An Unmemorable Macbeth (Macbeth - William Shakespeare)

Member Name: Leolover

Product:	Macbeth - William Shakespeare
Date:	04/11/02 (2337 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Sean bean fans will be happy

Disadvantages: Can't hear the main character, plenty of cringey moments, baffling use of setting

**** This is a review of 'Macbeth' starring Sean Bean and directed by Edward Hall, which is currently showing at the Richmond Theatre and is due to open at the Albery Theatre in the West End in a few weeks time. *****


I don't like this trend of plucking people off the telly/out of the recording studio and sticking them on the stage. An actor who has spent the majority of his working life in front of a camera is unlikely to have developed the vocal power and stage presence necessary to do justice to even a minor Shakespearean part, let alone the principal role.

Sean Bean proved this to me recently with his weak, dull and barely audible interpretation of arguably the Bard's greatest tragic character, Macbeth. Apparently, Bean is 'returning' to the stage after a twelve year absence, but if you were in the audience this Saturday, you could be forgiven for thinking he's never acted onstage in his life.

This production has been eagerly awaited by theatregoers and critics alike for some time, and is due to move to central London in a month or so. Richmond theatre is its launch site; presumably they intend to iron out any flaws and inconsistencies here before taking it to a harsher, less indulgent audience in the West End. They'll have their work cut out...


**** THE PLAY

One of Shakespeare's best known plays, Macbeth is the tale of a once great soldier's fall from grace. Following a successful battle, Macbeth, accompanied by his friend Banquo, is visited by three 'weird sisters' who prophecy his ascendance to the Scottish throne. His initial scepticism is jolted when one of the witches' other predictions come true, and he is crowned Thane of Cawdor. He begins to wonder whether the witches prophecy will only come true if he takes matters into his own hands...And is presented with the perfect opportunity when the King decides to stay at his castle.

With the
King under his roof and in his care, Macbeth becomes afraid and decides not to kill him, but is persuaded to do the dirty deed by his wife, a strong, powerful woman who is skilled at manipulating her husband.

Macbeth kills the King and leaves the bloody daggers with his guards to make it appear as if they have killed him. When the murder is discovered, the Kings two sons flee Scotland, and Macbeth is crowned King. Tyranny, violence and death follow. Macbeth believes he is invincible because the witches tell him that no man born of woman will kill him, but he is finally vanquished by Macduff, who was 'untimely ripped' from his mothers womb.


**** CHARACTERISATION

Macbeth

I have no doubt that those who cast Sean Bean in this role practically wet themselves with excitement when this well established TV and movie actor expressed an interest in the part. They may have been less ecstatic when rehearsals started, but they probably hoped the audience would overlook his obvious unsuitability for the role simply because of who he is. Unfortunately, they overestimated the audience?s tolerance levels considerably.

The main problem with Mr Bean's performance was that we could hardly hear him. I was in row E, five rows from the stage, and even I found myself straining to catch some of his speeches. It must have been terribly frustrating for those further back. At one point, a fed up audience member shouted 'speak up!' prompting murmers of assent from the rest of those near the back. Rude? Yes - but totally understandable.

Lack of volume aside, Bean's performance lacked depth and he failed to adequately convey Macbeth's inner turmoil as he struggles with his conscience, his own ambition and his wife's. Sean Bean's Macbeth is a pathetic and clumsy creature. His discomfort is way too obvious when the King?s body is discovered, and his descent into torment and madness is too sudden and
out of the blue to make any dramatic sense. Despite Lady Macbeth's best attempts to rouse him to fury and her blatant sexuality, Bean does not convey the powerful bond between Macbeth and his wife, and his tearful reaction to her death is simply not credible.

Another, more personal reason I found Sean Bean's performance uncomfortable was that I couldn't get past his accent. Why have all the other actors speaking with Scottish accents (some of them passable, most diabolical) if you are going to have the central character speaking with a northern drawl? Some of Macbeth's key speeches just sounded comical. 'It will have blud...Blud will have blud they say...' It just isn't right! Either have everyone speaking with their own accents, or everyone speaking in Scottish accents. Surely an actor of Bean's calibre (and salary) could manage a Scottish accent...?

Lady Macbeth

The actress playing Lady Macbeth gave a strong performance and I really liked the sexy edge she gave the character. Dominating and manipulative, Lady Macbeth is the force of evil behind the death of the King and this came across very well in the actresses' erformance.

The sleepwalking scene, in which Lady Macbeth is found by her distraught maid and a doctor walking and talking in her sleep, and trying to wash her hands of the imaginary blood of the King, was very creepy and powerful.

I felt that at times the actress went a bit over the top in her performance, such as when she calls upon the spirits to 'unsex' her and fill her full of cruelty - she almost screamed the lines, and I think a slower, less hysterical approach would have had more impact, but on the whole her performance was sound.

The Witches

I have never seen a production of Macbeth where the witches had so little impact. The director has obviously decided to try and cash in on the sex appeal of a big name movie star and has given th
e witches a similar sexy edge to Lady Macbeth, three pretty model types squeezed into satin negligees and draped across the admittedly handsome Sean Bean, as opposed to the traditional three hags huddled around a cauldron. The witches pranced across the stage, skirts a billowing, and lisped their prophecies girlishly to an entranced Macbeth. I'm sorry, but if I wanted to see semi naked women pouting and preening, I'd buy a copy of FHM. There was no dramatic impact in their speeches, no horror in the tableau they present to Macbeth in Act 2, no revulsion from Macbeth and consequently no struggle between good and evil (represented by the witches) in his mind.

The minor characters in the play gave generally good performances, with the exception of a stilted maid with a hideously bad Scottish accent and the cute little boy drafted in to play Macduff's murdered son, who simply couldn't act. Macduff himself was very good - the scene where he discovers his wife and children have been murdered was genuinely moving and his rage in the final scene, where he comes fact to face with their murderer, is formidable.


**** SETTING

I couldn't work this out at all. The actors were dressed in modern war uniforms, suggesting a modern setting, but Macbeth's home was a creepy gothic castle complete with candles on the walls and a portcullis door. Macbeth carried a sword and wore silver plated armour, but his attackers were dressed in camouflage gear and carried snipers rifles. What??? The only reason I can think of for the director having such blatant incongruencies in the setting is to convey the idea that the action is taking place in a time, space and reality completely separate to our own, but what?s the point? It just totally confuses the audience. We couldn?t accept the sword fight between Macbeth and Macduff when we had just seen the SAS storm the Scottish castle, blasting everyone into oblivion.

**** CONCL
USION

It isn't all bad. There are some excellent moments. A sketch just before the interval where we see Macbeth crowned under the Scottish flag with Lady Macbeth hovering nervously by his side, captured their journey from ambitious wannabes to murderous tyrants perfectly. The scene where a bloody Banquo's ghost appears to a tormented Macbeth at a banquet was excellently staged and drew gasps of shock from the audience. However, there were some cringe inducingly awful moments - two of the worst being the King?s son staggering from his fathers deathchamber and vomiting violently onto the stage, and a plastic replica of Macbeth's head, thrust onto a wooden stake at the end of the play. Both these elements were included for shock value and were completely unnecessary - the horror is in the acts themselves, not the body fluids and parts involved.

I really can't help thinking it would have been a far better production with an experienced stage actor in the role of Macbeth. I was immensely disappointed with Sean Bean's performance. If you're considering going to see this production, and you've never seen a production of 'Macbeth' before, please, please don't let it put you off the play. I have seen some breathtaking performances of this play. Unfortunately, this was not one of them.

Summary: