Review of Macbeth

Macbeth (1948)
6/10
"Trouble, trouble, toil and trouble."
23 February 2020
Orson Welles was undoubtedly one of the most extraordinarily gifted and charismatic beings to have walked the earth. It is to be lamented however that in his European films especially he made so many errors of judgement that, for this viewer at any rate, his genius is somewhat flawed.

Having obtained the requisite finance from 'B' studio Republic Pictures whose bosses were obviously tantalised by the prospect of being involved with something 'prestigious', Welles set about making his first Shakespearean film. He then proceeds to cock it up by casting as Lady Macbeth an American actress named Jeanette Nolan who is both unsuited to the role and inadequate to the task. She and the rest of the cast are furthermore hampered by the Scottish accents imposed by the director which renders some of them practically incomprehensible. The post-synchronisation leaves a lot to be desired but that is customary with Welles.

The film is visually impressive of course as Welles was a master of composition and unlike many directors really understood 'light'. He has the added benefit of John L. Russell behind the camera and Jacques Ibert as composer. He himself is utterly riveting in the role and the banqueting scene is especially effective but one is left alas with the feeling that a wonderful opportunity to make a definitive version of Shakespeare's play has been wasted. What a pity.

Laurence Olivier was denied the chance, one will never know why, of bringing his own Macbeth to the screen which is a great shame as his stage performance was considered one of his greatest whilst it is probably wiser to pass over in silence Polanski's dreadful version of 1971. It was down to Kurosawa to give us in 'Throne of Blood' what is and will ever remain, the greatest non-Shakespearean version on film. Let us at least give thanks for that.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed