We saw Ben Carlson (Macbeth) in Stratford Shakespeare Festival last year in Hamlet and were really excited to see him in Macbeth. We both enjoyed his performance and thought Karen Aldridge (Lady Macbeth) was wonderful. The whole cast was truly very good.
Now, as for the "modern" staging...it really didn't work for us. It was very over-the-top. The witches voice effects were especially hard to understand. The effects and staging over-powered the story. It's Shakespeare for crying out loud! It didn't need all the 'craziness' this production includes.

Overall, we liked it, didn't love it though.

The great thing about Chicago is that there are two more versions of Macbeth coming this year. Interested in seeing how those two versions fare.

report as inappropriate

• 0 Good To Know
• 0 I Like Your Writing
• 0 I Went And I Agree

I'm familiar with Macbeth from previous performances, and of course from reading the play itself. The lead characters' passion and eventual moral corruption and downfall leave a trail of blood and horror by the time the curtain falls, so obviously, I had an idea what to expect.

But I wasn't expecting this. And I don't mean that in a good way.

M. Gaines' production of "Comedy of Errors", which rightly won the Jeff last year, was a prime example of how directoral creativity can work well: a well scripted and acted outer envelope around the original work of Shakespeare, deliniated by the 'director' yelling "Action" or "Cut". And it wasn't just that it was a farce that made it more enjoyable to me - it was that it was simply well done, and made the actors, who were 'playing' actors, seem more real.

This version of Macbeth, however, left me feeling uneasy. No - it left me feeling downright disturbed at parts. While modern revisionism isn't something I take issue with (my favourite example: I once saw a version of "Love's Labours.." that was set in the 60's, with nehru jackets and Beatles-esque music), I felt that this production was disturbing just for the sake of shock value, just because it *could* be disturbing.

As mentioned by others, one of the key issues with this production is the voice-effect for the witches. Being familiar with the work, I knew what was going on, but I literally heard patrons all around me stating "I have no idea what they're saying." It's never a good idea to let your effects overshadow the dialogue.

I can appreciate the Macbeth heeds the Witches' warnings about MacDuff being a threat, and surprises his castle - the original source called for the decimation of his entire lineage (just like that of Banquo). What I don't appreciate is M. Gaines' need to portray a young boy being savagely murdered on stage, and crying out "Mommy!" as he falls dead. Worse still is when Macduffs' family are seen later while Lady Macbeth is sleepwalking, and they are strung up by the feet, hanging upside down, bloodied and butchered. This includes a young girl of perhaps 5 or 6. Purely, completely gratuitous.

These aspects, and others (a fetus being shown ripped from a witch's womb; the opening scene where an opposing soldier is cruelly, savagely gutted, etc) do not 'push the envelope' or make the play more memorable in a good way. Sadly, they reflect the MTV-ness that has become our culture. So sad that it has to be projected onto one of the Bards plays, and worse still, onto Navy Pier.

The acting was by and large wonderful, as it always is at this theater, in particular Karen Aldridge's "Lady Macbeth", Evan Buliung's "Macduff", and the subdued yet evocative performance by James Newcomb as "Ross". Mike Nussbaum absolutely steals the show with his (ad-libbed?) porter, who eventually makes his way to the pounding on the door, but still finds his palm empty despite his entreaties to not be forgotten.

The acting aside, however, I truly feel that this production was not of the same calibre as "Errors" or "Othello"Forgive me if I come across as a Luddite, but I was sorely disappointed.

Gare_NY

report as inappropriate

• 4 Good To Know
• 4 I Like Your Writing
• 5 I Went And I Agree

My wife and I walked out at intermission and would have left earlier. We did not want to disturb the show, so we waited. If you can avoid this show, then do so. I've seen Macbeth in a number of other venues and was disappointed at the acting, the staging, and just about everything. My wife an actress since she was 16 thought it was incredibly poor also.

report as inappropriate

• 2 Good To Know
• 0 I Like Your Writing
• 2 I Went And I Agree

this production of macbeth was confounding on a couple levels: the costuming & set were updated to reflect a modern/military setting, but i'm not sure to what effect. the use of "technology" was similiarly baffling - and i use that word in quotes because nothing was used that didn't already exist 40 years ago (i.e., projectors, voice distorters, video cameras). that being said, some of the actors could not have delivered shakespeare's language any finer; their ease with the language was a marvel to behold.

but why bother with the fatigues and gratituitous (and occassionally obscuring) sound effects? why insert media hounds and pole-dancers if you're not going to do anything interesting with them? despite a few stellar performances (notably the scene-stealing mike nussbaum as the porter), the whole production reeked of something a collegiate drama troupe would concoct given a box of dated technology and told to "reimagine" a shakespearean classic.

report as inappropriate

• 0 Good To Know
• 1 I Like Your Writing
• 2 I Went And I Agree