Review of Macbeth

Macbeth (1948)
10/10
crude but forceful
19 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
"Macbeth" is generally not regarded as one of Orson Welles' better movies, but after "Citizen Kane" it's my personal favorite. It's low budget and technically crude, but somehow all the stronger for it. "Macbeth" is a play that benefits from being done on the rough side; obviously the same approach would not work for "Hamlet" or "Romeo and Juliet." Welles made this film in competition with Sir Laurence Olivier's "Hamlet," feeling that Olivier prettied up Shakespeare. This is Shakespeare with fangs, a dark surrealistic nightmare that takes place less in 11th century Scotland than it does in the dark recesses of the human soul. Welles sees the play as a struggle between Christianity and paganism, with the Witches representing the latter and an invented character, the Holy Father (Alan Napier, Alfred in the 1960s TV series "Batman") standing in for the former. Ironically, in this version paganism seems to be winning. Welles progressively traces Macbeth's growing brutalization much as Al Pacino does with Michael Corleone in "The Godfather" and "The Godfather Part 2." Welles was criticized for having his actors speak in Scottish burrs; interestingly the two best performances are from Dan O'Herlihy (Macduff) and Roddy McDowell (Malcolm), who were from Ireland and Scotland respectively. Of all the actresses in Hollywood at the time who could have played Lady Macbeth--Joan Crawford, Bette Davis, and Orson's old pal Agnes Moorehead to name a few--he was stuck with obscure radio actress Jeanette Nolan, whose demented take on her character's sexuality works well in the context of this particular film.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed