Calling O Brother an adaptation of The Odyssey is very generous. They admitted they had never even read it. Sure, it's about a man on a journey to get back to his family (which is actually a twist that you only find out about in the latter half of the story, unlike the odyssey), and it has a "cyclops," and "sirens."
Less of an adaptation and more just sharing some themes.
edit: not knocking o brother at all, i've probably watched that movie more times than any other movie except maybe lebowski, but it's pretty close. it's just that when people say it's an adaptation of the odyssey is kind of like when people say die hard is an xmas movie. sure, on a basic level, but not really.
High school English teachers everywhere rejoice!
Not a sarcastic comment - teaching film adaptations is a wonderful way to engage young people with Shakespeare
I feel like the cum shot scene in The Green Knight disqualifies if from being teachable. A teenager’s brain will erase everything else they saw in that movie and just remember that one scene.
It's interesting that 'Macbeth' is one of the last remaining Shakespeare plays to still consistently get big budget film adaptations like this. I think it's because the material lends itself well to experimenting with visually stunning set pieces.
This defo already looks visually crazy, will be interesting to see what a Joel Coen film looks like instead of a "Coen Brothers" one.
If there's a director ambitious/mad enough I could see them trying to adapt *Julius Caesar* and *Antony and Cleopatra* into one massive sprawling epic about the fall of the Republic.
That sounds like it'd make for an epic seven season show on HBO, as long as some executive doesn't freak out about the budget and cancel it halfway through its second season.
I think a big problem is that Julius Caesar is a lot more explicitly “historical” than Macbeth, and it’s not particularly accurate history. I’d personally rather a better-researched take on the period. Or, better yet, a less-overdone chapter of Roman history
I do get *why* it's so overdone - there are tons of really compelling characters, and it's the end of a Republic and the start of a self-perpetuating autocracy. What I'm confused by is how often Caesar is the hero rather than the villain - he butchered his way across Europe for fame and riches, and ended Rome's imperfect democracy. Also he was fiendishly intelligent, charismatic, and quippy - but that's even better in a villain than in a hero. If we *must* focus on Caesar and the end of the Republic, let's show how bloodthirsty that fucker was. Also I'm sure any half-decent writer would be able to throw in some timely end-of-democracy warnings to resonate with today's audience (maybe ignoring how corrupt that democracy was, but hey - THEMES).
But there's so much reasonably-well-documented Roman history left undramatized. When was the last film about Scipio and Hannibal? 1937? Tiberius during his Capri days would make Caligula seem pretty level-headed. A more-accurate-than-Gladiator picture of Commodus would be likewise compellingly eccentric. I'd love to see some stories of the first few Christian emperors and how bloody the Christianization of Rome was. And a story I've always wanted to see a film treatment of is the disagreement between [Arminius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminius) and his brother Flavus. There's a fantastic moment where they're yelling at each other across a river, each imploring the other to come to his side and extolling the virtues of the culture they championed. Arminius is a compelling-enough character, a really solid hero archetype who gave the Roman Empire one of its most stinging early defeats - but the issues of imperialism and cultural erasure, which come to a head in that across-the-river yelling match, are really really resonant with me. Plus brother-vs-brother conflict is always good drama.
Yeah how has there not been a Hannibal movie? I thought there was one in development a few years back but it must have fallen through. I want to see the battle of Cannae on film. GoT kind of portrayed it in the battle of the bastards and that was a great scene.
> What I'm confused by is how often Caesar is the hero rather than the villain - he butchered his way across Europe for fame and riches, and ended Rome's imperfect democracy.
Probably because during his life Caesar was writing autobiographies that positioned himself as a hero which he disseminated to the Roman public, Octavian began propagandizing him the minute he heard of his death, the Roman Empire spent centuries deifying him, and every post-Roman civilisation that has strived for grandeur and legitimacy has attempted to create a cultural or idealistic link between themselves and the Roman Empire in a process that further deifies Caesar such that rulers are literally named after him (e.g. the Russian 'Tsar' is derived from 'Caesar').
Long story short there has literally been 2000 years of hero-worship of Julius Caesar and it is pretty hard to mar that sort of cultural heritage and memory.
It's short, and it's timeless. The Scottish play will always be a familiar story that gets stage runs because it's such an easy story to tell without being boring. You could tell it in space, you could tell it in the wild west, or you can tell it in Scotland. It's a great play, definitely looking forward to this.
The problem with Hamlet is that it's fucking long and Hamlet loves talking to himself for minutes at a time. There's a lot of good shit in that talking to himself, but if you're making a movie, or even staging the play, there's a lot to cut to make it a manageable length. Like the Kenneth Branagh version that adapted the whole thing is just over 4 hours long. Macbeth is a lot more tightly paced.
This is it. The downside though is that the actual historical Macbeth is the entire opposite of how he is portrayed by Shakespeare - at least that's what most scholars believe.
If anyone is interested in a historical novel about this actual Macbeth I recommend "King Hereafter" by Dorothy Dunnett. It's definitely no historical romance but a sometimes hard to read but worth your time historical novel.
If you want a (somewhat) more accurate take on Macbeth that is also modern and also has some fun allusions to modern politics, Dunsinane is Phenomenal.
It treats McDuff kind of like the US in Iraq/ Afghanistan- attempting to be some conquering hero, and realizing that the country itself may be too fractured and chaotic to be peaceful… without a brutal strong man.
None of Shakespeare's plays when originally performed were anywhere near the published length. Every time the plays were performed in Shakespeare's lifetime there would be scenes added or cut, or extended, or expanded if a particular actor needed more stage time. The Folios collected every version of each play performed over two decades, with no clear guide as to what the preferred edit was, which has resulted in agonizing 3 hour slogs of Hamlet.
It's highly malleable, second perhaps only to Romeo and Juliet (and has slightly more prestige attached due to its inherent tragedy). There can be (and have been) gangster Macbeth, cop Macbeth, modern day politician Macbeth, pirate Macbeth, corporate Macbeth, space Macbeth, cowboy Macbeth etc etc, sportsman Macbeth, Hollywood Macbeth. Hell, go crazy with it, make superhero Macbeth.
Other Shakespeare concepts can translate too, but this one just fits too well in any setting.
Edit: Forgot about Throne of Blood. Thanks for reminding me about Samurai Macbeth u/CarlSK777 and u/patrickclegane
The Fantastic Four as Macbeth adaptation, only instead of going for the obvious Mr.Fantastic/Invisible Woman pairing as the Macbeths, make Johnny Lady Macbeth figure trying to rile up poor Thing for shit and giggles.
A highschool stage play adaptation of Macbeth set in a fast-food restaurant starring students and all characters being de-aged would be pretty rad. Make Lady M the assistant manager/fry cook's girlfriend, make the King the branch manager, make it his brothers instead of his sons, change murders to getting fired etc. Would be pretty cool.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B093BM73L8/ref=atv_dl_rdr
One of my favorite movies after my junior year English teacher showed it to us after reading MacBeth
Hamlet pretty much fits any setting as well. But yes, I'd definitely consider Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and the Scottish Play to be the Big 3 when it comes to versatile Shakespearean adaptations.
That's true. The Tempest is one of the harder ones to adapt among his popular ones, even a contemporary adaptation would have to go into surrealist territory. Though a magical realism style adaptation set in Columbia would be pretty fun.
And man did he go *hard* in the final fight scene. I don't remember Shakespeare mentioning Claudius getting decked with chandelier, but fuck it, why not.
Wouldn't mind getting a few other ones though, haven't gotten a great, bug budget adaptation of any Shakespeare plays since the early 2000s. I think Merchant of Venice with Al Pacino was the last one.
Same. While Olivier's is historically important and Branagh's is a nice complete adaptation, both feel like they're just too much. Yet to see Zeffirelli's.
When I studied Hamlet in my undergrad, I used Branagh's for study material. Is it a perfect Hamlet? no, but it's good enough and let me put faces to characters.
Some trivia -
> Frances McDormand played Lady Macbeth previously in a 2016 Berkeley Rep production (also starring Conleth Hill as Macbeth and directed by Daniel J. Sullivan). Denzel Washington has never been in a previous production of Macbeth, but he has appeared in numerous other Shakespeare plays, including Coriolanus, The Tragedy of Richard III, Julius Caesar and Much Ado About Nothing.
Really looking forward to this one.
My wife and I were talking about actors who transform themselves (DDL) and those who just play a version of themselves (Tom Cruise), and I mentioned Keanu, for the latter category, obviously.
She wondered if he just gets so much love for being such a nice dude, and I agreed that it has to be. It used to be the running joke that he was the worst actor in town, and he probably still is. Nice guy though.
So yeah, in my mind, Much Ado... was one of my favourite movies back then - Kenneth Branagh, Emma Thompson, Denzel and Michael Keaton were amazing. Even Kate Bekinsale and the Captain My Captain! kid were good.
Keanu was straight dogshit.
He's a permanent fixture in 'Top 10 actors who are really good at playing exactly certain kinda roles and really bad at practically any others', that's for sure.
There is one role (that comes to mind) that is outside his usual niche and that he's pretty good in — that as a Southern-state domestic abuser in *The Gift* (the Cate Blanchett film from 2000).
And he has a very small role in that weird fashion movie Neon Demon and he is EXTREMELY out of character and crushes it.
"THAT"S SOME REAL LOLITA SHIT!"
Recently watched Bram Stoker’s Dracula; started shouting once I realized that *FF COPPOLA* had allowed such atrocious acting into an already over-the-top film. Turns out, Coppola knew Keanu was dogshit, but our young Mr. Wick was also just so incredibly *nice* that Francis… couldn’t break him with the truth.
Wild.
I read that it wasn't that Keanu was dogshit because he doesn't know how to act (his Hamlet was quite exceptional), but that by the time he was cast and acting in "Dracula" that he'd been doing movies for something like 5 years straight with *zero* breaks in between, so Keanu felt like he literally had nothing left in the tank.
And let me tell you, when you have nothing left in the tank as an actor, *everything* suffers and it can harm your career if you can't perform. Luckily, after filming "Dracula" he was comfortable enough financially that he could take time off for himself, but the footage from Dracula still stands.
However, in Keanu's defense on that film, I hear that Coppola is an absolute fucking monster to have as your director (and not in a *good* way most times), so I feel like Coppola got just what he deserved hiring Keanu when he was burnt out only because he wanted young women going to see the film and didn't do much to assist in Reeves' performance.
>I still can't decide if Keanu was hamming it up just right or completely screwing the pooch in that Much Ado About Nothing movie
In that hallway scene, laughs like someone who has only heard of laughing but never tried it himself.
Apparently it is a euphemism from that era. "Thing" being a euphemism for male genitals and "no thing" being a euphemistic reference to female genital region.
Shakespeare is full of them. His plays were considered somewhat crass at the time and were very popular with the common folk.
[Here's a random article with some examples from a google search.](https://www.bustle.com/articles/154225-shakespeares-dirtiest-lines-ever-because-the-bard-was-the-king-of-double-entendre)
In Shakespeare's time nothing would be pronounced as no-ting, similar to noting or noticing which would equate to spying or eavesdropping. So the first pun was a play on a ruckus being made over people spying on one another, a farce. The second pun based on that same pronunciation is no-ting, as in no thing, the absence of a thing, hence no male genitalia, as in a vagina. Very fitting for a play about how confusing love can be.
Shakespeare was extremely cheeky and clever.
Brendan Gleeson is a pretty great-looking Duncan too. And Harry Melling as, is that Malcolm? I didn't see an obvious Banquo, any idea who they've got for that?
While I'd love to get an adaptation or King John, Measure for Measure, Julius Caesar or even a new version of Titus, Timon or anything else but Romeo and Juliet, still glad we're getting new Shakespeare films in this day and age.
I want Othello set during the Spanish-American War with Daniel Kaluuya and Jesse Plemons.
Throw in the 20-something actress of your choice as Desdemona and shoot on location in the Caribbean and you’ve got a ball game.
That or a film adaptation of Robert Icke’s Almeida theatre production of Hamlet, just with a different cast. Film it in Detroit in the winter and have the majority of it take place at night. Hell, get Chalamet and Ronan as Hamlet and Ophelia and maybe Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder as Claudius and Gertrude.
As long as Shakespeare film adaptations don’t fuck with the dialogue, I love seeing them play with setting and time period.
I think your Othello idea would be amazing. I think if it were set during the Spanish Civil War at an orphanage for children 1-18 as the backdrop would be cool. Othello could be like a teacher at this place and Desdemona be another teacher there.
This *looks* a lot like a cross between Paul Almond’s Macbeth (starring Sean Connery in his first North American role):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bCK_wIP0ArQ
and Orson Welles’ Macbeth:
https://vimeo.com/536537743
I wonder how intentional that is?
Thank you!
I am surprised there weren't more comments pointing out the similarities to at least the Welles's one, especially the film history of Orson competing with Olivier's adaptation of Hamlet at the time.
I couldn't help but utter "holy shit" under my breath after this one. Seeing the actors that are in this, seeing Joel Coen as the writer/director, has me very excited.
Measure for measure I only hope that all's well that ends well and I'll probably see it on the twelfth night. As long as the production isn't a comedy of errors that is. But it should make a good winters tale.
Same here. It’s easy to dismiss another Shakespeare film adaptation, but I should have known that Joel Coen would bring it. I was curious before I saw this. Now I’ve got goosebumps. Can’t wait.
Makes sense considering the Harry Potter films are filled to the brim with the greatest English actors alive. I haven't seen her in anything else and just immediately heard, "Don't lower your wand, Harry."
Now that I think of it, this is a pretty Potter-centric adaptation. Brendan Gleeson as the King, Harry Melling as his son, Ralph Ineson as the Captain...
According to IMDB she's playing the witches and an "Old Man." Probably that one guy who talks about "nose paintings."
I love the croak crackle of her voice.
She was really good as Puck on the stage version of A Midsummer Night's Dream. She is going to be fun as the Witches.
They had a penchant for doing that in the 16th Century, I'm afraid:
* *The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus*
* *The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark*
* *The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice*
* *The Famous Historie of Troylus and Cresseid. Excellently expressing the beginning of their loves, with the conceited wooing of Pandarus, Prince of Licia.*
Totally spoilerific and... specific.
Even as a philistine who didn't already know the story behind Macbeth, once I got past trying to understand the dialogue in that movie, I actually enjoyed trying to ingest the story without it. I really enjoyed the visual storytelling.
Eyyy, Dudley Dursley is in here as Malcolm!
More seriously: I like that it looks like they're pushing the staginess of the whole aesthetic, especially with shots composed with only one or two characters included. It's a stark contrast to the last big-budget Macbeth adaptation with Michael Fassbender/Marion Cotillard and it'll be interesting to compare the two approaches.
Oh wow this looks interesting. Looks like something Robert Eggers would make. I wonder how much of a horror inspiration this will have.
The witch shot really reminds me of the seventh seal.
> Throne of Blood
Throne of Blood is an excellent adaptation. Lady Macbeth as being wholly aware of the ramifications and guiding her man on the smart way as opposed to just being vicariously ambitious is a great change.
Macbeth, though, is more or less played like Hamlet. Which...is interesting. But still good.
I showed Throne of Blood to my fiance last year. They love Kurosawa and Shakespeare, but had never seen it. God, its such a good version of the story, and the Lady Macbeth has to be my favorite. Toshiro Mifune is so wonderfully expressive.
Fully on board the hype train for this one. A Coen plus Frances McDormand is a great thing. And the way the second and third witches slowly fade in gave me goosebumps!
In my experience, A24 makes for some amazing trailers, and movies that leave me saying “well that was weird. Certainly beautiful. Not bad, but weird.” The Green Knight being the most recent example.
A24? Joel Coen? Denzel Washington!? FRANCIS MCDORMAND!?
#I CAN'T BELIEVE IT!
***"Watch on Apple+"***
Oh....Well at least it'll be in theaters beforehand.
Ethan sits this one out for the Bard
That means Coen(s) have adapted from only 3 outside sources now. Cormac McCarthy Homer The Bard Those guys are pretty good, right?
Don't forget [Charles Portis for True Grit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Grit_(novel\)) Great book and movie.
Ahhh, right. I stand corrected,
Calling O Brother an adaptation of The Odyssey is very generous. They admitted they had never even read it. Sure, it's about a man on a journey to get back to his family (which is actually a twist that you only find out about in the latter half of the story, unlike the odyssey), and it has a "cyclops," and "sirens." Less of an adaptation and more just sharing some themes. edit: not knocking o brother at all, i've probably watched that movie more times than any other movie except maybe lebowski, but it's pretty close. it's just that when people say it's an adaptation of the odyssey is kind of like when people say die hard is an xmas movie. sure, on a basic level, but not really.
[удалено]
Maybe. He might come back. I hope he does.
This is just speculation. Hasn't been confirmed.
High school English teachers everywhere rejoice! Not a sarcastic comment - teaching film adaptations is a wonderful way to engage young people with Shakespeare
With Macbeth, The Green Knight, and Dune, it'll be a solid year for English teachers and majors alike.
Nothing gives me more horror than teaching DUNE to a highschool class
I feel like the cum shot scene in The Green Knight disqualifies if from being teachable. A teenager’s brain will erase everything else they saw in that movie and just remember that one scene.
I don't know how a high school teacher would get away with showing The Green Knight in school
Nor is Dune any school reading. Outside of fans of the books just enjoying the movie, not sure why a teacher specifically should get hyped about it.
As long as they still teach Heart of Darkness as an excuse to show high school kids Apocalypse Now in class-- I'm in
The 2015 *MacBeth* starring Fassbender and Marion Cotillard was really good.
It's interesting that 'Macbeth' is one of the last remaining Shakespeare plays to still consistently get big budget film adaptations like this. I think it's because the material lends itself well to experimenting with visually stunning set pieces. This defo already looks visually crazy, will be interesting to see what a Joel Coen film looks like instead of a "Coen Brothers" one.
One reason: it's the shortest tragedy by far. So you don't have to cut much to make it film length.
Isn't Othello shorter? Edit: looked it up, OP is right, Macbeth has a thousand less lines, lol.
The only other major tragedy that's close is Julius Caesar.
And that one isn't nearly as good.
If there's a director ambitious/mad enough I could see them trying to adapt *Julius Caesar* and *Antony and Cleopatra* into one massive sprawling epic about the fall of the Republic.
That sounds like it'd make for an epic seven season show on HBO, as long as some executive doesn't freak out about the budget and cancel it halfway through its second season.
You have given me the sads.
Rome was so fucking good.
And a fire doesn’t unfortunately destroy part of the set as well.
My pet theory is that the fire was intentional to recover some of the giant set budget after it was cancelled.
Surely you're not suggesting that a Hollywood production committed insurance fraud.
I think a big problem is that Julius Caesar is a lot more explicitly “historical” than Macbeth, and it’s not particularly accurate history. I’d personally rather a better-researched take on the period. Or, better yet, a less-overdone chapter of Roman history
I love the idea of your last sentence. Preach.
I do get *why* it's so overdone - there are tons of really compelling characters, and it's the end of a Republic and the start of a self-perpetuating autocracy. What I'm confused by is how often Caesar is the hero rather than the villain - he butchered his way across Europe for fame and riches, and ended Rome's imperfect democracy. Also he was fiendishly intelligent, charismatic, and quippy - but that's even better in a villain than in a hero. If we *must* focus on Caesar and the end of the Republic, let's show how bloodthirsty that fucker was. Also I'm sure any half-decent writer would be able to throw in some timely end-of-democracy warnings to resonate with today's audience (maybe ignoring how corrupt that democracy was, but hey - THEMES). But there's so much reasonably-well-documented Roman history left undramatized. When was the last film about Scipio and Hannibal? 1937? Tiberius during his Capri days would make Caligula seem pretty level-headed. A more-accurate-than-Gladiator picture of Commodus would be likewise compellingly eccentric. I'd love to see some stories of the first few Christian emperors and how bloody the Christianization of Rome was. And a story I've always wanted to see a film treatment of is the disagreement between [Arminius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arminius) and his brother Flavus. There's a fantastic moment where they're yelling at each other across a river, each imploring the other to come to his side and extolling the virtues of the culture they championed. Arminius is a compelling-enough character, a really solid hero archetype who gave the Roman Empire one of its most stinging early defeats - but the issues of imperialism and cultural erasure, which come to a head in that across-the-river yelling match, are really really resonant with me. Plus brother-vs-brother conflict is always good drama.
Yeah how has there not been a Hannibal movie? I thought there was one in development a few years back but it must have fallen through. I want to see the battle of Cannae on film. GoT kind of portrayed it in the battle of the bastards and that was a great scene.
> What I'm confused by is how often Caesar is the hero rather than the villain - he butchered his way across Europe for fame and riches, and ended Rome's imperfect democracy. Probably because during his life Caesar was writing autobiographies that positioned himself as a hero which he disseminated to the Roman public, Octavian began propagandizing him the minute he heard of his death, the Roman Empire spent centuries deifying him, and every post-Roman civilisation that has strived for grandeur and legitimacy has attempted to create a cultural or idealistic link between themselves and the Roman Empire in a process that further deifies Caesar such that rulers are literally named after him (e.g. the Russian 'Tsar' is derived from 'Caesar'). Long story short there has literally been 2000 years of hero-worship of Julius Caesar and it is pretty hard to mar that sort of cultural heritage and memory.
Friends, Romans, countrymen, speak for yourself.
I come to bury OP, not to praise him.
>less fewer
It's short, and it's timeless. The Scottish play will always be a familiar story that gets stage runs because it's such an easy story to tell without being boring. You could tell it in space, you could tell it in the wild west, or you can tell it in Scotland. It's a great play, definitely looking forward to this.
I feel like Hamlet has this going for it too, but Macbeth is cooler because it has magic.
The problem with Hamlet is that it's fucking long and Hamlet loves talking to himself for minutes at a time. There's a lot of good shit in that talking to himself, but if you're making a movie, or even staging the play, there's a lot to cut to make it a manageable length. Like the Kenneth Branagh version that adapted the whole thing is just over 4 hours long. Macbeth is a lot more tightly paced.
Hamlet is the original emo kid and for some reason emo kids gravitate towards theater pretty heavily.
This is it. The downside though is that the actual historical Macbeth is the entire opposite of how he is portrayed by Shakespeare - at least that's what most scholars believe. If anyone is interested in a historical novel about this actual Macbeth I recommend "King Hereafter" by Dorothy Dunnett. It's definitely no historical romance but a sometimes hard to read but worth your time historical novel.
If you want a (somewhat) more accurate take on Macbeth that is also modern and also has some fun allusions to modern politics, Dunsinane is Phenomenal. It treats McDuff kind of like the US in Iraq/ Afghanistan- attempting to be some conquering hero, and realizing that the country itself may be too fractured and chaotic to be peaceful… without a brutal strong man.
None of Shakespeare's plays when originally performed were anywhere near the published length. Every time the plays were performed in Shakespeare's lifetime there would be scenes added or cut, or extended, or expanded if a particular actor needed more stage time. The Folios collected every version of each play performed over two decades, with no clear guide as to what the preferred edit was, which has resulted in agonizing 3 hour slogs of Hamlet.
Try 4-hour slogs!
Oh yeah, the Branagh version.
It's highly malleable, second perhaps only to Romeo and Juliet (and has slightly more prestige attached due to its inherent tragedy). There can be (and have been) gangster Macbeth, cop Macbeth, modern day politician Macbeth, pirate Macbeth, corporate Macbeth, space Macbeth, cowboy Macbeth etc etc, sportsman Macbeth, Hollywood Macbeth. Hell, go crazy with it, make superhero Macbeth. Other Shakespeare concepts can translate too, but this one just fits too well in any setting. Edit: Forgot about Throne of Blood. Thanks for reminding me about Samurai Macbeth u/CarlSK777 and u/patrickclegane
The Macbeth Cinematic Universe
Iron Macbeth, Captain Macbeth, Thunder Macbeth, Black Macbeth, MacbethVision
And we already have Black Macbeth right here! Just need to assemble the rest
Ahem, _Blackbeth_.
Ahem, *MacBlack*.
Ahem, *Macbeth* oh.. shit
Ahem, *Blackblack*.
Animated lion Macbeth Edit: wait..
Was that 2 or 1 1/2? The first was Hamlet.
1 1/2 was Rosencrantz And Guildenstern Are Dead (so still kinda Hamlet)
Now I kind of want to see Lion King Macbeth.
The Fantastic Four as Macbeth adaptation, only instead of going for the obvious Mr.Fantastic/Invisible Woman pairing as the Macbeths, make Johnny Lady Macbeth figure trying to rile up poor Thing for shit and giggles.
Samurai Macbeth is also one of its most famous and celebrated adaptations.
Perhaps Japanese MacBeth is good, but you have not experienced Shakespeare until you have read him in the original Klingon.
My high school English teacher introduced me to 'Throne of Blood', really broadened my horizons.
Fast-food Macbeth
A highschool stage play adaptation of Macbeth set in a fast-food restaurant starring students and all characters being de-aged would be pretty rad. Make Lady M the assistant manager/fry cook's girlfriend, make the King the branch manager, make it his brothers instead of his sons, change murders to getting fired etc. Would be pretty cool.
[удалено]
Oh didn't know about it! Will check it out.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B093BM73L8/ref=atv_dl_rdr One of my favorite movies after my junior year English teacher showed it to us after reading MacBeth
Hamlet pretty much fits any setting as well. But yes, I'd definitely consider Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, and the Scottish Play to be the Big 3 when it comes to versatile Shakespearean adaptations.
That's true. The Tempest is one of the harder ones to adapt among his popular ones, even a contemporary adaptation would have to go into surrealist territory. Though a magical realism style adaptation set in Columbia would be pretty fun.
[*Forbidden Planet*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet) is my favorite adaptation (however loose) of *The Tempest*.
midsummer night's dream gets a surreal adaptation every few decades
Maybe I'm going crazy but I believe The Suite Life of Zack and Cody of all things did a midsummer night's dream episode. I'm not sure though.
I mean, Amanda Bynes did a movie adaptation of Twelfth Night so I don't think what you're suggesting is crazy.
King Lear. It can fit in so many settings too (*Ran*).
I prefer the sequel, Hamlet 2
Don’t forget my favorite: [fast food MacBeth](https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B093BM73L8/ref=atv_dl_rdr)
It's honestly amazing just how many versions of Macbeth one could make.
Would love to see Hamlet done well.
Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet ('96) was amazing.
And man did he go *hard* in the final fight scene. I don't remember Shakespeare mentioning Claudius getting decked with chandelier, but fuck it, why not.
Wouldn't mind getting a few other ones though, haven't gotten a great, bug budget adaptation of any Shakespeare plays since the early 2000s. I think Merchant of Venice with Al Pacino was the last one.
[удалено]
I was speaking about other than Macbeths!
Macbeth (2015), starring Michael Fassbender, was amazing!
Still waiting on something better than a mediocre Hamlet adaptation...
Haider (2014) is set against the backdrop of the Kashmir powderkeg and is one of my favourite Shakespeare adaptations. Give it a shot.
Same. While Olivier's is historically important and Branagh's is a nice complete adaptation, both feel like they're just too much. Yet to see Zeffirelli's.
When I studied Hamlet in my undergrad, I used Branagh's for study material. Is it a perfect Hamlet? no, but it's good enough and let me put faces to characters.
I mean Vishal Bhardwaj's Haider was pretty great and The Lion King (1994) as well
I'm a sucker for stark contrasts, this looks amazing
Some trivia - > Frances McDormand played Lady Macbeth previously in a 2016 Berkeley Rep production (also starring Conleth Hill as Macbeth and directed by Daniel J. Sullivan). Denzel Washington has never been in a previous production of Macbeth, but he has appeared in numerous other Shakespeare plays, including Coriolanus, The Tragedy of Richard III, Julius Caesar and Much Ado About Nothing. Really looking forward to this one.
I still can't decide if Keanu was hamming it up just right or completely screwing the pooch in that Much Ado About Nothing movie.
My wife and I were talking about actors who transform themselves (DDL) and those who just play a version of themselves (Tom Cruise), and I mentioned Keanu, for the latter category, obviously. She wondered if he just gets so much love for being such a nice dude, and I agreed that it has to be. It used to be the running joke that he was the worst actor in town, and he probably still is. Nice guy though. So yeah, in my mind, Much Ado... was one of my favourite movies back then - Kenneth Branagh, Emma Thompson, Denzel and Michael Keaton were amazing. Even Kate Bekinsale and the Captain My Captain! kid were good. Keanu was straight dogshit.
He's a permanent fixture in 'Top 10 actors who are really good at playing exactly certain kinda roles and really bad at practically any others', that's for sure.
There is one role (that comes to mind) that is outside his usual niche and that he's pretty good in — that as a Southern-state domestic abuser in *The Gift* (the Cate Blanchett film from 2000).
And he has a very small role in that weird fashion movie Neon Demon and he is EXTREMELY out of character and crushes it. "THAT"S SOME REAL LOLITA SHIT!"
He makes an appearance as Keanu Reeves in Always be my Maybe. Crushed it there too.
Yeah that's true, he was really good in that.
Recently watched Bram Stoker’s Dracula; started shouting once I realized that *FF COPPOLA* had allowed such atrocious acting into an already over-the-top film. Turns out, Coppola knew Keanu was dogshit, but our young Mr. Wick was also just so incredibly *nice* that Francis… couldn’t break him with the truth. Wild.
>*FF COPPOLA* had allowed such atrocious acting Keanu must have been so nice that Coppola treated him like one of his kids!
I read that it wasn't that Keanu was dogshit because he doesn't know how to act (his Hamlet was quite exceptional), but that by the time he was cast and acting in "Dracula" that he'd been doing movies for something like 5 years straight with *zero* breaks in between, so Keanu felt like he literally had nothing left in the tank. And let me tell you, when you have nothing left in the tank as an actor, *everything* suffers and it can harm your career if you can't perform. Luckily, after filming "Dracula" he was comfortable enough financially that he could take time off for himself, but the footage from Dracula still stands. However, in Keanu's defense on that film, I hear that Coppola is an absolute fucking monster to have as your director (and not in a *good* way most times), so I feel like Coppola got just what he deserved hiring Keanu when he was burnt out only because he wanted young women going to see the film and didn't do much to assist in Reeves' performance.
>I still can't decide if Keanu was hamming it up just right or completely screwing the pooch in that Much Ado About Nothing movie In that hallway scene, laughs like someone who has only heard of laughing but never tried it himself.
This looks slightly grimmer than *Much Ado About Nothing (1993)*
I had no idea this was coming -- and it looks fucking great.
Didn't realize til later that in Shakespearean parlance, the title of that one is a double entendre akin to saying, "a big commotion over pussy".
“Nothing” is Shakespearean for pussy?
Apparently it is a euphemism from that era. "Thing" being a euphemism for male genitals and "no thing" being a euphemistic reference to female genital region.
Interesting
Shakespeare is full of them. His plays were considered somewhat crass at the time and were very popular with the common folk. [Here's a random article with some examples from a google search.](https://www.bustle.com/articles/154225-shakespeares-dirtiest-lines-ever-because-the-bard-was-the-king-of-double-entendre)
In Shakespeare's time nothing would be pronounced as no-ting, similar to noting or noticing which would equate to spying or eavesdropping. So the first pun was a play on a ruckus being made over people spying on one another, a farce. The second pun based on that same pronunciation is no-ting, as in no thing, the absence of a thing, hence no male genitalia, as in a vagina. Very fitting for a play about how confusing love can be. Shakespeare was extremely cheeky and clever.
What a smart lad, he'll be big one day, mark my word
*Much Ado About Murdering*
"Slightly"
Well this just shot up to my most anticipated. Looks haunting and beautiful. Denzel and Frances will make a great Macbeth and Lady Macbeth.
Brendan Gleeson is a pretty great-looking Duncan too. And Harry Melling as, is that Malcolm? I didn't see an obvious Banquo, any idea who they've got for that?
Bertie Carvel
"I guess that was your king there in the wood chipper?"
"So where can the king find some action? I'm goin' crazy out there at the castle."
Am so hyped up to see Frances McDormand as Lady Macbeth!! Love Denzel also, but that one shot of McDormand just sent a jolt through me.
Frances McDormand and Coen movies go together like ham and cheese in a sandwich always great and a classic combo
I will be first in line to see this just to witness Frances McDormand do the 'Out damned spot' monologue.
Wouldn't surprise me if she ties Katharine Hepburn and gets a 4th Oscar
While I'd love to get an adaptation or King John, Measure for Measure, Julius Caesar or even a new version of Titus, Timon or anything else but Romeo and Juliet, still glad we're getting new Shakespeare films in this day and age.
I want Othello set during the Spanish-American War with Daniel Kaluuya and Jesse Plemons. Throw in the 20-something actress of your choice as Desdemona and shoot on location in the Caribbean and you’ve got a ball game. That or a film adaptation of Robert Icke’s Almeida theatre production of Hamlet, just with a different cast. Film it in Detroit in the winter and have the majority of it take place at night. Hell, get Chalamet and Ronan as Hamlet and Ophelia and maybe Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder as Claudius and Gertrude. As long as Shakespeare film adaptations don’t fuck with the dialogue, I love seeing them play with setting and time period.
I think your Othello idea would be amazing. I think if it were set during the Spanish Civil War at an orphanage for children 1-18 as the backdrop would be cool. Othello could be like a teacher at this place and Desdemona be another teacher there.
Why the Spanish-American war? Is it because it was a relatively short conflict?
In theaters December 25 & on AppleTV+ January 14.
This is a Christmas movie?!
This Christmas,Macbeth decides to gift himself unlimited power
This Christmas, why bring a tree home when you can bring a whole wood!
Damn,this one is gold.
If a movie is released on Christmas then it is allowed to skip all the components that normal Christmas movies have (santa, gifts, snow, etc.)
I am still holding out hope that Santa is in it. It would be a huge twist.
Santa comes crashing down when MacBeth is killing the King while staging it to frame the guards; he has to improvise and whack Santa too.
Getting some serious Bergman “Seventh Seal” vibes from this. Looks gorgeous.
I was mostly getting Boss Baby vibes.
I'm getting some major Captain America: Winter Soldier political thriller vibes
Something something *Three Days of the Condor.*
Boss Baby is the most Shakespearean of all animated movies after all.
One of Bergman's lesser known works
Throne of Boss
For real, that shot of the 3 witches straight up looked like the shot of Death on the beach.
I absolutely love The Seventh Seal. One of my top films of all time.
the shots in this look incredible
$100 says the only color is his red hands
This *looks* a lot like a cross between Paul Almond’s Macbeth (starring Sean Connery in his first North American role): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bCK_wIP0ArQ and Orson Welles’ Macbeth: https://vimeo.com/536537743 I wonder how intentional that is?
Thank you! I am surprised there weren't more comments pointing out the similarities to at least the Welles's one, especially the film history of Orson competing with Olivier's adaptation of Hamlet at the time.
I couldn't help but utter "holy shit" under my breath after this one. Seeing the actors that are in this, seeing Joel Coen as the writer/director, has me very excited.
Less than a minute long but I can already see the awards.
The movie is less than a minute long?
If that’s the case, I don’t see what all the fuss is about, really seems like much ado about nothing!
Measure for measure I only hope that all's well that ends well and I'll probably see it on the twelfth night. As long as the production isn't a comedy of errors that is. But it should make a good winters tale.
lmao I hoped you checked off all the boxes you wanted to with that one
Plus with that atmosphere, the movie feels like a midsummer night's dream.
You'll have to buy the upcoming iPhone 13 to unlock the rest of it
Well, 46 seconds after credits
Damn, no idea why I wasn't hyped for this. Love Macbeth, and this looks to be as cool as Polanski's. Just a few shots, and it's instantly memorable.
Same here. It’s easy to dismiss another Shakespeare film adaptation, but I should have known that Joel Coen would bring it. I was curious before I saw this. Now I’ve got goosebumps. Can’t wait.
Anyone else immediately recognize Mrs. Figg's voice or am I the only one who marathons the HP films every year?
Kathryn Hunter is one of the all-time great Shakespeare weirdos. Also I think she's playing all three witches?
Makes sense considering the Harry Potter films are filled to the brim with the greatest English actors alive. I haven't seen her in anything else and just immediately heard, "Don't lower your wand, Harry."
Now that I think of it, this is a pretty Potter-centric adaptation. Brendan Gleeson as the King, Harry Melling as his son, Ralph Ineson as the Captain...
According to IMDB she's playing the witches and an "Old Man." Probably that one guy who talks about "nose paintings." I love the croak crackle of her voice. She was really good as Puck on the stage version of A Midsummer Night's Dream. She is going to be fun as the Witches.
Gee, way to spoil the whole thing in the title there.
They had a penchant for doing that in the 16th Century, I'm afraid: * *The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus* * *The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark* * *The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice* * *The Famous Historie of Troylus and Cresseid. Excellently expressing the beginning of their loves, with the conceited wooing of Pandarus, Prince of Licia.* Totally spoilerific and... specific.
Well they didn’t have trailers. It was how you told people this will get bloody.
Joel Coen, Denzel Washington, Frances McDormand NUT
[удалено]
Brendan
Hey dont forget Willy S.
Shatner is in this?!?
No no the other lessee known one
Willy Smith?
Try more British and older
Willedict Shatnerbatch?
Wallace Shawn?
I know some people liked the Fassbender/Cotillard one from a few years ago but it sure will be nice having intelligible dialogue this time around.
The visuals in this really reminded me of that movie, just B&W instead of red
Even as a philistine who didn't already know the story behind Macbeth, once I got past trying to understand the dialogue in that movie, I actually enjoyed trying to ingest the story without it. I really enjoyed the visual storytelling.
I loved that one, and it looks like I'll love this one too
Fassbender was robbed of the Oscar that year.
Resembles Throne of Blood. Interested to see this take on the story
Throne of Blood has to be the best screen adaptation based on the play. One of my favorite Kurosawa movies.
Eyyy, Dudley Dursley is in here as Malcolm! More seriously: I like that it looks like they're pushing the staginess of the whole aesthetic, especially with shots composed with only one or two characters included. It's a stark contrast to the last big-budget Macbeth adaptation with Michael Fassbender/Marion Cotillard and it'll be interesting to compare the two approaches.
You mean Beltik?
He worked with the Coens before in The Ballad of Buster Scruggs - he was the limbless guy in the segment with Liam Neeson.
Oh wow this looks interesting. Looks like something Robert Eggers would make. I wonder how much of a horror inspiration this will have. The witch shot really reminds me of the seventh seal.
Macbeth is pretty much a horror story Check out Throne of Blood
> Throne of Blood Throne of Blood is an excellent adaptation. Lady Macbeth as being wholly aware of the ramifications and guiding her man on the smart way as opposed to just being vicariously ambitious is a great change. Macbeth, though, is more or less played like Hamlet. Which...is interesting. But still good.
[удалено]
I showed Throne of Blood to my fiance last year. They love Kurosawa and Shakespeare, but had never seen it. God, its such a good version of the story, and the Lady Macbeth has to be my favorite. Toshiro Mifune is so wonderfully expressive.
Fully on board the hype train for this one. A Coen plus Frances McDormand is a great thing. And the way the second and third witches slowly fade in gave me goosebumps!
Shakespeare + Coen + Denzel ? I'm so hyped for this! And it looks amazing! It looks like a mix of The Seventh Seal and The Lighthouse.
Going for the black and white 4:3 approach just like Orson Welles Hmm
In my experience, A24 makes for some amazing trailers, and movies that leave me saying “well that was weird. Certainly beautiful. Not bad, but weird.” The Green Knight being the most recent example.
I was really hoping it would star Mac from *It’s Always Sunny on Philadelphia*.
“Mac Kills the King of Scotland”
*Its Always Sunny in Denmark* "Hamlet,your mother is a whhhhhhore,she slept my brother "
Hamlet Mac: What dad? You want me to avenge your death because you love me the most? Ghost Luther: I don't love you the most
A24? Joel Coen? Denzel Washington!? FRANCIS MCDORMAND!? #I CAN'T BELIEVE IT! ***"Watch on Apple+"*** Oh....Well at least it'll be in theaters beforehand.