When Macbeth says "we will proceed no further in this business," each movie/play portrays Lady Macbeth's reaction differently (1.7.34). In Folger's version, this feast is not shown, so it is not known if Lady Macbeth and Duncan have any more interaction than just greeting each other when he arrives. They sit by each other at dinner and talk, and dance with each other in the celebration of his visiting. Also, when Duncan arrives at Inverness, she bows to him, smiles, and shows respect. It seems that not only is Macbeth scared to commit this murder, but Lady Macbeth is too due to the fact that she is soft spoken and not as loud and violent as the Lady Macbeth in Folger Production's is. When Lady Macbeth speaks in Roman Polanski's version, she speaks very softly and doesn’t seem capable of the murder which she is planning. However, in Folger Production's version, Lady Macbeth is an extreme opposite than the woman we see in the first version.
In Roman Polanski's version, Lady Macbeth seems very innocent. Lady Macbeth is portrayed in two completely different ways in these two theatrical productions. If you include citations from the text, make sure you cite them correctly! I will be grading not just your content but also your style, so be thoughtful and deliberate. Please, please, please proofread before you post. Your goal, though, is to write a clear, eloquent analysis of the film(s) that hopefully helps us understand the repercussions and meanings of the choices made by each director. You can analyze (and remember, that means to argue something with specific support from the film) Lady Macbeth's purple dress or the vastly different performances of the "What if we fail?.We FAIL" scene or the portrayal of the witches in either or both performances.the possibilities really are limitless. Your job in this post is to analyze something about either or both of the film versions. There are a million decisions that went into the film you saw today, so I hope you left class with an idea of what particular decisions you can now analyze. I am sorry that I couldn't watch the films with you, but I hope they were intriguing and thought-provoking. You saw two different productions in class today: the 1971 Polanski production and the 2009 Folger production (directed by Teller and Posner). The challenge for these theatre professionals is to channel their individual interpretations into one cohesive, powerful production. Check out the clip below and a quick history lesson on why Macbeth is really all about the witches.Ooooh I love seeing Shakespeare performed-especially because every director/actor/costume designer/set designer/voice coach/tech manager interprets the texts in his/her own way.
Though they have a relatively small speaking part in the play and film, these witches are really a focal point of the play, and here's why. "All hail Macbeth, that shall be king hereafter," the fourth and final witch tells Macbeth in the two-minute-long clip, setting in motion the chain of events that cause him to commit regicide, his wife to commit suicide, and his final (bloody) downfall - the tragedy keeping with any good Shakespeare classic. A new Macbeth clip released earlier today via the Guardian shows Macbeth's early confrontation with the witches, played by Lynn Kennedy, Seylan Baxter, Amber Rissman, and Kayla Fallon, who portend his ascent to the Scottish throne. Early appearances are that it's a bold interpretation (and a Guardian review noted that it might not be the most subtle), with its share of thrills. Though some of the play's most harrowing scenes take place in bedchambers and the nooks and crannies of dank and unwelcoming castles, the new film - currently slated for an October release - takes place on the open battlefield. Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard star as Lord and Lady Macbeth, respectively, with Elizabeth Debicki as Lady Macduff. I hope high school English didn't ruin Macbeth for you, because its latest iteration is going to be truly incredible.
0 kommentar(er)
