Reader Reviews
Macbeth (Gielgud Theatre, West End)
Back to Show Details| Score | Comment | Date |
 | Although I have some reservations about Rupert Goold's direction (the withches and Seyton in particular) there is no doubt that the Stalinist setting is a triumph. Macbeth is a political thriller and this production mirrors the internecine struggles between Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky with the addition of moments of horror and a scary sound design by Adam Cork. Unfortunately Patrick Stewart was still struggling with a throat infection so his performance seemed to be holding something back, but there was excellent support, particularly from Michael Feast, Martin Turner and Tim Treloar. However, unlike the RSC some of the smaller roles were very poorly acted. Kate Fleetwood's Lady Macbeth was sexually charged and full of dangerous ambition - she strangely reminded me of the wife of a former PM. Goold's Macbeth is undeniably exciting and visceral but not quite the definitive version some have felt it to be. - David Baxter | 29 Nov 07 |
| A mixed night. Patrick Stewart gave an assured performance, but I don't think he always plummed the full depths of Macbeth's inner turmoil. Kate Fleetwood was great with the verse, but there was definite pretending rather than feeling going on at times. Basically, you could tell that the cast had been doing the play for some time. I don't know what he was like earlier in the run, but Michael Guest was an embarrasment as Macduff. He reminded me of the ham actors in that episode of "Blackadder The Third". The directing was very good on the whole, paticularly eveything around the Witches' scenes. I did think Banquo's murder was overly gimmicky and laid on the Stalinist context with a trowel. I'm glad I saw it, but I do think some of the critics have got a bit over excited. Just because they didn't have to sit through yet another awful "Macbeth", doesn't mean it was definitive. - Nick | 20 Nov 07 |
| I am really glad I managed to see this because for me as a Director, it had some beautiful staging ideas and themes which I genuinelly appreciated. My favourite being the scene change from Banquo's death to the banquet - inspired! Lights fabulous, sound a bit too OTT, I didn't like the "Witch Rap" totally unnecessary and the dialogue was lost. Likewise the opening - great idea, but dialogue lost. I feel that lots of the verse and therefore the meaning was lost, a friend said that most people know the story, I disagree, it is the director and casts job to tell a story, not to presume anything. I would say that the production was bigger than the actors on stage, except Lady Macbeth and Macduff who were equal to it. The majority of the cast were quite simply out done by the Rupert Goold and his Design Teams ideas. Worth seeing, but with a stronger cast, and a better Macbeth this could have been amazing. - Alassin Sane | 15 Nov 07 |
| ps - that was supposed to be 2 stars. pps - I wouldnt mind betting that some of the 5 stars below are from the production company. DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE! - bb | 02 Nov 07 |
| Well I'm glad its not just me that was underwhelmed. I was really looking forward to this and had paid over £50(!!!) for the ticket on the strength of almost universally astonishing reviews. I was really disappointed. The idea of the Soviet setting is great but really generalised in its execution. Lots of flouncy actoriness and shoulder slapping jollity when these are supposed to be war hardened, Soviet soldiers who are paranoid about who might be next for the chop or who is being spied on. Look at Putin - THAT is scary and you wouldnt catch him mincing around. And whoever the goose-stepping soldier was would have been shot for that shabby effort - where was that famous well drilled straight back and straight leg. No sense of power, fear or status from Duncan who, within this setting would have to have been something of a tyrant himself even if loved by his men. He looked a bit like a young Stalin which could have been really interesting but he wouldnt stop shuffling around and patting people. When all the soldiers come into the kitchen none of the staff bat an eyelid - where is the status system?Really generalised uniforms and 'combats' (as in Trevor Nunn's equally over-hyped Hamlet) which might be because of Chichester's Limited budget but it just looks lazy. Also everyone comes on with really clean boots!? Why? They've just been on the battlefield. At one point Macbeth asks for his armour and is given a modern flak jacket so when exactly are we in Soviet Russia? The Macduff children are all dressed like they are at the school down the road from me! The 'soldiers' dont look as if they know how to hold a gun - one of them uses his middle finger for the trigger which he obviously thinks looks quirky a la Tarantino. And guns on stage - bangs from the overused sound system look silly - why not use ones that go off? In the battle at the end an unarmed soldier thinks he has captured Macbeth only to be shot by him. But why, in the middle of a battle, didnt he have a gun?? Lots of little niggly things but they all grate when a period or setting has been established and then it is constantly broken. And the final knife/pistol duel was so stupid. Why wouldnt Macbeth just have shot him straight away even if as we find out he has no bullets left. Then when they finally do fight with knives it looks flabby, choreographed and totally unscarey. Look at the fight with a knife in the film Saving Private Ryan - utterly terrifying which ends up as a messy battle of stregth wrestling match. This looks like the Royal Ballet were brought in for help! I suppose these could all be seen as minor points if there was an amazing central performance but there isnt. Patrick Stewart is just not up to it - you dont believe him. And by the end his voice was going and I couldnt hear everything and I was half way back in the stalls. I would say this could have just been a bad night but I saw him in 'The Tempest' and the same thing happened. And there are funny noises going on that I think are supposed to be something emotional. God only knows what but they just come out as funny. He resorts to playing for cheap laughs with little camp moments that the diehard trekkies laugh nervously at. Macduff kept running out of breath too. But Kate Fleetwood was FANTASTIC. Amazing voice, genuinely terrifying and really moving when she starts cracking. You somehow ended up really feeling for her. This production should be called 'Lady Macbeth'. Scott Handy was also excellent as Malcolm. You could understand everything he was saying as clear as a bell and when he was given the task of playing the whole of his final speech to a silly severed head he pulled off the horror of it brilliantly. One final thing - why oh why oh why do the witch/nurses have to rap Hubble bubble ...is to appeal to the yoof of today? I was unaware of the postwar Soviet rap culture as I beleive were the others falling of their seats with laughter. So why has this show got such raves? I think there are 3 possibilites: 1 - Critics are trying to fight against the unstoppable tide of musicals in the West End by over compensating. Duping people into pay £50 a ticket when it is not worth it will not help. 2 - Critics are being bribed. This is big business, people. 3 - I am in the minority. I think it might be 2. rant over. - bb | 02 Nov 07 |
| I must say that I don't understand what all the fuss is about, as I certainly didn't find this "the Macbeth of a lifetime" as one critic apparently labelled it. It was good, but certainly not that good, and I was far from impressed with Patrick Stewart's performance, which I would describe as adequate, but hardly more, too much technique and too little inhabiting the character, almost like watching some sort of acting-by-numbers. Deeply disappointing and uninspiring, and his performance brings down the grade for this production in my opinion. By far, the standout performance of this production was that of Kate Fleetwood as Lady Macbeth, oh my goodness! I saw her during the RSC's Complete Works year as Hermione in The Winter's Tale, and as Thaisa in Pericles, and she was good in both, but those are both, well, bland characters I guess you could call them, and given a meatier part as Lady Macbeth she really proves herself. It was an amazingly nuanced and multi-layered performance, way, WAY beyond what Stewart delivered, even though she's about half his age and has much less experienced of performing the Bard. I hope that she gets the accolades that she so richly deserves when this heads over to New York. [POSSIBLE SPOILERS] The production is a clever one, and it's a matter of personal taste if you like certain things I suppose, but I'm sick of seeing productions where Lady Macduff's part has been padded out (probably in order to attract a bigger name to play the part) beyond what's in the play, in this case even reallocating other characters' lines to her. To have her instead of Lennox - plus the Macduffs' three children - turn up at Macbeth's castle with Macduff when Duncan has been murdered, and then again when Macduff is on his way to Fife instead of to Macbeth's coronation makes little sense. If his family are such suave travellers, why would he suddenly leave them behind when he heads off to England? The WOS ratings system only allows for whole stars, but I'd rate this at about 3.5 stars. - //Jenny | 23 Oct 07 |
| Quite simply one of the best interpretations of Shakespeare I've ever seen. There isn't a weak link in the casting; this is no star vehicle for Patrick Stewart. The modern setting works brilliantly. I cannot praise it more highly. How thriling to see 'Full House' signs and hear an audience cheer a Shakespeare play on an October Monday on Shaftsbury Avenue! - Gareth James | 16 Oct 07 |
| This is an exceptional production. Unusual staging and design which works incredibly well. The three witches in their dour, starched nurses outfits are evil personified. And I love the wicthes rap! The acting is to be commended. Chris Nolan as Seyton stood out along with the central performances from Patrick Stewart and in particular Kate Fleetwood who gave the performances of their lives. Dark, harsh, evil and compelling must see theatre! - Paul Wallis | 12 Oct 07 |
| Astonishingly good theatre. An exceptionally talented cast, stunning design and imagery, a fresh but nonetheless valid take on many key moments in the play... simply perfect. I never thought that a play so familiar to me would hold me in such thrall for 3 hours. I was exhausted by the final curtain. Go. Now. - KJC | 09 Oct 07 |
| Worst production I have ever seen.Dull,poorly acted.Patrick Stewart gives the worst performance I have seen from him.Utterly disappointed. - Richard Gill | 01 Oct 07 |
| Fantastic performance/production by everyone. This is "Macbeth" as you've never seen it before. Better get your tickets soon because once the reviews hit there will be none available for this limited-run production. - Terry Johnson | 25 Sep 07 |
| Seen from the front row of the intimate Minerva Theatre this play was totally entralling, fantastically acted, the best production I have seen for years. I feel sorry for anyone who does not have a ticket! - Sarah | 08 Aug 07 |
