The beginning (act I scene I) of both Nunn's and Polanski's version of Macbeth are very different. As both the directors use different techniques. Nunn doesn't start of where the book version of Macbeth starts off, but instead Nunn starts his production by shining a white spotlight on a circle from above and then all the characters of the play move in around and towards the circle, which creates a really good effect, as it shows shadows closing and covering the circle as the characters movie in.
This is maybe because the director wanted to show you that Macbeth had spies everywhere and was listening to anything said in opposition to him. This idea at least keeps the viewer's mind in motion. Whereas in theatre you would view the whole stage in general so you don't feel that kind of intensity the producer was trying to capture. Television is an intermediary of entertainment to anyone watching it. This also applies to the working classes who are not that wealthy so instead can watch a production of Macbeth on television.
Good conclusions usually refer back to the question or title and address it directly - for example by using key words from the title.
How well do you think these conclusions address the title or question? Answering these questions should help you find out.
Do they use key words from the title or question?
Do they answer the question directly?
Can you work out the question or title just by reading the conclusion?
"In conclusion, this production was very different from Shakespeare's original text. This is what the directors' intention was. It was not accidental. I believe that the different and avant-garde style worked very well but I still think that there were some weaknesses such as Lady Macbeth's inability to show ambition, but overall I believe this production to be a success, especially for a young audience.
"In my opinion Roman Polanski's version is the better of the two, there is more of a symbolic meaning enforcing the thoughts of William Shakespeare. I enjoyed watching the Polanski version more, as the acting seems to be more 'natural' than the quality of acting in the Shakespeare Company's version. The only drawback to Polanski's version, I think is that he is not loyal to Shakespeare's original script and stage directions. If adhered to, Shakespeare's literary genius and Polanski's fantastic imagery could bind together to create a fantastic production of Macbeth.
James McLoughlin 12M"
"In conclusion, both Welles and Polanski have successfully achieved what Shakespeare had portrayed in the first scene of Macbeth. Both directors have adapted Macbeth very effectively to the screen. However, Polanski has created a more realistic setting, conveying that evil is everywhere. Welles has not achieved success with his unconvincing scenery. Both directors successfully portray the witches although in a different manner. Polanski keeps to the depiction of the witches by Shakespeare in that they are not dressed as traditional witches for the viewer's benefit. Polanski also imposes the intentions of Shakespeare to make his film truer to the original play, whereas, Welles utilises maximum artistic license to create his own vision of Macbeth."
Marked by a teacher
This document has been marked by one of our great teachers. You can read
the full teachers notes when you download the document.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student essay
reviewing squad. Read the full review on the document page.
This document has been reviewed by one of our specialist student document
reviewing squad. Read the full review under the document preview on this page.