Okay guys post comments on what you think of the film adaptation

It is a good film, but an awkward adaptation. If you want to see a Shakespeare play, go and watch a play. There are plenty online btw.

Watched it earlier today, Fassbender's good but when its not done by Shakespearean actors, they tend to deliver the lines awkwardly as if they're speaking a different language they don't understand.
Anyway see what you think, the cinematography is amazing.

>>7678862
Please link to some. I couldn't find any on YouTube.

>>7678955
I believe this happens because 400 years ago English was a lot different as to what it is today, making the constructed sentances sound odd in tounge. therefore instead of speaking the sentances they just recite what they read making it sound unnatural

>>7679247

Or.. . it's the fact the sentences are warped because of the frequent iambic pentameter?

>>7678957
Just go to a theater nigga

>>7678856
Meh. Solid cinematography but that's it. I don't know exactly why, but to me, the movie was quite boring. Madness during the banquet and the last duel in particular were dragging. The sex scene was edgy as fuck and unnecessary. Polanski's version is much better.

Personally I really enjoyed it, thought it was well acted and it looked amazing

>>7678955
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7X9C55TkUP8

Huge exception here.

>>7678856
Had a thread about this last night - beautiful movie, but it only has a thin veneer of Shakespeare to it. It's still worth watching, and interesting to compare to other Adaptions. If you want the best adaptation, go watch Polanski's version.

>>7681070
>watching movies made by a literal rapist

>>7681080
There's a point in here somewhere I suspect.

>>7681086
Yes, it's that the anon is a Redditor.

>>7681080
>Implying I don't pirate so he doesn't see a cent of it
>Implying China Town isn't one of the greatest movies ever made

While we're speaking on Macbeth, some of your favorite authors from the Early Modern period were probably rapists too!

File: 1432887673224.jpg (29KB, 736x313px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 736x313px

over-stylized shite, for the most part. not a patch on polanski's underrated version, or throne of blood for that matter

imo, modern films increasingly fail to capture a 'genuine' medieval atmosphere, as weird as that might sound. like no matter how much grime they throw in fassbender's face he still looks more like a world of warcraft avatar than a scottish lord

>>7679247
No... It's language written for the stage, in Iambic pentameter. It is not meant to be performed conversationally as you normally perform dialogue for film. Polanski's Macbeth is better primarily for this reason (not to mention he cuts less of the play and doesn't fuck up crucial scenes like the suicide of Lady Macbeth). Branagh's, Olivier's, and Orwell's adaptations are all the best adaptation because they meld stage acting with screen acting in a delightful way. Kurzell tried to make this one into a western.

>>7681132
Not him, but pronunciation has changed a lot over the centuries. It really does change a lot of Shakespeare's puns and wordplay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlpphT7n9s