I saw this after seeing the Tragedy of Macbeth from 2021 and the differences were stark. This was much more brooding and dark, but it still packed a cave goblin like punch at times. I felt there was more of a focus on Scotland and Macbeth. Perhaps it was Welles' ego? Regardless, it had moments, like Lady Macbeth and the outrageous viking like costumes / crowns. It was on youtube.

Weird crown, but okay. With any adaptation of a major literary work, the question inevitably becomes one of faithfulness vs. originality; virtually no subject matter receives more scrutiny that Shakespeare, with its long tradition of theatrical and cinematic versions alike and its retinue of purists who would scream in agony if minor grammatical alterations were made (which is funny given the major disparities in many plays published in early individual quartos vs. the First Folio). Into this dangerous territory walked Orson Welles, with a minor budget, recycled sets, off-the-rack costumes, and a shooting schedule of barely more than three weeks. What he came up with was subjected to forced alterations and was still lambasted, largely due to comparison to the Olivier Hamlet that was circulating at the same time. But its reputation has grown with time, with recognition given to the cinematography, Welles' maddened performance, and even to the changes made to the narrative to accomodate the medium. While it doesn't quite approach the style of Welles' adaptation of Othello, nor the power of his Chimes at Midnight, Macbeth is still quite impressive particularly given its practical production limitations. Half-convinced that the production team behind The Tragedy of Macbeth (2021) reviewed this Welles adaptation and had it in mind when casting Harry Melling as Macduff; Dan O'Herlihy, in the same role, bears striking similarities in his facial features. (3.5/5)

Without being too daring but being very personal, Welles' 'Macbeth' is a highly honourable adaptation of the play made by an expert. Its rustic, frightening, supernatural atmosphere beautifully fits the play, and Welles interprets a diabolical Macbeth. Furthermore, the budget constraints of the film do not only seem to make it suffer, they also seem to participate to its rough, wild style.

http://filmreviewsnsuch.blogspot.com/2016/08/welles-bard-trilogy-macbeth-othello.html

Near theatre-like, Wells adaption of Macbeth, presents in with vision and some rather near-perfect shots of the three witches, cursing thy formulas of the future. Like the serpents sting, death betrays the lust of kings.

well crafted version of this shakespeare tale

I saw this film many years ago as a teen, and loved it then, but saw it again for the first time in nearly 50 years, and my opinion hasn't changed. Since then, I've seen our own National Theater do it and seen Eric Porter do it on PBS, but this is till my favorite version. When Orson Welles was on top of his game as an actor and a director, no one could beat him. Every angle of every shot is artistic perfection and the black and white cinematography is mind blowing. Shakespeare on film just doesn't get any better than this! And the Christopher Welles playing MacDuff's son is Orson Welles oldest daughter. Yes, that's right--they named their daughter Christopher, her only film appearance ever.

Very good adaptation. The only problem is that, when you previously know the story, it is not the same. But that is not a fault from the movie, but from the spectator.

I was too distracted by the awful "scottish" accents to notice much else

creepy and violent. I love it!

Sparse in sets and content (some of the heavy trimming makes the story a bit difficult to follow) and hindered by the constantly noticeable ADR (the studio made them re-dub the movie to get rid of the thick Scottish accents Welles wanted the performers to speak in), but this is still an interesting rendition of Shakespeare.

A good and very well acted version of the Scottish Play, but not the 'definitive' version some claim. I still prefer the Jon Finch, Roman Polanski take from 1971.

It just doesn't sit very well. Yes it way have been filmed on a low budget but it is a bit bland.

An epic adaptation of the Shakespeare's tragedy. Its perfectly dark atmosphere, stunning camera movement and placement, rich visuals, powerful performances lead by the tremendous and fearful Orson Welles, amount to a truly memorable experience. Even though it may not be the best take on this famous, old tragic tale, it still is the most climatic and formidable one. It's not only a great adaptation, but also a fantastic auteur approach to Macbeth, courtesy of Mr. Welles. Though almost everyone knows the story, not everyone can imagine that it could be made with such play-like, vibrant, and also stunningly obscure, manner.

Orson Welles' career was in trouble after The Lady from Shanghai (1947) went over budget and was a flop in America, but even so, Welles was able to convince Republic Pictures to fund a film version of Shakespeare's Macbeth, but because of limited funds, Welles could only afford to use sets leftover from Westerns that Republic had made. It's a good adaptation, but it's very dark and despite being made on a shoestring, it's well made. In the wilderness of Scotland, three witches (Peggy Webber, Lurene Tuttle and Brainerd Duffield) make a prediction that Scottish captain Macbeth (Welles) will become King of Scotland, the currant king of Scotland, Duncan (Erskine Sanford) names Malcolm (Roddy McDowall) as his heir. Macbeth tells of the prediction of the witches to his wife Lady Macbeth (Jeanette Nolan), who urges him to kill Duncan and become King of Scotland. Macbeth does so and they frame Duncan's guards for the crime, however when Macduff (Dan O'Herlihy) comes to the castle, and see's what's happened, he instantly becomes suspicious of what really happened, while Lady Macbeth starts going insane. It's well made, despite the dodgy sets and costumes, (not Welles' fault), but it was all downhill here for him sadly, it has good performances, even though it was filmed in 23 days, with all the dialogue pre-recorded. It's a shame Welles' was exiled from Hollywood in the years that followed.

watchable and quite atmospheric, will galvanise me to watch other versions which should make interesting comparisons

this should be the version that they show in schools after reading the book, a very well done adaptation

This is the fever-dream version of the Scottish play -- expressionistic (although not at Caligari heights), with half-remembered lines and tortured soliloquies (performed entirely inside of the characters' heads). Dark and gloomy with heavy mist and sometimes heavy burrs (and sometimes not), the angst and horror settle in on Lady M and MacB pretty much right away -- Welles is his posturing self but the others sometimes do get lost in the jumble. Out, out, brief candle.

Welles is THE MAN. Seriously; his grim interpretation towards Shakespeare is a fantastically visionary one, plaguing the landscapes of a 12th-century Scotland with macabre settings and asphixiating shadows. Too bad his ambition became momentarily overwhelming, but the technical innovation present here make up for the minor flaws. When you watch a film by Orson Welles, you don't feel it's from the US; when you watch a Welles film of the 40s, it feels significantly ahead of its time. 96/100

Macbeth ou l'histoire d'un hà (C)ros qui sombre dans la folie suite à son ambition extrême. Mais aussi à cause des ravages causà (C)s par sa femme. Que dire sur cette version de Macbeth sinon que Welles appuie sur le côtà (C) psychologique des personnages, où l'on y voit un hà (C)ros entre ambition et dà (C)mesure, entre homme qui se rend compte qu'il va trop loin, mais que c'est la seule manière d'atteindre ses buts. Sa femme est à (C)galement celle qui semble être parfois l'inspiratrice du comportement de Macbeth. Ajoutez un cela un noir et blanc et une mise en scène absolument superbe et un Welles qui vit pour ce rôle. Pour moi, il y a encore un côtà (C) un peu trop thà (C)âtral et bavard par moment, là où des silences auraient pu être suffisants. Mais une broutille en comparaison des qualità (C)s.