ChikPapa Very disappointed :(

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

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.

Calibanhagseed This is an entertaining rendition of Bill's dark and moody play.Shakespeare's play about the rise to power and overthrow of Macbeth is not something to be made even more heavy by too mush subtext. Let's leave that for the Scholars who tear apart Shaky Bill's works with over zealous need to analyze this plays.MacBeth is not a hero, he's a villain, plain and simple. A villain plagued by his guilty conscience that deprives his of his wholesome sleep and eventually his mind and enjoyment of life. He resorts to very masculine measures to assure his usurped throne and retain some dregs of life. Violence, plotting and eventually black magic. He is torn between wavering guilt and dynamic force to change his wretched state. In the end he sub-comes to a monomaniacal assurance of his own power and to a fatalist view of life. (MacBeth is not a profound character study like Hamlet, and any such "in depth" speculating only takes away from the performance) These two things tear him asunder. What makes him so appealing and tragic is his manly defiance and power.Nicol Williamson portrayal of Macbeth incorporates all these things, most of all Williamson captures MacBeth's masculine force. People might argue that his acting is reminiscent of a 19th vaudeville villain, So what! (So it isn't as inventive and ceremonial as Ian Mckellen's excellent McBeth.) I loved the way Williamson ranted and sneered and his theatrical gesticulations that bordered on over-acting, but it takes a great actor to play a ham enjoyable and Williamson acting was excellent and enjoyable. (Many things seemed heat of the moment,which I like)The Rest of the cast was adequate, though Ian Hogg's Banquo used what I call the "Shakespeare finger" a bit to much an some of his acting was strained. Tony Doyle as MacDuff too, his acting lacked in any real enjoyable dramatics, I did not find his lamentations concerning his murdered family moving. The gatekeeper wasn't funny at all(well, not that Shakespeare's humor is funny, frankly I find it dull) If you want a good solid "comic" performance of the gatekeeper watch Ian McDiarmed in the Trevor Nunn directed version.As for Lady McBeth. I found Jane Lapotaire's interpretation strange, yet not bad. I agree there are discrepancies between Shakespeare's meaning and her performance, but She was incredibly seductive as Lady MacBeth. Which made her inducement to MacBeth to murder Duncan a great sensual piece of acting. (Who can say no to a bad girl, right.) Though her madness in the end lacked some of the dignity and power of Judy Dench's version of the role.This version of MacBeth is not a simply a good version you can enjoy intellectually by yourself, but one that can be enjoyed with your friends drinking beer 'n booze, eating pizza, due to it's "go-for-the-guts" virility. It'll have you cheering on MacBeth as he murders, plots and rages. In fact this movie is a great instructional video how to be a real man, in an age where metro-sexuality castrated most men."...Give to th' edge o' th' sword His wife, his babes and all those unfortunate souls that trace him in his line." Heck, yeah!!!!

mmcpartl Although this is a rather dark film, Macbeth was written as a dark play and therefore is very fitting.The way that this film was done reflects the difficulties of converting a successful and ageless stage production into a filmic production. It is filmed and acted in a way that expresses the actors' stage presence and ability while exercising the many capacities that cameras have.It is worth watching. I have had to view many different versions of Macbeth for many classes in the general ed and collegiate levels and this version does justice to the original text and to the stage origins of the play.

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.