CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › DOOMED FROM THE START - Aug 2010 - MACBETH and SCOTLAND, PA
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DOOMED FROM THE START - Aug 2010 - MACBETH and SCOTLAND, PA

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
MACBETH has always been my favorite of Shakespeare's plays. It's possible that I'm not paying enough attention, but it seems like filmmakers love it the most as well, reinventing it in different eras, with their own spins. Some have been great (Kurosawa's Throne of Blood), some have been terrible (Men of Respect, where the play is reimagined as a NY mafia story. Good luck finding it, but it stars John Turturro as "Mac", who brags that "no man o' woman born can do shit ta me!" Peter Boyle plays "Duffy", ludicrously delivering the climactic speech about how "they had to rip me outta my mutha's fuckin' uterus!" Good stuff.)

Anyway, I offer up two compelling yet wildly different versions of the classic tale:

Macbeth (1971, Roman Polanski): It's impossible to ignore that Roman Polanski's first film after the murder of his wife and unborn child is a nihilistic, oppressive, and shockingly gory take on Shakespeare's play. Although it was named Best Film of 1971 by the National Board of Review, critics such as Pauline Kael found the violence distracting and harmful to the text. Polanski himself allegedly defended the heightened violence on set by saying "You didn't see my house in California last summer. I know about bleeding." He also claimed an awareness that any production he mounted after his wife's murder would draw a certain level of over-analysis, and had it been a comedy, he'd be called callous. (thanks, Wikipedia!) Beautfully photographed, with a screenplay co-written by Kenneth Tynan, and produced by Hugh Hefner.

Scotland, PA (2001, Billy Morrissette): The Scottish Play is transplanted to a fast food restaurant in the middle of Pennsylvania in 1975. Joe "Mac" McBeth (James LeGros) works at Duncan's Cafe with his wife (Maura Tierney). Mac is passed over for a manager position, despite his heroic feats of throwing out rowdy customers and reporting his thieving superior to Mr. Duncan, the cafe's owner. Urged on by his social climber wife and a trio of stoned hippies (Amy Smart, Andy Dick, and some other guy), Joe kills his boss and takes over the place, stealing Duncan's idea for delivering orders to customers' cars through a window in the building. Things are going well and the McBeths are a couple on the rise, until vegetarian homicide detective Lt. McDuff (Christopher Walken) arrives to investigate the murder of Duncan.

Oh and the movie's soundtrack is comprised almost completely of Bad Company songs. Enjoy.
post #2 of 22
Fantastic choices.
post #3 of 22
Great Choices. And what a lucky boy I am to own both.

I'm gonna watch both of them again, of course, but off the top of my head it will be interesting to compare the way both films handle the witches. The coven scene in MacBeth has always stuck out in my memory above all else and I always found Scotland, PA's take on them to be really clever.
post #4 of 22
Thread Starter 
I forgot to mention Jon Finch, who stars in Polanski's film. I've seen him in exactly three things: Macbeth, Hitchcock's Frenzy, and a seriously fucked up sci fi film from 1973 called The Final Programme (aka The Last Days of Man on Earth). I always liked this guy, but he never really hit (he originally had John Hurt's role in Alien but dropped out, and turned up in Kingdom of Heaven). He's like a non-campy Tim Curry.
post #5 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
Great Choices. And what a lucky boy I am to own both.

I'm gonna watch both of them again, of course, but off the top of my head it will be interesting to compare the way both films handle the witches. The coven scene in MacBeth has always stuck out in my memory above all else and I always found Scotland, PA's take on them to be really clever.
My early note is that the witches, killing Duncan, and McDuff being an adversary are the only places the parallels are truly exploited. There's no corollary in Scotland, PA for Macbeth's later murders, or Duncan's sons having a more active role in the resolution, or of the witches' predictions about how Macbeth can or can't be harmed, or the twists of those predictions. I think had Morrissette really carried the 1:1 Macbeth riff into those waters it really would have been an amazing feat.
post #6 of 22
August officially starts Sunday. I'll watch one of the films then! And the other either the same day or next weekend.
post #7 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
My early note is that the witches, killing Duncan, and McDuff being an adversary are the only places the parallels are truly exploited. There's no corollary in Scotland, PA for Macbeth's later murders, or Duncan's sons having a more active role in the resolution, or of the witches' predictions about how Macbeth can or can't be harmed, or the twists of those predictions. I think had Morrissette really carried the 1:1 Macbeth riff into those waters it really would have been an amazing feat.
Did Walken mention something about being born via C-section in the movie or am I imagining that? I am probably imagining that.
post #8 of 22
Thread Starter 
No, but I was in error about the film dropping the ball on Duncan's son and the Banquo subplot. It's been nine years since I last saw it.
post #9 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil View Post
My early note is that the witches, killing Duncan, and McDuff being an adversary are the only places the parallels are truly exploited. There's no corollary in Scotland, PA for Macbeth's later murders, or Duncan's sons having a more active role in the resolution, or of the witches' predictions about how Macbeth can or can't be harmed, or the twists of those predictions. I think had Morrissette really carried the 1:1 Macbeth riff into those waters it really would have been an amazing feat.
I'm so full of shit. I wrote the above before rewatching Scotland, PA. I misremembered quite a bit. Most of what they toss away is the third act stuff (Birnam Wood coming to Dunsinane, etc.). They don't make McDuff "not of woman born", but they find another way to make him unique among the community of hunters and burger-gobblers. The murder of McDuff's whole family is addressed and dismissed.

Scotland, PA even works in the witches' opening narration, which Polanski's film does not. Polanski's witches are nude in a scene; I would have liked to see Amy Smart naked, but not if it meant also seeing Andy Dick naked.

Maura Tierney is a great foul-mouthed Lady Macbeth.

Cinematography by Wally Pfister!
post #10 of 22
Maura Tierney has one of my favorite lines ever: "We're not bad people, Mac... just underachievers who have to make up for lost time."

My wife and I had planned a year-long Shakespeare film project this year, with each of us picking six films and watching one per month. Our plan was quickly derailed by real life, but we hope to get it back on track. Polanski's MACBETH was my choice (I haven't seen it yet aside from a few intriguing minutes) and it was scheduled for October (maybe a bit obvious but it felt right), but I was going to screen SCOTLAND, PA that month as well for contrast; I love that the filmmakers were able to make it work as a comedy. All the elements just work wonderfully well, I really like the soundtrack, and I have crushes on Tierney and Amy Smart.

I was also going to watch the Folger Theatre/Two River Theater Company stage adaptation that was done a couple of years ago because they finally released it on DVD. From Amazon: 'Conceived and directed by Teller (of Penn & Teller) and Aaron Posner, this acclaimed production showcases the inventive magic of Teller, who, with Posner, contributes a new foreword to this edition, writing about their vision of the play as a "supernatural horror thriller."'
post #11 of 22
Thread Starter 
God, Polanski's version is just bleak as hell. Murdered children, LOTS of shots of corpses in awkward positions. You at first think it’s an on-the-nose choice for Macbeth to, in the middle of the climactic swordfight, scramble to put back his crown, but it becomes perverse and kind of brilliant once MacDuff beheads him: I could be misreading, but as his head comes off it looks as if his arms instinctively reach up to try to catch not the head, but the crown.

Polanski very much tells “The Tragedy of Macbeth”, but Morrissette’s film is almost more about Lady Macbeth. Or perhaps I’m being charitable and it’s more that LeGros just doesn’t nail anything beyond the surface. She outshines him by a bit.
post #12 of 22
I rewatched both this weekend. Much of that was made possible by Polanski's version not being OOP like I had originally believed.


I still find Scotland, PA to be a terrible movie. Sure, it was shot well. What I didn't enjoy was how so much of the film was given over to female revisionism. While you would think that would work well for a story like this, it comes across as trite when told in Scotland, PA.

In regards to Polanski's vision, Phil is spot-on. Coming right out of losing his wife, Polanski takes the material and goes blacker than black. The futility of human existence measured against the battle for personal success has rarely been captured so amazingly on film.

Last time I watched Polanski's MacBeth was a counterpoint to Cromwell. Strange bedfellows, but they work well together.
post #13 of 22
Thread Starter 
Can you get into what you mean by female revisionism a bit more? Where they took Lady Macbeth certainly felt logical enough.

Scotland, PA is flawed, and has a deflated third act, but I thought it was a promising first feature and a clever enough graft to keep me compelled throughout. According to IMDB, Billy Morrissette never even worked again. On anything. Wonder what happened there.

Also, lest anyone be put off by the boring-as-fuck DVD cover to Macbeth (which is an old-age shot of Banquo from a dream sequence; seriously, it's like they carefully selected a cover to make you not want to watch the film), here are some shots:



Edit: NSFW

Spoiler!
post #14 of 22
I'll try to find the beast grounding for it, but a lot of the material seems to be forced upon Maura Tierney.

Take a look at the original work and then watch how much of the dialogue/plot advancement is broke off the normal path to portray Tierney as a reasonable figure. There's also the really fucked sense of speech that Tierney uses. If I watch it again, I'll pinpoint scenes.


But, there was just something about that last viewing that bugged me.
post #15 of 22
I never had a problem with Tierney in Scotland, PA.

I don't quite understand the criticism of "female revisionism," since the movie is an interpretation of the text, and any divergent choices by the director are part of the fun.

But I also have to watch the film again. Maybe then I'll understand the criticism better.
post #16 of 22
I actually found my copy among the stack of stuff I've reviewing. Watching it as I type, I feel that "revisionism" might have been too strong of a term.

A little research also shows that the director of the film was married to Tierney at the time. She really doesn't have a way with language.

Also, I appreciate divergent choices as much as the next deviant. My problem is that it just doesn't work for the story they're trying to tell.
post #17 of 22
Thread Starter 
But I think it says SOMETHING that the director comes out and says the movie is based on his hazy teen memories of reading the play in high school, and that as a teen the biggest character to him seems to have been Lady Macbeth. And it says something yet again that he cast his own wife as that character.

Maybe that reading makes it accidentally compelling, but compelling just the same.
post #18 of 22
I'm reading it the opposite way. You had a director who had an idea (a half-assed one) and attempted to make something out of nothing. What you end up with is an amazing supporting cast having to sit in the background while Maura Tierney stumbles in the forefront.
post #19 of 22
Is your problem with how the film focused on Lady Macbeth, or how poorly Maura Tierney portrayed Lady Macbeth?

I always remember Lady Macbeth prominently, but I haven't read the play in awhile, or seen a direct telling.

Edited for spelling.
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franklin View Post
Is your problem with how the film focused on Lady Macbeth, or how poorly Maura Tierney portrayed Lady Macbeth?

I always remember Lady Macbeth prominently, but I haven't read the play in awhile, or seen a directing telling.
That's what I've been asking myself today. I haven't read the play since 2003, but something about Scotland PA doesn't strike me just right.


The easy answer is the over-reliance on Tierney to carry material that she seems ill-suited to perform. But, there's this inkling that says there's a bigger problem.
post #21 of 22
Saw Macbeth today.
Shit that was grim. The covenant scene was pretty intense. And the entire film just feel so oppressive. Like everyone had a terrible time filming that. Standing in the rain, cold and wind, mud and murdering people.

The final fights Macbeth has are pretty great. I wasn't a huge fan of the camera work.
post #22 of 22
Scotland PA is objectively terrible. But it was watchable as hell.
Maura Tierney was incredibly hot. And Christopher Walken just steals the entire film with a great performance.


His relationship with the deputy made me think of Twin Peaks.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Films in Release or On Video
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › Films in Release or On Video › DOOMED FROM THE START - Aug 2010 - MACBETH and SCOTLAND, PA