While the theatre release of the film was edited to 89 minutes, the Olive Films DVD release has restored the film to its intended running time of 107 minutes. The presentation is lacking in any other extras, though; subtitles to help with the dialogue would have been a pleasant addition.
I don't have the film school background to discuss the technical aspects of the film. They are treated well in the book, Studying Shakespeare on Film (see 11/9/2014 post). In fact, there is an extended discussion of the film in the section of critical essays.
Had this film been a self-contained work, it actually might have been easier to follow. Comparing it to the Shakespearean original is where the difficulty lies. Spending one's time trying to ignore the juxtaposition of scenes, the creation of interactions, and the invention of characters leads the viewer astray here...or is it the film version itself that has gone awry?
For instance, Welles has created a character described as "a holy father." The role is played by Alan Napier, better known to fans of 1960's TV as Alfred, butler at Wayne Manor, "stately home of Bruce Wayne and his youthful ward, Dick Grayson." It was interesting to see him out of tuxedo and in braided pigtails; in fact, were it not for the instantly recognizable voice, I might not have known it was him. The better question in this context, though, is "Who is he?" Shakespeare's play did not have a "holy father." Welles' character takes the place of an old man, a messenger, Ross, and maybe some other incidental roles. One scene in which he leads the army in a religious service struck me as invented entirely by the director.
Other scenes were also Wellesian inventions. Lady Macbeth at the home of Macduff's family prior to their slaughter? Macbeth present at the slaughter of Macduff's family? Macbeth discussing the health of a bedridden Lady Macbeth with her doctor at her bedside? Husband and wife both present (in body at least) during the latter's sleepwalking scene, which was shifted to later in the action than it had appeared originally? Lady Macbeth falling off a cliff to her death? It was at this point, when Macbeth appeared wearing a tiara borrowed from the Statue of Liberty, that I gave up. Having the weird sisters on screen to deliver the film's final line (from Act I of the play, no less) was a fitting close. It was obvious that this was Orson Welles' Macbeth, not William Shakespeare's.
Welles' Macbeth pales in comparison to other versions I have seen. This summer's live version at Stratford was far and away superior. Its Wellesian predecessor was rather boring and not terribly believable. Perhaps film students might be interested in its technical aspects, but this more-than-casual Shakespeare fan found it not so. Viewing finished, I can check it off my list and move on. As the weird holy man might say, "Amen."
No comments:
Post a Comment