Yes, But What a Stage
After my usual end/beginning of year break, I'm back with a review of a 1961 version of Macbeth.
Besides the fact that I actually own this movie and wanted to justify the cost to myself, the main reason I was curious about the 1961 TV movie version of Macbeth was because Sean Connery was playing the title role. Given his very prominent Scottish accent, this seemed like appropriate casting, doubly so given some of the roles he’s known for. After watching it, I think I can say he gave a decent performance, but I was admittedly a bit…distracted.
I’m guessing most of my audience is familiar with Shakespeare’s play (even if only in the broad details), so I’ll dispense with my usual summary and cut straight to the chase. What really stood out to me about this adaptation is the various technical aspects, some of which are intentional and some which aren’t as clear cut. My copy of the movie hasn’t been remastered, nor did the DVD creators take it from the best available print, which explains why scenes where the characters are in extreme closeup often lop off the top or bottom of their heads. It probably also contributes to the difficulty in seeing the characters at times, though this isn’t helped by the various wide shots or the use of silhouettes. But even if I had a better copy, I suspect my attention would still be on the trappings rather than the acting.
To begin with, the entire movie takes place on one set, with just the camera positioning helping to add some variety. This is fine as far as it goes, but it does raise the question of why Macbeth has a huge throne in his house before he becomes king, or why the doors are so enormous (Macbeth’s home is probably actually a castle of some sort, but even so…). You might think from the single set that this was some sort of televised live performance, and maybe it was, but Connery delivers a lot of Macbeth’s monologues in voiceover (something no other character does) and there’s the occasional fade or wipe that makes it feel more like a movie, so I’m left with no idea what the intent was. Then there’s the costumes, which are mostly nondescript, except for two aspects. One, some of the outfits the men wear make them look like they have huge, pointy shoulder pads, which makes them look ridiculous rather than intimidating. And two, the crowns Macbeth and his wife (Zoe Caldwell) wear look like part of Sauron’s helmet from Peter Jackson’s movies, in contrast to the relatively sensible crown Duncan (Powys Thomas) wore. I’m guessing the costumers were going for symbolism, but again, the effect was funnier than I think they meant for it to be.
When I did manage to tear my attention away from the tech, I mostly found myself pondering the adaptation as a whole. Since the movie is about ninety minutes, the screenwriters stripped out extraneous material, including most of the material surrounding the three witches. While it’s sad that we don’t get some of the most famous lines in the play, overall they tell a pretty tight version of the story that gets the point across, with two notable exceptions. MacDuff (Ted Follows) comes out of nowhere as a character, and the fulfilling of one of the witches’ prophecies is never explained to the audience, so if this was your first exposure to the play, you’d probably wind up a bit confused. The adaptation does, however, include the scene with Lady MacDuff (Sharon Acker), which went in an extremely dark direction, darker than any version I’ve seen prior to this. I almost admire the adaptation for going there, though mixing it with all the other elements just makes it one more weird thing to add onto the pile.
On the one hand, the film quality and various distractions make me hesitant to recommend this movie. However, it’s strange enough that it needs to be seen to be believed at times. So if you’re in the right sort of mood, see if you can track down a copy. Who knows, maybe it’ll be even better (or worse) than the one I have.
Besides the fact that I actually own this movie and wanted to justify the cost to myself, the main reason I was curious about the 1961 TV movie version of Macbeth was because Sean Connery was playing the title role. Given his very prominent Scottish accent, this seemed like appropriate casting, doubly so given some of the roles he’s known for. After watching it, I think I can say he gave a decent performance, but I was admittedly a bit…distracted.
I’m guessing most of my audience is familiar with Shakespeare’s play (even if only in the broad details), so I’ll dispense with my usual summary and cut straight to the chase. What really stood out to me about this adaptation is the various technical aspects, some of which are intentional and some which aren’t as clear cut. My copy of the movie hasn’t been remastered, nor did the DVD creators take it from the best available print, which explains why scenes where the characters are in extreme closeup often lop off the top or bottom of their heads. It probably also contributes to the difficulty in seeing the characters at times, though this isn’t helped by the various wide shots or the use of silhouettes. But even if I had a better copy, I suspect my attention would still be on the trappings rather than the acting.
To begin with, the entire movie takes place on one set, with just the camera positioning helping to add some variety. This is fine as far as it goes, but it does raise the question of why Macbeth has a huge throne in his house before he becomes king, or why the doors are so enormous (Macbeth’s home is probably actually a castle of some sort, but even so…). You might think from the single set that this was some sort of televised live performance, and maybe it was, but Connery delivers a lot of Macbeth’s monologues in voiceover (something no other character does) and there’s the occasional fade or wipe that makes it feel more like a movie, so I’m left with no idea what the intent was. Then there’s the costumes, which are mostly nondescript, except for two aspects. One, some of the outfits the men wear make them look like they have huge, pointy shoulder pads, which makes them look ridiculous rather than intimidating. And two, the crowns Macbeth and his wife (Zoe Caldwell) wear look like part of Sauron’s helmet from Peter Jackson’s movies, in contrast to the relatively sensible crown Duncan (Powys Thomas) wore. I’m guessing the costumers were going for symbolism, but again, the effect was funnier than I think they meant for it to be.
When I did manage to tear my attention away from the tech, I mostly found myself pondering the adaptation as a whole. Since the movie is about ninety minutes, the screenwriters stripped out extraneous material, including most of the material surrounding the three witches. While it’s sad that we don’t get some of the most famous lines in the play, overall they tell a pretty tight version of the story that gets the point across, with two notable exceptions. MacDuff (Ted Follows) comes out of nowhere as a character, and the fulfilling of one of the witches’ prophecies is never explained to the audience, so if this was your first exposure to the play, you’d probably wind up a bit confused. The adaptation does, however, include the scene with Lady MacDuff (Sharon Acker), which went in an extremely dark direction, darker than any version I’ve seen prior to this. I almost admire the adaptation for going there, though mixing it with all the other elements just makes it one more weird thing to add onto the pile.
On the one hand, the film quality and various distractions make me hesitant to recommend this movie. However, it’s strange enough that it needs to be seen to be believed at times. So if you’re in the right sort of mood, see if you can track down a copy. Who knows, maybe it’ll be even better (or worse) than the one I have.