To me, this movie is perfection.

Absolutely the worst movie.

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

I really appreciate the effort to make this film. Not many of The Bards masterpieces can be pulled off in a true modern adaptation like Baz Lurhmans 1996 Rome and Juliet. Some elements were creative, like using school girls for the Weird Sisters, and Narco Wars for feudal times. But did Lady MacBeth have to be coke fueled and barren? I found it a shame that they chose to omit the porter at the gate. These are the elements that give Shakespears work richness and timeliness. I hope Hollywood keeps trying to make modern versions of Shakespeares work. When they pull it off it's magnificent. I can envision Julius Caesar set in a modern capitol.

Bored isn't what I was expecting to be while watching this film. I love Macbeth. I've both read the play and have been in a production of it. It's a beautiful play with some of Shakepeare's finest soliloquies. I can sit through a production of Macbeth and still appreciate the language, this adaptation from Geoffrey Wright even butchers the language of the play. What we have is a relatively slim adaptation of Macbeth with much of its substance left out and grim scenes added in.I didn't expect a film adaptation to include everything. Wright however has taken the original text and edited it with a meat cleaver. So many scenes are barely there. The characters of Ross and Lennox are almost non existent and the Witches are mere props rather than characters. Wright takes the lines of the play and adds his own little changes to them. Well, he didn't realize that once he has done this that it ceases to be Shakespeare. I don't think any character in the film speaks in iambic pentameters for any length of time. What we get is an awkward transition from some lines lifted directly from the play and Wright's creations which include big words. Shakespeare isn't about big words it's about the language. The music of the play is completely gone in this Macbeth and it is painfully noticeable.What really got me though is Wright's inclusion of two scenes that Shakespeare wisely put off stage. We aren't supposed to see Macbeth murder Duncan or see Macbeth look over Lady Macbeth's corpse. Shakespeare could be violent,grimly violent, but these scenes are more effective in building the character of Macbeth if we don't see them. Implied violence is so much more effective than seeing the dagger pierce the skin. Shakespeare could have easily have written a scene where Macbeth murders Duncan, he doesn't and it's brilliant. We only see Macbeth drenched in blood obviously already regretting his sins and haunted by the world's eyes. Not only do we see Macbeth kill Duncan in this version but it is a grim scene. Macbeth stabs Duncan multiple times with a vicious fury. Does Macbeth want to be there? The scene doesn't let us see the turmoil in Macbeth's head. He was a good man turned evil by his ambition. That mental transition is the key to Macbeth and we simply don't get the full effect if we see Macbeth kill Duncan.Macbeth looking over his wife's corpse is detrimental to their relationship in the play. I've read Macbeth many times and I can't answer this question, "Do Macbeth and Lady Macbeth love each other?" I tend to think that maybe they don't but I come to a different conclusion every time. Lady Macbeth is obviously flirting with Duncan during their brief interaction together. Their relationship is complex. All Macbeth says when he hears of Lady Macbeth's death is "She should have died hereafter, there would have been time for such a word." The best soliloquy of the play is delivered immediately after but I think Macbeth's "tomorrow" speech is largely about himself. There isn't time for such a word and it seems almost detrimental to the pacing of the final act to see Macbeth lament over his wife. By this time in the story Macbeth has lost his sanity, love is one of the last things on his mind. Maybe he loved her once but by that moment of the play he is incapable of love.The mob setting is really the only new thing about this adaptation and I think it is kind of clever in terms of staging. In terms of storytelling though it hurts Macbeth. Macbeth is about a mans fall from good to evil, does this work in a gangland setting? Macbeth and Duncan are supposed to be moral men at the beginning. You lose that seeing them as criminals. Is it really so far fetched to expect a gang member to kill to advance himself? It really isn't all that shocking. The thought of a kinsman killing a king he loved to advance himself has much more dramatic tension. While I admit there are some cool staging, the gangland setting isn't original enough to cut down the actual Shakespeare for overlong gun battles.

i reckon people should give this film a bit more of a fair go really, sure the opening scene is confusing as hell unless your really paying attention and there are some awkward moments it still is a good adaptation of this famous Shakespeare play. The acting is mostly very good especially from Worthington who plays Macbeth and the Melbourne gangland setting is an interesting concept to me. the way they substituted certain parts of the play was interesting, for example, the bit where the burnam wood is removed to dunsinane (I've probably spelt that wrong) was intriguing, though using trucks to tow a forest to Macbeth's house seems like a bit of overkill in the plot which is where this movie goes wrong. The concepts are very interesting and intriguing but don't really work in many ways but do work in others so the film is left feeling a little odd. all in all, it is worth a red hot go but don't expect a masterpiece like romeo and Juliette by baz luhrman (i think I've spelt that wrong too).

A very hyped-up, slick, edgy reinterpretation.They've fallen into the "because it's modern, it has to be hyped-up, slick, etc." trap."Romeo and Juliet" carried this idea off much more successfully, but I really think it's time we move beyond the two extremes here (period piece vs. edgy film).Just because this is a "modern" retelling, doesn't mean the movie has to look like a magazine ad, or have anything to do with drugs or guns.If the trappings were as subtle as the honeyed words, Macbeth would be a far more powerful film. As it is, read your Shakespeare. Read it out loud. Ask your Oxford dictionary some questions. Skip the film. Or don't, but you've been warned.Sorry for the super-long review. IMDb made me do it.