Review: Denzel Washington as Macbeth

I suppose the official title of this production is “The Tragedy of Macbeth”, directed by Joel Coen and starring Denzel Washington and Frances McDormand in the title roles, but that’s too much to fit in a title. You all no doubt know which production I’m referring to. Though it came out in 2021, I’ve finally sat down to watch the entire thing.

If you are a student of the art of film-making, you’re probably going to love this. It’s one of those final products that is all about the director’s vision, regardless of what actors he had to work with or what source material they spoke. Every scene is clearly driven by, “Ok, I want it to look like this.”

For my part, I hate that. Shakespeare, to me, is all about the character. Why are the characters speaking to each other the way that they do? What’s their backstory, their motivation? Why are they making the choices that they make? I can get that on a bare stage with no costumes. I don’t need special effects.

Macbeth's Castle
Seriously, who was their architect? What if they did have kids? That’s so dangerous.

Worse, I think that the visual backflips in this version are disjointed and distracting. Like when Macbeth and Banquo have first encountered the witches (more on this in a moment) and get to the line “Whither are they vanished? Into thin air…” but they are still right there. Or when the murderers set Macduff’s castle fully ablaze in a matter of seconds, just so we can get the image of people falling into the flames. Don’t get me started on the MC Escher-esque castle that the Macbeths live in. It’s like they borrowed some scenery from David Bowie’s Labyrinth.

Starring Kathryn Hunter as The Witches

Let’s talk about the witch(es) for a moment because clearly, she/they are the best part of the production. I would see a one-person show of just this performance. Kathryn Hunter alone plays the witches. Is she playing one, then, or three? Or one body housing three spirits? Yes, I guess, to all the things. If she didn’t play it so well, I’d be taking serious issue with the inconsistency in the presentation. Sometimes, she’s just one person speaking in three (or more?) voices. Other times, she splits into three. Or, she’s one body casting three reflections or shadows. She’s also a bit of a contortionist, which only adds to the otherworldliness of the whole performance. When I first started watching this at home on my laptop, my son walked by and said, “What the hell is that? That’s terrifying.”

Kathryn Hunter as the Witches

I’d watch a one-person show of that because the other actors have no choice but to break the illusion. Why does Macbeth refer to “them” in the plural when there’s just one person there? Something like that leaps off the screen and pulls me out of the moment. It’s a minor thing, I suppose. It just feels disjointed, as I mentioned above. It is as if the director is saying, “Yes, I know what the script says, but I know what I want the visual to be, even if they don’t match!”

Bring It Home, Denzel

Even if the director didn’t care much about how the actors played their parts, they still had to find something to work with. Though I admit I wasn’t hanging on every word, I liked parts of Washington’s performance, such as Macbeth. His explanation of killing Duncan’s guards can be summed up as “Sometimes I get into this weird mood where I randomly kill people, I can’t explain it,” and it is the implied, “Would you like to be next?” that cranks up the tension. Everybody probably wonders precisely what happened, but they know they’d better not question it too deeply.

Toward the end, I also enjoyed the way he played his assumed immortality to a point. Everything’s falling apart around him; most of the witches’ prophecies have come true, yet he’s still almost laughing at it all, believing himself to be invincible. His speech to Young Siward is a cross between a serial killer and a Marvel supervillain. Unfortunately, this is ruined by a ridiculous fight scene, but I’ll take what I can get.

See It Or Skip It?

I’ll end how I started. If you’re a fan of the art of filmmaking, this is a great example. You can pause at any point and break down why the director wanted that scene to look like it does. It’s disorienting 100% of the time. There are claustrophobic shots, there are shots looking straight down. There’s nothing extra in any of the scenes, it often feels like bare stage. For me, though, I think that takes away from the Shakespeare. Shakespeare didn’t make any of those decisions, Joel Coen did. Which is fine if your plan is to go see the Coen version of Macbeth. But I’m more about the actors, I wanted to see more of Denzel Washington’s Macbeth. I got some. I liked some. I just wish it was more about the words and the actors and not the visuals.

Macbeth on his throne
Macbeth doing his best Thanos impression.

Wicked Shakespeare

Ok, show of hands, has everybody seen Wicked yet? How many times? 🙂

Well, it’s now available for streaming, which means we get to take screenshots. And with screenshots and subtitles, we get to do this!

You just knew that if there were any Shakespeare in there, we would find it. Here, of course, Galinda (or Glinda) borrows Malvolio’s quote from Twelfth Night: “Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.”

This got me thinking about something I like to call the “Lion King Rule.” That’s the one that says you only need a handful of recognizable elements of a Shakespeare play to say that a movie is based on that movie. So, is Wicked a retelling of any Shakespeare plays?

We’ve got a father who wants nothing to do with his wife’s new baby and demands it be taken away. There’s even a bear. This makes it Winter’s Tale.

We’ve also got a powerful solo central character who is positioned as a pawn of powerful political forces. When our hero fails to do what they’re told, they’re recast as the villain of the story. There’s also a “frenemy” character who our hero may or may not be in love with but will certainly be instrumental in their downfall. Coriolanus.

Of course, this is a story about witches. Therefore, it is obviously Macbeth.

Anything else?

Enjoying The Infinite Variety Podcast?

Art!

Loyal readers probably know that Bardfilm and I finally did something we’ve talked about for years — we started a podcast!

The Infinite Variety Podcast

Hamlet and Ophelia, sitting by a tree. -- Infinite Variety Podcast
Hamlet and Ophelia, sitting by a tree.

Infinite Variety: The Shakespeare Rewatch Podcast will involve us watching anything inspired by Shakespeare—movies, television shows, music videos, commercials … If we can watch it and find some Shakespeare in it, it’s up for discussion.

We decided to start with one of the most well-recognized examples of how to put Shakespeare on screen. Don’t anybody dare say Lion King. I’m talking about Slings & Arrows, a Canadian television show about actors fighting to preserve the integrity of live theatre against the unending onslaught of commoditization and commercialization. Each of the three seasons is mirrored against a Shakespeare play—Hamlet in season one, Macbeth, then King Lear.

Darren Nichols -- Infinite Variety Podcast
He is Darren Nichols, and you’re not.

You have to watch a few episodes of S&A to understand why we love it so much. This isn’t just Hamlet — we have plenty of options to choose from if we want to watch Hamlet. This is a Hamlet mirror story. Geoffrey, the director of Hamlet, was an actor who played Hamlet. Who may or may not have gone insane. Who definitely sees ghosts.

If you’re an actor, love live theatre, or love Shakespeare, there are so many reasons to watch this show. Multiple times per episode, you’ll gesture wildly at your screen, yelling, “Exactly!” or “Oh my god that is so me!”

You’ll want to share the experience with people who get it. It’s people who love what we love, reminding us why we love it in the first place. Plus, it includes some stars you’ll no doubt recognize, including Mark McKinney, Luke Kirby and Rachel McAdams.

It’s been a joy to rediscover this show. I’m thankful to Bardfilm for getting the ball rolling and creating the opportunity to start the conversation. Join us, won’t you?

https://www.infinitevarietypodcast.com

You Had Me At Peter Dinklage. I Thought.

Al Pacino’s almost mythical King Lear project draws closer to reality! We have a cast now for “Lear Rex”, the Pacino / Jessica Chastain project that, by my calendar, has been buzzed about for almost 15 years.

https://deadline.com/2024/08/star-cast-aligns-around-al-pacino-jessica-chastain-for-bernard-roses-lear-rex-lakeith-stanfield-ariana-debose-peter-dinklage-1236029062

Peter Dinklage (Game of Thrones) has attained a status in his career where you hear his name and you assume whatever he’s about to do has got to be good. So when I saw him attached to a King Lear I immediately started wondering what role we might see him in. He’s a presence, so no minor character. He’s also typically a good guy, though I’d love to see him play the villain. Edgar? He might make a great Cornwall. But alas it’s probably going to be …

Fool. He’s playing Fool.

Lear and his Fool

I guess it makes sense, and I’m sure he’ll kill it. I just think that at the end of the day Fool is minor to the action, and that’s not where we’re used to seeing Dinklage. A character who literally just disappears, with no ending? I guess we’ll have to wait to see what they do to the story. Other productions have given Fool a more pronounced ending.

Let’s see who else we’ve got?

Ariana DeBose (West Side Story) as Cordelia. I have no idea how I feel about this. There’ll (hopefully!) be no singing and dancing here. Can she carry such a lead role here? Does she have any Shakespeare experience?

Rachel Brosnahan (The Marvelous Mrs Maisel) as Regan is fine, but Jessica Chastain is playing Goneril. That feels a bit lopsided, no matter how much I enjoyed Brosnahan’s performance in Mrs. Maisel.

Stephen Dorff, who has been around so long that I can’t pin a particular credit on him, is listed as playing “Poor Tom.” What exactly does that mean? I have no idea. Edmund gets a specific credit, and Gloucester, but not Edgar? Is that just the way it’s written, or is that some indication about the story? A character of Poor Tom makes no sense without him being Edgar in disguise, unless he’s been reduced to just a random crazy person that Lear befriends, and they’re leaving out Edgar’s whole story.

A number of other names are listed in the linked article, though I admit that I do not recognize them enough to have an opinion (no offense to intended). Let me know in the comments if you’re excited about any particular casting!

Review: Commonwealth Shakespeare presents The Winter’s Tale on Boston Common

I want to say our Commonwealth Shakespeare streak continues, but we actually missed a show in 2019 when my mom was sick. Cymbeline, which I’ve never seen, but have no real personal feelings for. Other than that hiccup, the 2024 show marks 19 shows we’ve seen by this group at this location. We also missed back in 2005. Hamlet, which I’m still salty about.

I have no special love for The Winter’s Tale, a later and therefore lesser-known play, filled with difficult to pronounce characters (Autolycus? Perdita? Polixenes?) and the usual kitchen-sink of Shakespearean comedy switcheroos. I tend to only refer to it to make a rapidly aging joke about how it’s Shakespeare’s Maury Povich Show. Leontes, you are the father!

Seriously, though, quick plot summary for those who need it. This is really two plays smooshed together at the end. Leontes and Polixenes, kings of neighboring nations, are long time best friends. Leontes becomes paranoid that Polixenes got Leontes’ wife, Hermione, pregnant. Polixenes flees the country, Leontes jails his pregnant wife for treason. The Oracle says that Leontes is wrong, they’re innocent, Leontes still clings to his paranoid belief even after his son and wife both die of grief. He refuses to take care of his new baby daughter and demands that she be left somewhere to survive on her own if that’s what the gods want. That’s our first story.

The second half leaps forward 16 years — Shakespeare literally makes “Time” a character who comes out to talk to the audience — and we meet teenage Perdita, whose been raised by the kindle shepherd that found her. Perdita’s in love with Florizel, son of Polixenes. Polixenes is having none of it, however, as he will only allow his son to marry a princess. See where it’s all going? This is a Shakespearean comedy, so as I always tell people with a handwave, “hijinx ensue.” All is straightened out in the end, Perdita reunites with her father, she gets to be with Florizel because now we know she’s a princess … and oh hey look, Hermione comes back from the dead. That’s Shakespeare for you.

So how was this particular production? Let’s start with some pictures! Click on individual pictures to expand.

I quite loved it, honestly. I was afraid that my family would not be able to follow it very well, for all the reasons I listed above. You can barely figure out from moment to moment who is who, much less what’s happening. But from the opening scene, they had it just right. Leontes was clearly a jealous man driven to near insanity as his paranoia consumed him. It’s quite dark. We’re at a comedy, this king has been presented with his baby daughter, and he’s literally screaming, “Throw it in the fire.” The music was ominous. It was scary, as it perhaps should be, to set up the second half.

The women – Hermione and her friend Paulina – pretty much stole the show. Both did an outstanding job of standing on a stage full of men, knowing full well that they’re entirely powerless, and yet speaking their minds in full voice, with heads held high. You knew that they had been wronged, and waited for the men to get what was coming to them.

The longer I go with these the more uncomfortable I get because I don’t want to misrepresent anyone, or leave anyone out. So what I’ll do this year is leave a link to the play info so people can explore the individual artists’ stories in their own words rather than mine: