Macbeth Movie Review & Film Summary (1. We have all heard it a hundred times, Macbeth's despairing complaint about life: . Macbeth's character was not strong enough to stand up under the weight of the crime he committed, so he disintegrated into the fantasies of ignorant superstition, while his flimsy wife went mad.
Directed by Geoffrey Wright. With Chloe Armstrong, Kate Bell, Miranda Nation, Sam Worthington. A contemporary retelling of Shakespeare's "Macbeth" set in the. 10 Best Movies of 2015. From simmering same-sex romances to 'Star Wars', Peter Travers' top 10 films of the year. Suggested essay topics and study questions for William Shakespeare's Macbeth. Perfect for students who have to write Macbeth essays. Academy Award-Nominated Great Films That Didn't Win a Single Oscar, or Weren't Nominated: Although the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.
Advertisement. It all seemed so clear. And at the proper moment, the forces of justice stepped forward, mocked the witches' prophecies which deluded poor Macbeth and set things right for the final curtain.
From "Inside Out" to "Amy," these are the best films to premiere on the Croisette this year. Black Women, White Men: Interracial Romance in the Movies. This is a user-contributed, ever-expanding list of theatrical and made-for-TV movies that feature romantic. Discover Empire's best movies of 2015 in our top 20 countdown. Find out if Avengers, Jurassic World and Terminator Genisys all made the list. We have all heard it a hundred times, Macbeth's despairing complaint about life: ".
2015 Oscar contenders for best Original Screenplay and best Adapted Screenplay.
There were, no doubt, those who thought the play was about how Malcolm became king of Scotland. But in this film Polanski and his collaborator, Kenneth Tynan, place themselves at Macbeth's side and choose to share his point of view, and in their film there's no room at all for detachment. All those noble, tragic Macbeths - - Orson Welles and Maurice Evans and the others - - look like imposters now, and the king is revealed as a scared kid. No effort has been made to make Macbeth a tragic figure, and his death moves us infinitely less than the murder of Macduff's young son. Polanski places us in a visual universe of rain and mist, of gray dawns and clammy dusks, and there is menace in the sound of hoofbeats but no cheer in the cry of trumpets. Even the heroic figure of Macduff has been tempered; now he is no longer the instrument of God's justice, but simply a man bent on workaday revenge. The movie ends with the simple fact that a job has been done: Macbeth got what was coming to him.
Polanski has imposed this vision on the film so effectively that even the banquet looks like a gang of highwaymen ready to wolf down stolen sheep. Everyone in the film seems to be pushed by circumstances; there is small feeling that the characters are motivated by ideas.
They seem so ignorant at times that you wonder if they understand the wonderful dialogue Shakespeare has written for them. It's as if the play has been inhabited by Hell's Angels who are quick studies. Tulip Fever (2017) Ipod Movie.
All of this, of course, makes Polanski's . This is an original film by an original film artist, and not an . It is impossible to watch a film directed by Roman Polanski and not react on more than one level to such images as a baby being . Polanski's characters resemble Charles Manson: They are anti- intellectual, witless, and driven by deep, shameful wells of lust and violence. Why did Polanski choose to make ?
I have no way of guessing. This is certainly one of the most pessimistic films ever made, and there seems little doubt that Polanski intended his film to be full of sound and fury - - which it is, to the brim - - and to signify nothing.
It's at that level that Polanski is at his most adamant: The events that occur in the film must not be allowed to have significance. Polanski and Tynan take only small liberties with Shakespeare, and yet so successfully does Polanski orchestrate . We didn't identify with either Macbeth or Macduff in their final duel. We were just watching a sword- fight.
The Top 1. 0 Films Of The 2. Cannes Film Festival.
In the dreary apartments of film journalists across the world, suitcases overflowing with dirty clothes sit in bedrooms reproachfully. Tote bags overrun with swag litter our hallways, and most of us have sudden colds.
Many have googled “symptoms of scurvy” or “how can I tell if I have gout?” in light of a fortnight of subpar pizza and pink wine. It can only mean the glorious/tedious amazing/depressing cinephile wonderland that is the Cannes Film Festival has ended for another year and all that’s left for us to do is round up our time on the Croisette, take some vitamin C and put a goddamn wash on.
We’ll have another post on a few of the trends and themes we saw emerge this year coming later, but for right now, we’ll try to remember the whole palaver is actually supposed to be about —the films. Somewhat contrary to the prevailing opinion that this year’s lineup was not one for the ages (which we’re beginning to suspect prevails toward the end of every Cannes as the fallback position of world- weary seen- it- all- before veterans), your intrepid reviewers Jess and Oli found a huge amount to admire. Perhaps we were a little cleverer or luckier or more discerning in what we chose to see this time than previous years, or perhaps with neither of us being complete newbies we were able to be a bit savvier about the whole circus.
But for us at least, Cannes 2. Here are the top ten films we saw, and a couple of extra personal favorites, but you can find all 4. Cannes coverage here. One one level, it’s narratively unsatisfying: the storyline is convoluted and more or less unexplained, and the characters are less creatures to be related to and more elaborate parts of the film’s meticulous design and construction. But on another level, one rarely attained elsewhere, “The Assassin” may be the richest narrative you’ll find in modern cinema —every shot is packed with story and beauty, and every scene is a self- contained miniature of its enveloping, sensual, mythically beautiful, yet immediate and real world. Loosely following a female assassin (Shu Qi) who has been sent to dispatch her old lover, the fights are graceful but few and brief and will in no way satisfy the chop- socky addict.
This is a Hou Hsiaou- Hsien take on wuxia, and thus primarily the work of a man fascinated with time and history and a kind of collective memory of China’s distant past as a place of extraordinary beauty, perhaps largely because it is so out of reach. This film moves infinitely slowly, on quiet feet, and like its heroine, it spends most of its time observing and listening, but this is time you need to spend with nearly each and every scene so that the full force of the miracles therein can work on you. But our fear was misplaced: “Green Room” is a significant step- up from Saulnier’s grimy, darkly funny revenge flick, a brilliantly executed siege horror/thriller with some of the most gruesome violence seen on the Croisette in quite some time. Essentially, it’s punks vs. But that doesn’t quite hint at the insanity that unfolds —Saulnier carefully ratchets up the tension in the early stages before letting it explode in a mess of near- severed arms, throat- ripping dogs and shotgunned faces, drawing on peak- period John Carpenter without imitating in the manner of other recent pictures. There’s a lived- in authenticity to the contemporary punk world setting that might have descended to cliches in a more mainstream movie, while giving the story and characters enough room to breath that it doesn’t become too lean.
The cast are pretty much impeccable here — “Blue Ruin” holdover Macon Blair, and indie stalwart Mark Webber are among the standouts— and it even wraps up in satisfying fashion, never seeming cheap or leaving you feel cheated. If he can keep up this level of consistency, Saulnier might be the most exciting filmmaker in genre cinema going forward. Shot in lovely black and white, the film follows two different journeys into the Amazon in two different time periods —the 1. This native shaman/the last of his tribe is one of the most unforgettable characters in any Cannes film this year —his younger self is brash, clever, quick to anger and quick to laugh, and his older self is a tragic figure full of self- recrimination and regret for being unable to carry the burden of keeping alive all his tribe’s centuries of knowledge. The film could be trimmed of 1. Playing in Director’s Fortnight on the opening day, it’s exactly the kind of film it would have been very easy to miss, but for once serendipity worked the way it’s supposed to.
It went on to win the biggest prize awarded in the Fortnight sidebar, in a year when again the selection here showed a broad- ranging strength that rivalled or maybe even put to shame some of the main- brand Official Selections. That Gallic movies took the Palme, Best Actor and Best Actress might have validated the festival head’s decision for some, but since Desplechin’s latest was almost universally hailed as better than ninety percent of films in the Official Selection, it suggests it was something of an error. Luckily, Directors Fortnight stepped up to showcase the picture, and so we got a chance to see a major return to form for the “Kings & Queens” helmer after English- language misfire “Jimmy P.” Few would have thought there was anything new to mine in the white- boy first- love Bildungsroman genre, but Despelchin finds it in a gorgeously literary story of the early years of Paul Dedalus (Quentin Dolmaire), jumping deftly from a curious Cold War story to the formative romance with Esther (the superb Lou Roy- Lecollinet), heading down various detours or transgressions along the way. It could have been sprawling, overstuffed and unfocused, but Desplechin’s featherlight, unpredictable touch makes it enormously palatable in a way that Gaspar No. Deft, dense and featuring a host of actors that we’re sure to see in French cinema and beyond for years to come, this felt like a sort of back- to- basics palate cleanser for Desplechin, one that’s seen him come back reenergized and revitalized. We didn’t (the top five or six films at least here are better than anything we saw last year), but you could certainly make an argument that the Official Competition, while it had some dizzying highs, was sort of heavy on filler. Which makes it particularly baffling that “Cemetery Of Splendour,” Apichatpong Weerasethakul’s follow- up to his Palme D’Or winner “Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives,” was overlooked and instead turned up in the less prestigious Un Certain Regard section —it was easily as strong as its predecessor, as well as most of what was competing for the Palme, and one of the most beguiling, haunting films of the festival altogether.
You can tell a Weerasethakul (or “Joe,” to his friends) picture from a hundred paces: he has a unique mood and style that’s in full force here, as a middle- aged woman (the wonderful Jenjira Pongpas Widner) tends to a group of soldiers stricken by sleeping sickness and wanders the streets with a psychic possessed by a man named Itt. No, it doesn’t make much sense on paper, but it makes perfect sense when you watch it, similar to how a dream in which you hang out with Abraham Lincoln, your long- dead great aunt and a talking dolphin makes perfect sense at the time: the woozy, ever- shifting mood created here is entirely hypnotic, proving again that the filmmaker is better than anyone at evoking a semi- conscious state. Rich, utterly gorgeous and yet oddly entertaining, if this film had made the Competition, it surely would have been gunning for Weerasethakul’s second Palme.