of a great beloved 60’s/70’s movie, but the rest of the movie fails to live up to it.

Why does this dagger look like a pickup in a 90's RPG? Why couldn't it just be lying down?

Throughout Macbeth, there are a lot of times where I stop and think “Alright, this is how this scene could be better”, and that’s what I think exemplifies a bad movie, where you, an average viewer, can think quite frequently about obvious changes the movie could make. “This dagger scene looks really goofy in terms of effects?” Well, don’t use effects, just leave a dagger lying naturally and we would get it. “This final sword fight in the movie lacks any real energy in terms of choreography?” Try to tie in character motivations and have Macduff fight with brutal, angry manoeuvres, because he’s fighting the guy that killed his family. “Why the hell is this 8-year old boy full-frontal naked in this movie?” Why the hell, indeed. Was there any necessity or enhancement to having a naked boy in the scene where Macduff’s castle gets raided? Why not just leave him clothed and playing with a toy or something, instead of making us curse 1970’s child labour laws?

Perhaps my least favourite thing about this movie is the awful musical score by the Third Ear Band, which consists of ear-splitting noises coming in at the most random moments of the film. I would describe this score as “Gaelic Inception noises”, but if there’s a more technical term for it, let me know in the comments. Anyway, just replace this with some more violin/cello-based music and it’s better.

But as I said earlier, there are some positives to this movie. The camera movement, if not always the imagery, is really fluid in the action, and the production and costume team really outdid themselves, even if their work is too grim. Jon Finch gives a very strong performance as Macbeth, as does Francesca Annis as his wife. There are definitely elements of a really great movie here, but they’re let down by a lot of really odd decisions and some distractingly bad moments.

Yeah, this guy's pretty good. He's the best part of the movie.

To sum up, 1971’s Macbeth squanders its considerable potential thanks to a lot of really weird decisions that distract a lot from the main film. If you want to see a big-screen adaptation of Macbeth, go see Justin Kurzel’s 2015 effort, which is a direct adaptation with higher production values and also some interesting additions to the play, or see Akira Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood, a more indirect adaptation but still excellently done.

Watch these Macbeth's instead. At least for the Fassbender one, you'll learn what the guy who made Assassin's Creed did before he committed such an abysmal film to the world.

So, which Shakespeare adaptations made you either want to be or not to be? That is the question I want you answering in the comments.