Macbeth

Who was Macbeth actually made for? Connoisseurs will not find any superior value in it compared to the original, on the contrary, they will be convinced that its proper place is in the auditorium of theatres, and the less knowledgeable viewers will not get a warmer concept either. Only die-hard fans of the actors might find the excellent cast to their liking. The new version of the famous play does not bring a faster pace or a more original concept, the only change is that the grandiose conversations of the characters have replaced the theatre setting with the realities of the Scottish Highlands. Shakespeare is already challenging, so I don't understand why it's stretched out with long slow-motion shots of chilling landscapes or the faces of dejected actors. In the final analysis, therefore, this is a great-looking drama that brings nothing but misery to everyone involved, from the audience to Macbeth. (29/01/2016)

The best adaptation of Shakespeare for a really long time. Visually captivating, gloomy Scottish hills and verses interlaced with madness and fears. Fassbender as Macbeth and Marion Cotillard as his wife give their very best. Ambition, power, women. The age-old danger of temptation of a good man. If he succumbs, he will be damned. (02/02/2016)

Sociopaths of the verbal type (the multiple species among us) won't appreciate this film, of course; it is only for sensitive people able to cherish the celluloid language called film that takes you back to a time when stories where still told with pictures without making artistic compromises. Here, the trump card is the modest production design. It’s not about large crowds and lavish sets, but about compositions and atmosphere. In that respect, I particularly enjoyed the first half fantastically, up to the point where Macbeth is made king. The visual aspect is so unique that it doesn't really matter if the source material was written by Shakespeare or another theatrical titan. I'm genuinely curious about Assassins Creed now, because Kurzel's cinematic language is completely incompatible with the game poetics of an assassin running on rooftops and jumping into haystacks. (08/06/2016)

A raw and bleak hypnotic film that will forever remain out of the mainstream. Audience-averse and psychedelic, the film lyrically tells the story of Shakepeare's warrior exclusively through breathtaking cinematography, lighting and period music. Forget about a wartime historical spectacle or crowd scenes, the Kurzel brothers have gone all out. There are only a few action scenes, and most of them are shrouded in a mysterious misty shroud, or thanks to the aforementioned lighting work that creates countless breathtaking shots. The individuality of this film is impossible to deny. What is debatable, however, is to what extent this is an appropriate form of presentation of Shakespeare's legend, as in many aspects of the plot and in terms of the flow of the story, it is questionable to say the least and difficult to digest. (08/11/2015)

I can't help but think that if I had seen this film first, it probably wouldn't compel me to watch Shakespearean tragedies in the theater. It has everything this play should have, but at the same time, it's so incredibly unpleasant to watch that I didn't enjoy looking at it, despite the presence of my favorite actors. (21/02/2016)