Macbeth - RSC

There are some confused elements to the RSC staging

And some novelty decisions

Which are always going to be divisive

Child witches as an example

But overall the RSC version

Has humour and a sense of purpose

Although you might not feel
This

When you see the NT staging

You will see what I mean

Personally
I wouldn’t recommend the NT version

Even if someone paid YOU to attend

It’s that awful

I’m a bit surprised about E forgetting his words in Macbeth. Sure it wasn’t a dramatic pause or two? I mean, you only have to go on about blood and muttering about witches and they can pick it up,surely?

I thought that might have been the case the first time, but he tripped himself up a few times after that, so no, I’d say he forgot his words. It was sort of the least of my problems with him though 🤷🏻‍♂️

And yes Parsley, was a full house.

It might have been a off day for him, I’m more than happy to accept that on the line front.
Will be interested to see what you think on this one!

Nice interpretations there that I possibly hadn’t considered, but hadn’t done anything to change my opinion I’m afraid.

Glad you liked it though, theatre would be boring if we all liked the same thing!

There’s that bit in Hamlet where Polonius loses the thread of what he’s saying and stops. I remember Michael Bryant in the Daniel Day-Lewis one did that so brilliantly that it was counter-productive because for a moment even I thought he’d forgotten his lines and it felt awkward.

All the words were there tonight. In funny places occasionally. Since when was Macbeth funny apart from the Porter that is and we don’t understand the porter without a lecture on gunpowder plot and equivocation. So back in the day the porter brought the house down. Now not so much. So...is that why they introduced a few laughs in other places? She should have died hereafter: laugh.

I enjoyed this more than the NT one but we are not talking ecstatic. Nice touches and consistent thinking and good performances spesh Ed Bennet who got the modern concept. I liked the little girl witches and we are all over the child thing now aren’t we?
What was the point of the words being projected on back? And the clock was silly.
It all held together though. And my favourite touch at the end of bringing on Fleance. Only seen this once before I think an RSC job ( correct me if I’m wrong Jan)
One last point. ‘We fail ‘ is not a statement of resignation. It is a tough question as a jibe. Modern directors muck about with all sorts but don’t understand that the punctuation is all up for grabs.

Yeah, the Porter's speech is all references to the Roman Catholic priests they were chasing all over the country after the Gunpowder Plot. Farmer was a pseudonym used by the so called ringleader and equivocation was what they accused them of when they tried to wriggle out of accusations of Popery etc. And of course it is what the Witches do, that is they don’t tell the whole truth to Macbeth and he realises this at the end.
Both occasions I’ve seen Fleance appear at the end is was menacing as if the whole shebang is about to kick off again in the struggle for power. As King James I thought he was descended from Banquo, it makes sense.

Again, like the NT effort, no guns despite the modern context. I wonder why. You can have knives with the guns, nasty flick knives and stuff....

Thanks lynette, will def have to revisit that speech now and see if that helps me, I seem to have a very let it wash over you approach to Shakespeare, I merrily go but don't appear to really listen since when people quote reference bits I seem to have missed them entirely often, I guess I don't fully concentrate.
Now why on earth had I assumed Fleance as a child appearing at the end wouldn't be threatening, why on earth would Malcolm want a rival that was not even his own his blood? Thanks has given me something to chew over, which is a great distraction from the current badly made porridge I have to chew over.

I didn't mean the Kit Harrington thing if that is what you are referring to, it was a historian based more evidence laden programme which nicely explained equivocation. 

Saw this on Saturday night (have yet to see the NT production). For what it's worth, and just to add to the discussion, I thought this was enjoyable. Done with vigour and pace but with little sense of the driving forces of the play.

Chris Ecclestone is bullishly believable as a soldier, and certainly charismatic and watchable on stage, but he appeared to be racing through the words rather than finding the essence of the man. Where was the ambition? The self-doubt? The lust for power and the growing awareness of his imminent downfall? Sadly, I saw very little of it. Niamh Cusack was more interesting, though her Lady Macbeth to me seemed more neurotic than a real force for evil. She did however work hard at making Lady M human, which is no mean feat.

While I did like the sense of a ruling class and power, and that the Macbeth's taking of it after Duncan's death was a natural step for them, Polly Findlay appears to have fallen into the trap that Macbeth is all about surface horror, and has definitely watched too many Hollywood horror films. I actually felt that many moments of genuine horror were missed, if not fudged entirely (the murders of Banquo and the Macduffs, the appearance of the ghost, the sleepwalking scene).

And Polly should surely know by now that throwing stage blood over actors for no real reason may seem visceral but, actually, it just makes them look somewhat hilarious, as it drips in their eyes and off the ends of their noses.

The creepy porter was definitely more interesting than usual, though his character made little sense; unless you go with the idea that he really is Satan in disguise? His scoring up of each death was a nice idea, though there were obviously not many deaths during the battle of Dunsinane, or perhaps he just couldn't keep up. The countdown was, I thought, interesting but distracting, as I kept watching the damn clock as the play raced to its end. The witches (straight out of The Shining etc) were an interesting misfire, pretty much summing up the style over substance ethos of the director and the production. Having said all that though I was certainly never bored, as it all flew by. Sadly though not the gripping psychological thriller I was hoping for.

Oh, and Edward Bennett, who I adored in Loves Labour's Lost and Much Ado, was just horribly miscast as a dull as ditch-water Macduff. Please, please drop the cardigan before it comes to the Barbican. It's the only real horror in this production.

Watching at the cinema in Stratford upon Avon.

I’ve long come to the conclusion that when given the chance Polly Findlay is full of ideas but struggles to execute them cohesively

The pre show interview implies how heavily she and the designer took cues from horror films. But this show doesn’t begin to feel tense or scary and is merely full of visual cues to the genre

We complain about the child witches here, but some of us can still remember the children in Michael Boyd’s production. It worked there because there was atmosphere and build up as those children were lowered from above with the nooses round their necks.

All Polly Findlay has to show is that she has watched the shining without beginning to make those kids creepy. And the pacing is at odds too. Macbeth’s first encounter with the witches comes so quickly (the moment the scene starts) that there’s no build up

The horror feels superficial. The few onstage deaths are taken off stage or done in a brief blackout (seriously?). I like the idea of the hundreds of murders committed under Macbeth’s rule implied by the porter but how about we see some of that, like Banquos murders or that random servant being silenced for his knowledge on Macduff

Eccleston delivers the lines without fully grasping the meaning. So easy Cusack faired better trying to humanise Lady Macbeth

What the hell happened to you Edward Bennett. Surely you haven’t been eating extra pork pies for this production. And his scene with Malcolm was overshadowed by the sound you get when a microphone is pressed against a cardigan!

Generally good acting from the supporting cast and good visuals. But this is a macbeth thats not going to linger in my mind