THE TRAGEDY OF MACBETH (Joel Coen) - Movie Review

Website: www.deepfocuslens.com
Support me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/deepfocuslens...
Follow me on instagram: / deepfocuslens
Follow me on twitter: / deepfocuslens
Like my Facebook page: / deepfocuslens
Email me: [e-mail]
#macbeth #joelcoen #moviereview #deepfocuslens

[@looney1023]

This makes me all the more curious how Robert Egger's The Northman will turn out. While not Shakespeare, it's an adaptation of the material that inspired Hamlet, again interpreted through a very singular, auteurist vision

[@user-ln4gd6hx7e]

What's old Norse for Arthouse Conan the barbarian ripoff?

[@helvete_ingres4717]

Self-consciously aping styles from the uh, 1920s isn’t what auteurism is - it’s the middlebrow film nerd crap the Coens have always been known for

[@ajitterbug]

I had very similar feelings to you after a single watch. But like with a Kubrick film, my feelings have changed radically after repeat viewings (I've been dipping into it with Apple TV). I no longer see it as "cold" or emotionally distant. I now see how artfully Coen has interpreted nuances in the text. In particular, I radically disagree with your assessment that this is merely an "interpretation of the Spark notes of Macbeth". Nothing could be further from the truth! Consider the brilliant way the relatively minor character of Ross has been reinterpreted here as a devilish intermediary, playing both sides for his own selfish gain (I have never seen this interpretation before, but it works superbly without ever deviating from the text). Consider the way that Coen picks up on textual references to the air, to birds, to sounds and knocking, to the stars, to the crown as the "golden round", and weaves these motifs into the visuals and soundscape to create ominous resonances. Consider for example, the way that ravens are creatively associated with supernatural evil, thematically tying the witch(es) and Banquo's ghost with a murder of crows at the film's close (Macbeth may be vanquished but evil is not). Consider the way that blood dripping from Duncan connects with the room below where Macbeth is washing his hands futilely to remove the stain, who then upends the bowl, which drips to connect with the room below wherein the drunken gatekeeper lies... Blood into water into wine. Consider the way the black and white cinematography comments on and deconstructs the many diametric opposites we get in the text (fair/foul, done/undone, natural/unnatural etc), beginning with a white screen symbolising the "fog and filthy air", and slowly filling with darkness until closing on black at the film's conclusion. I could go on and on. There is so much happening here. Frankly, I don't think I've ever seen a version of Macbeth that so deeply understands the minutae of the text. You say Coen ignores Shakespeare's "wit". Again, nothing could be further from the truth. There are little moments of Coen humour embedded everywhere. To mention just two: the way Hunter oafishly counts on her fingers to confirm a tally of nine in her early charm; the way a sadistic smile flickers on Ross' face as he discovers the child Fleance quivering in terror in a ditch (we assume the worst without actually seeing the act of infanticide, but Ross has his own agenda as is revealed at the film's conclusion). This is a film of closeups, and it's a joy to see great actors like McDormand and Washington add their own layers and wrinkles to time-honoured speeches. The performances have grown on me significantly in the rewatch. One definite flaw of the film is its brisk pacing. I think Coen wanted to make a noir thriller, a nightmarish, German expressionist version of Blood Simple. The editing is very fast, and in some ways the film isn't left to breathe. So I do agree with your remark that it feels like Shakespeare on "fast forward", and that the breakneck trot of the editing is to the detriment of its emotional core when consumed in a single big gulp. As such, the film is best sampled slowly, in individual scenes. Perfect for streaming!

[@superficialwannabe]

You have such an in-depth review technique! You should write for publications!! (if you don't already!) :)

[@garycooper3243]

I consider Kurosawa's "throne of blood" as the best Macbeth adaptation.

[@bigneon_glitter]

As an adaptation, it was a truncated "greatest hits" revue of the play (Polanski's is still top for me) but as a unique showcase for two of the greatest living American actors to show how it's done - it did not disappoint. Denzel & McDormand _destroyed._ Kathryn Hunter (The Witches/The Old Man) deserves a Best Supporting Actress nom. Mindblowing performance.

[@TTM9691]

Great review, thank you very much, you gave me a clear idea what to expect, and I love that you're able to recognize when someone is borrowing from Dreyer or Lang! I also really appreciate what you said about the modernization of the dialog. I'm intrigued to see it, but I will temper my expectations. Thank you!!! As always! PS: You mentioned seeing Welles' "Macbeth" and "Othello", which are stylistically a little different from this third Shakespeare film, "Chimes At Midnight". Just want to make sure you've seen "Chimes At Midnight", though! It might be his greatest film! Definitely one of his greatest performances (as Falstaff). If you haven't seen it, definitely put it on your list. (John Gielgud and Jeanne Moreau are also fantastic in it)

[@wrestledeep]

You are really really great at reviewing and quickly breaking down movies. I am really impressed. Also u are a hell of an artist. Something of a Renaissance woman. =)

[@zachcameron1117]

This movie is the logical culmination of one of the many things that the Coen Brothers have excelled at: dialects. We've heard it all throughout Fargo, Hudsucker, Miller's Crossing, O'Brother, Llewyn Davis, a fun bit in Hail Caeser, and most pronounced in True Grit and Buster Scruggs, but The Tragedy Of Macbeth is the most extreme and almost daring example. Joel's script is so committed to the source material's authenticity that it's beyond just an If-It-Ain't-Broke-Don't-Fix-It approach, but more impressive in how linguistically ambitious it manages to be.

[@Suite_annamite]

*"Life imitates art..."* It's interesting that Joel Coen picked Denzel Washington to play the titular character for his vision of the play; because in world politics, *there really was an African Macbeth* in the form of *Blaise Compaoré* , who ruled with an iron fist as the *President of Burkina Faso.* After he and his friend Thomas Sankara (aka the "African Che Guevara") overthrew the previous leader; he let his friend lead the country for a short while, then he *kills his friend, and led the Saharan country himself* between 1987-2014, until he was finally himself overthrown and exiled to the nearby Ivory Coast.

[@Dylanbolton69]

I’m just stoked this movie is free on Apple TV. I’ll definitely be watching it soon

[@adrenochromejoe7448]

... 14 months later ... Oh yeah, I forgot ...

[@Solonghoney]

I can't help but express my suffering for not only just finding this channel but also because you clearly have studied and know what you're talking about. I can only hope Cohen's adaptation will grow on you in time lol

[@Cinema9Podcast]

Great review, this film looks amazing!

[@GrandSlamSilver]

Great analysis.

[@PurushaDesa]

Did the Kurzel/Fassbender/Cotillard interpretation from 2015 work better for you?

[@forevrrich]

Only Shakespeare I know is Othello (1995) with Lawrence Fishburne (who was AMAZING). This was my first intro to Macbeth and I found the language impossible to follow. I turned on the subtitles which helped a great deal (English is my first language by the way). My first viewing wasn't enjoyable because I simply couldn't get the story. Had to watch several videos on KZbin just to get the plot. After getting the plotline/summary, my subsequent viewings of the film have been increasingly appreciative. I felt that Washington delivered his lines in the same way over and over again. I did get the impression that both McDormand and Washington are truly devotees (geeks) of the craft.

[@craydogdog1530]

I struggled to understand it because I hadn’t read Macbeth before. however, it did make me want to research more about It. I probably need to rewatch it again to properly judge it.

[@lloydpassafume5357]

Totally random question. What is your opinion of the use of Black and White used in newer films and the influence of Black and White films in general. I'm just curious. Great content!!!

[@seijunsejuki]

I LOVED this movie, I consider it superior to the Welles version, and thought Denzel was amazing. VERY surprised you didn't like it more, frankly. TBH though, I'm not a Shakespeare fan as you are, so maybe that's why I enjoyed it so much more.

[@bolder2009]

Superior to the Welles version? Interesting. That version is next on my list. Orson Welles is my favourite director so I'm curious to see how it contrasts with Joel Coel's visually stunning adaptation.

[@georgedeboo9046]

Just after I have seen it. Thank you!

[@thatfilmguy232]

Maybe I shouldn’t have watched Orson Welles’ version directly before this but yeah I unfortunately agree with you 100%. They also spoke so fast and bluntly that the dialogue didn’t have impact I was so removed from it. They didn’t change the dialogue or dumb it down it was just the delivery. How do you feel about other film versions of Macbeth? Curious about your thoughts on Branagh’s Hamlet also

[@ArthurAugustyn]

I'm glad you felt the film was "cold" because that was my response as well. I have never liked Shakespeare, but I thought discovering my love for The Green Knight last year meant I had become an adult and could now enjoy these classic plays everyone loves. That was not my experience. I understood maybe 40% of this movie. The dialogue was incredibly dense and it didn't feel like anyone was talking to each other. There were definitely highlights of very successful moments. The witches, the final encounter, some exchanges between Lady MacBeth and MacBeth. There were way more stumbles and strange moments. I thought Denzel Washington's modern accent was incredibly distracting. There were moments where he was very convincing in the role, but for the most part he sounded like... a contemporary American reading gobly gook from the 1400s. Maybe it's because I'm so used to British actors playing these roles the American accent threw me off? There were some lines that felt especially strange ("MUCH HAPPINESS!!!" ???). I also thought Alex Hassell's character Ross looked like an actor in a costume - everything about his look was distracting to me. I guess I was never going to like this movie, but it wasn't that I couldn't appreciate it. It seemed kind of dull and boring. I'd rather watch the 2015 version.

[@merlin9943]

Or maybe ,THE GREEN KNIGHT IS PRETTY COOL!

[@lacrimatorium]

Thanks Maggie, I'd heard different thoughts about this film, which will no doubt be reflected in your comment section. The stills look gorgeous, yet... I think you've hit the issues. While I love Francis McDormand I would think someone like Toni Collette would be more appropriate. Her range can run totally dark. Although as you were talking I thought 'Why has no one done a quiet seductive Lady M.?' She is often portrayed as being strong and manipulative, but what if she were painted in the softest most erotic tones, letting her manipulation come out from her seductiveness, rather than her conniving. Make her a blackhearted, knowing Ophelia. Just a thought. Cohen's version sounds like the kind of thing I might watch if I go on a Shakespeare binge. (Or witches?)

[@robertjewell9727]

Really good overview although I haven't seen it. I'm very fond of Welkes' version and I really like Polanski's although I don't watch it often because I feel like I'm crawling through mud when I watch it. I love your Costume Designer by the way. 👍

[@cameronbrooks3767]

hope u come to Hawaii sometime!

[@ChaosReigns45]

I agree with you, it felt like such a hyperbolically minimalistic enviroment tidy and clean, without any room for emotional engagement. And the ironic thing is, it feels very slow, but it skips through story and scenes very fast. Kinda the same way Dune did.

[@danielcastillo4537]

I just saw this at the Bijou in San Antonio, TX a small arthouse theater now slowly moving towards showing mainstream films. In a way this Coen film didn't feel like a Coen film. I did like it but I think it was missing the signature Coen dark humor. Shakespeare is so hard to transpose to cinematic terms simply because the source material uses language to move the plot. Shakespeare has a distinct rhythm that moves with the language and I think the movie tried to move in that direction. To me it made the film more intimate particularly during the soliloquy speeches. And c'mon Denziel Washington keeps aging like fine wine! It feels like actors, directors categorically choose Shakespeare's work to affirm or legitimize their knowledge of their craft.

[@jygordon]

Appreciate your thoughts on effectively delivering Shakespeare's dialogue, esp. since a lot of film reviewers only care about mise-en-scene. IMO, there's no better way to kill Shakespeare than to float through his speeches in an effort to make them sound "natural." (The recent Broadway "Macbeth" with Daniel Craig did this as well; I walked out on it.) I enjoyed McDormand's Lady M more than you did, but I completely agree that the "tomorrow" speech - the play's emotional and philosophical climax - fell flat here.

[@thJune-ze7dn]

Dead chuffed you decided to review this, I saw it last week and found it a lot fresher than most movies I'd seen recently. You're right, it is a lot colder than most adaptations, but I felt that that made for some more interesting artistic decisions than most movies often offer at the moment. I hope it does well.

[@rickhanson3293]

Haven't seen it as yet, but what a line up! I especially like who they cast for Macbeth, Lady Macbeth, King Duncan and The Witches. Washington and Gleeson are awesome selections for the parts they are cast for. I have seen Hawkins before but admit I don't know much about his career so I reserve comment and am content to wait and on the other cast. I do like your candor as regards this movie, but I like Denzel way better than Shakespearean plays so am interested in what he and Coen do with it. It cannot possibly be worse than many of the things I have seen before so I have to keep an open mind on that one.

[@siddharthm6410]

Don't expect too much from Duncan tbh, Gleeson is barely there. But Hunter, McDormand and Washington all FIRED.

[@rickhanson3293]

Thanks for the response.

[@Jynxsphynx2869]

“Chess pieces”. What a great way to describe these characters!

[@adrenochromejoe7448]

"Throne Of Blood" is the best Macbeth adaptation.

[@izetyusein3323]

Without a doubt, one of Kurosawa's finest film, and my second favourite Skakespeare adaptation of his, my favourite being Ran due to the epic scale and incredible battle scenes, but Throne of Blood is still one of his best works. Anything Akira Kurosawa touched turned to gold.

[@DirtyDawg]

Yup

[@everythingflows3196]

Facts.

[@odorendre6539]

true

[@Suite_annamite]

Have you finally checked out some of the other film adaptations of "Macbeth" yet? In varying levels of either awesome or just awful... *a)* Akira Kurosawa's *"Throne of Blood" (1957)* aka "Cobweb Castle" with Toshiro Mifune, through the guise of Noh drama in feudal Japan. *b)* Roman Polanski's *"(The Tragedie of) Macbeth" (1971)* with Jon Finch, Francesca Annis, and Martin Shaw: the Middle Ages told through the lens of late 60's / early 70's paranoid psychedelica. *c)* Geoffrey Wright's *"Macbeth" (2006)* with Sam Worthington and Victoria Hill, in the world of gangland Australia! *d)* Justin Kurzel's *"The Tragedy of Macbeth" (2015)* with Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Sean Harris, and David Thewlis, through the tapestry of an imagined Scottish-French alliance.

[@robnjosnavelin3496]

I've only seen the Kurosawa one. I think I might work my way through the other 3 you mention before seeing the Coen version

[@mrbass093]

Damn and I was about to see this movie

[@rezai7]

I like the red dress, and the review

[@axelnavarrete3947]

The acting and the cinematography definitely blew my mind. But there definitely was a stale feeling through out the film. For some reason through out the film it kept on reminding of the film "the seventh seal" I personally loved it but it feels like a movie i'll most likely forget about a week later.

[@anthonyburn1010]

Except the Seventh Seal is fantastic. :-)

[@ed1rko17]

The movie is pure cinema. I don't agree with the criticism that the stripped down nature of it is a flaw in the sense that the visual story telling is strong, while the film lacked substance, because the goal of this film was the make the visual story telling the substance. That is the substance. If you're looking for a more fleshed out/realistic/epic version of the story, Polanski already did that, and if you prefer that type of adaptation, that's fine, but there was no point in Joel Coen just redoing something that's already been done. This film is not that. This film took a more art-house approach and relied on visual poetry to tell the story rather than the script and dialogue.

[@rajatnandi2175]

That's the point, if you can't make it better, than why make it on the first place?

[@ed1rko17]

@@rajatnandi2175 That's not what I was saying. I'm saying there was an opportunity to do it differently, and if you have this original idea for Macbeth, then you absolutely should make it. Comparing this one to Polanski's version is silly because they are both different. It really just comes down to what mood you are in, or what style you prefer. Also, Macbeth is a timeless piece of literature that will continue to be reinterpreted for the rest of time.

[@matthewjordan7297]

This may be a case where the film is not long enough. Too much of the dialogue was cut to keep the runtime tight. A typical production of this would run 3 hrs + intermission, this film is 105 minutes. I enjoyed the film for it's technical excellence, and the cast, but I felt that the whole was less than the sum of its parts. Shakespeare is hard to do on film.

[@doomjuan4892]

You need to start a discord.

[@siddharthm6410]

What's your favourite Coens movie? And what's your favourite Macbeth adaptation? PS: Love the dress!

[@megametallimaiden8516]

Yeah I agree. The film felt like it was holding back.

[@charlesknowlton7198]

I love Denzel Washington, but I can't see him pulling this role off. Still I'm looking forward to seeing it though.

[@swagtropolis6770]

yaaaaaas

[@sanchitvarma1282]

I liked this film but I much prefer the more visceral and striking 2015 film by Justin Kurzel.

[@lamb9770]

best movie i saw in 2021

[@Jackson-lo7nw]

I have to disagree with you on the accessibility of the dialogue. Maybe that’s what it was going for but it definitely didn’t succeed for me. There were little things here and there where I could tell they trimmed it, but I found the Shakespearian style inhibited me from connecting to the characters, as is usually the case for me with his tragedies. I totally agree on the underdevelopment of Lady Macbeth though. She just felt like an archetype.

[@jmuench420]

I agree. This movie is beautiful and well made but ultimately just gets a shoulder shrug from me.

[@ryanrudolph5667]

Curious to know your thoughts on Polanski’s Macbeth

[@roneteus]

Kathryn Hunter was fckn amazing

[@ronbock8291]

Bloodless is a terrible tonal choice for Macbeth, which features a famous reference to a river of blood.

[@samueljholly]

this movie was badass

[@6chips150]

I find that I enjoy works of art a lot better when I don't know what to expect. Hearing your analysis I feel like you were let down by your own expectations, not the movie itself.

[@tds7078]

Been looking for a review on this for like 3 weeks since seeing it with my family. My Dad and I thought the movie should have had a more "modern" dialogue as it is easy to be thrown off by the Old English style. It's interesting you said it is similar to Christopher Nolan in the beginning of your review because it reminded me of when I was watching TENET. Personally, the performances were great and fight scenes were interesting. I honestly wish the dialogue was different in all honesty.

[@johnnyjohnny2650]

Everyone likes to shit on the 2015 version (not sure why, I guess I'm not smart enough to see it), but at least it had some passion and pathos to it. This one felt very dry.

[@siddharthm6410]

It leans in even more on the realism and grittiness and Shakespeare is just not a good fit with those. Love the visuals and a lot of other scenes, but overall its more of a miss as a Shakespeare adaptation to me. Especially considering the key deviations it makes

[@walkerstark4564]

Polanski’s Macbeth that is very true to the Bard, the spirit of the play, and also 100% Polanski. Savage, naturalistic, intimate, in Polanski’s pantheon I might even put it over Rosemary’s Baby. A very hard act to follow.

[@jimmyblaze4097]

Unfortunate to hear this. The trailer wasn't very compelling and this review pretty much confirms that. One problem is that there are several adaptations of Macbeth that are at or near classic status. I'm thinking in particular of Kurosawa's Throne of Blood or Polanski's The Tragedy of Macbeth. This film really doesn't seem to be bringing anything to the table that would place it among those films.

[@robertgoyette5863]

Denzel is now my fave on screen MacBeth BUT the rest was to bland for me. The supporting cast was lifeless (sans Stephen Root)-really missed the usual Coens players here like Goodman, Tutorro etc. And the aesthetic was just boring-Welles already aced 'Macbeth+Expressionism' and had the advantage of film and practical effects.

[@viso9043]

If you love Shakespeare and haven't seen Vishal Bhardwaj's Shakespeare trilogy, you're getting robbed. Maqbool (Macbeth), Omkara (Othello) & Haider (Hamlet) they are all fantastic cinematic gems. Please give it a try. ❤️

[@sambitnes]

I completely agree. It missed for me. Totally lifeless, he went to stark and it felt like it drained everything and it felt like “feel this long speech that’s not theatrical that goes for minutes”. Totally missed and went too realism and not inspired felt like anyone could’ve made this movie, could’ve been great.

[@ed1rko17]

This take that it uses "realism" is baffling, because that's the complete opposite of what the film does. It's totally artificial looking because the film is expressionistic, not realistic. All the exteriors, everything in this film was shot on sound stages and meant to look like it was shot on sound stages, and used impressionistic lighting, which is the opposite of realistic lighting. Same with the set design. The film is entirely devoid of realism, there isn't a single ounce of realism in any aspect of the production. I'm convinced you didn't actually watch the movie, because it's impossible to watch it and think it went "too realism." "Felt like anyone could've made this movie" is just an insane statement. No one makes movies like Joel Coen because nobody can. He has a totally unique and original voice that no one can replicate. Nobody could ever make a Joel Coen Macbeth movie except for Joel Coen.

[@QuizmasterLaw]

this looks more like ... "The tragedy of MacLeavage" Tragic because fatally attracting men, who are doomed but in the end also doomed by age. (go ahead. do Othello. I Dare you...)

[@QuizmasterLaw]

some of said men may only win her only to leave. i didn't want to spoil the show

[@tdbn4599]

This version is interesting but a little too art house-y. Polanski's version is still the best.

[@sandorx4]

I was sceptical, but this film is amazing. If you don't like this film, you don't understand cinema, and how many times is the word "feel" used in this review?

[@tbwatch88]

it adds absolutely nothing to the filmic Shakespeare canon. Polanski and Kurosawa best this banal dreck to the max, mon.

[@fattymcfatso1083]

Shakespeare is all about the lnguage. All the rest is window-dressing.

[@kingmooo]

Came for the movie, stayed for the looks!

[@ganganthefatman1382]

It seems we're in a dark age of the human psyche in which emotions are no longer revered the way they used to be, but instead mocked with no heart. Makes Tarkovsky's work more relevant in hindsight.

[@ruly8153]

I find Frances Mcdormand to be the most overrated actress on the planet. It blows me mind that she has 3 oscars.... She plays everything the exact same way.

[@moonwalker8459]

What a Debbie downzies lol why so serious 🧐

[@ricosadao828]

..and why the review has to be done in a bikini please? Oh...viewership...

[@gregthomas1323]

When you can’t understand what the actors are sputtering out, you lose interest. 👎

[@elichaitman3294]

That seems like a you problem

[@gregthomas1323]

@@elichaitman3294 perhaps it is. Is it ok with you, that I share my thoughts? I just realized, you don’t need to read or respond to me.

[@elichaitman3294]

@@gregthomas1323 Share it all you want and I'll accept it as your opinion, but I'm also allowed to say what I think of it.

[@helvete_ingres4717]

This mock german expressionism thing got old w/the Lighthouse imo - just professional film nerd crap, making the medium devour itself in winking self-reference in lieu of any real vision or vitality. No interest in seeing this one

[@mabusestestament]

And Orson Welles already used a black and white and German Expressionist(ish) style for his adaptation, so that doesn't come of as original etc. to me. It just makes me think of Welles' version.

[@zacharyfarr5044]

Totally agree, there never was a good black and white movie, everything should be in color. Striped film nerds!!!

[@helvete_ingres4717]

You just took being obtuse to a level I’ve never seen before, well done

[@abhiezibran9654]

I already submitted to the fact you'll be shitting on another gem of a film. so not bemused.

[@gregthomas1323]

Licorice Pizza far superior movie 🍿