Great version of the play, however I am just not a fan of Shakespeare's tragedies to begin with.

Some of the scenes are absolutely amazing, but the low-budget and sporadic shooting (;poor sound poorly synchronized, doubles shot from the back of the head, etc) detract from the artistic vision. Also . . . all the Christian versus pagan symbolism becomes a bit much after awhile.

I haven’t read many Shakespeare plays, but Macbeth has always been my favourite. It’s a really great and dark story. I thought this film was great. The atmosphere and mood that he presented especially was fantastic. It’s hard for me not to sort of tune out Shakespearean language sometimes, but it was all delivered beautifully. It’s the only adaptation of Macbeth I’ve really seen, but I’m prepared to declare it a brilliant one.

The phantasmagoric atmosphere is perfect: surreal, dreamlike majestic sets, swamps, shadow, fog... It's 'Macbeth' alright. I didn't like Nolan as Lady Macbeth, but the cast was overall very good and Welles was simply amazing, what an actor. Even though the photography is great there isn't much more to this than a neatly edited theatre production, but Welles of course brings the out best out of it.

Like 'The Departed,' I just couldn't get over the accents.

Disappointing.

Shakespeare is one of my roadblocks, I have too much difficulty processing the dense language. But I'll try to comment as best I can. Welles' version is quite visually arresting, but too often relies on low angles, perhaps to hide the inadequacy of the sets. Made on the cheap for Republic Pictures, the film strives for abstraction when it can't attain realism. Orson himself is not bad, but Jeanette Nolan makes a lousy Lady. I dunno, I've got nothing more to say. Again, not a big Shakespeare guy.

Absolutely Beautiful.

Hard to gauge because its limitations were all out of Welle's control; budget. Even the Scottish accents are mostly muddled by poor recording levels. Yet still it is an amazing and note worthy film.

Jeanette Nolan was awful as Lady Macbeth! The first murderer, Macduff's son, Malcolm and Seyton were all badly acted and Edgar Barrier as Banquo was a non-presence. It is overblown with the music needing to quiet down and with choices to make the film feel large scale taking away from potential for claustrophobia, horror or psychological intrigue found in the original script. I also thought the pace of the film is far too fast at the beggining. And that final crown - Statue of Liberty much?

The first time I sat down to watch Welles' version of Macbeth I lasted 20 minutes, sickened by the atypical accent and rhythm. I watched it last night with the subs on. I have concluded that a strange symbiosis has been found 'twixt the savagely adapted Scottish Play and the medium of film.

The visual bravura captures the play nicely and the photography deserves much praise. Very thoughtfully composed realization that still feels like an interesting mess. The essence is here, but perhaps the execution is too rushed and too reliant on atmosphere. Welles is a fine Macbeth but Jeannette Nolan is somewhere between brilliant and a disaster as the Lady.

Beautiful and haunting, a fantastic adaptation of one of Shakespeare's best plays. The changes Welles makes do not hurt the material; they sharpen its focus and make it more concise for a feature film. Again, the photography is stunning, and the minimalist sets give it a dreamlike impression.