Shakespeare Study: The Tragedy Of Macbeth (Part 1: Books)

This is the third year of my Shakespeare study. I read one play each month, and then watch as many film versions as I can get my hands on, and read as many books about the play as I'm able. June, 2012 was The Tragedy Of Macbeth. This blog entry has short blurbs about the books I read this month.  A separate blog entry will contain the film reviews.

Related Books:

- Macbeth edited and with an introduction by Harold Bloom  -  This is a volume in the Major Literary Characters series, and includes critical essays by A.C. Bradley, Elizabeth Nielsen, Carolyn Asp and several others, as well as shorter bits by Samuel Johnson, Victor Hugo, Sigmund Freud and James L. Calderwood, among others.  Freud writes, regarding the connection between Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, "namely, that the stirrings of fear which arise in Macbeth on the night of the murder, do not develop further in him, but in the Lady. It is he who has the hallucination of the dagger before the deed, but it is she who later succumbs to mental disorder; he, after the murder, hears the cry from the house: 'Sleep no more! Macbeth does murder sleep...', and so 'Macbeth shall sleep no more', but we never hear that King Macbeth could not sleep, while we see that the Queen rises from her bed and betrays her guilt in somnambulistic wanderings" (page 34).  Michael Goldman writes, "What is particularly important is that Macbeth's imagination is a moral imagination. The images it registers most vividly have to do with the moral status of Macbeth's acts and desires. It is especially sensitive to evil, and it confronts Macbeth with vivid and terrible pictures that express the moral repulsiveness of what he is doing" (page 72).  Elizabeth Nielsen writes, "Macbeth ruled Scotland from around 1040 A.D. to 1058 A.D., when he was killed and at which time the law of tanistry, in effect from 843 A.D., ended. The practice of this law meant that no son of a king on the throne could succeed his father immediately; instead, the first ranking adult member of the nearest or junior branch of the family should, by election, succeed the enthroned king, acting, until his own succession, as military leader of all the king's forces (as Macbeth did in the play), and, in turn, that king's successor would be the first ranking adult member of the preceding senior branch of the family. In other words, the line of succession was not direct but alternating and elective between the branches of the 'blood royal.' Now, both Macbeth and the woman who became Lady Macbeth were of the royal family and had claim to the throne through this law" (pages 125-126).  Later in the same essay, she writes, "Macbeth pleads with Macduff to fight with someone else, even explaining the prophecy to Macduff in order to persuade Macduff to desist" (page 130).  Carolyn Asp writes, "When Macbeth appears after the murder she calls him 'my husband,' the only time in the play she addresses him by that familiar title that emphasizes the sexual bond between them. It connotes a certain desired reliance on his strength, indicating that she is not as independent as the stress of her role demands. The staccato rhythm of her speech preceding and just after her husband's entrance betrays an anxiety that not even the wine can mitigate. It is only when she realizes that her husband is losing control that she resumes the dominant role she would much rather he played" (page 204).

- Macbeth  by Richard Andersen; introduction by Joseph Sobran  -  This book is part of the Shakespeare Explained series aimed at children.  And as far as Shakespeare books for children, this one is pretty good.  It gives a bit of background on Shakespeare, then goes through the play, scene by scene, offering a description of each and then an analysis.  Andersen writes, "And why is Banquo planning to go riding with no destination mentioned on the day of the great banquet? Could he be thinking about following Macduff's lead in boycotting the feast and, at the same time, covering himself if he decides to show up after the party is over?" (page 62).  Later he writes, "As for those eight kings lined up 'to the crack of doom,' some of them carry the three balls and two scepters that make up part of the royal insignia of Great Britain. The realization of this prophecy is reinforced by the king who carries the mirror. He not only creates, through its reflection, an infinite number of descendants from Banquo, but he can also reflect in the mirror the image of James I sitting in the audience" (page 70).  And then, "And just to drive home the point of how little influence the witches have had on Macbeth's spiraling descent, Shakespeare has Macbeth commit an act that the sisters are not even aware of: the senseless murder of Macduff's family" (page 85).  Published in 2009.

- Shakespeare And Macbeth: The Story Behind The Play  by Stewart Ross; illustrated by Tony Karpinski and Victor Ambrus; foreword by Kenneth Branagh  -  This book, aimed at children, focuses on the court performance of Macbeth. It also discusses a few of the changes that Shakespeare made to the story from the Holinshed chronicles, and briefly describes The Globe.  Published in 1994.

- William Shakespeare's Macbeth  edited and with an introduction by Harold Bloom  -  This volume in the Modern Critical Interpretations series includes critical essays by Harold C. Goddard, L.C. Knights, Maynard Mack Jr., Howard Felperin, Harry Levin and Robert N. Watson.  About the knocking scene, Harold C. Goddard writes, "At such performances of the play at least as I remember, the knocking is heard from the first as a clearly audible noise. This is an obvious mistake. What Macbeth hears is not Macduff and Lennox trying to awaken the Porter, but all the powers of hell and heaven knocking simultaneously at his heart. If the auditor is to feel it with Macbeth, he must hear it with him. His ear and heart, that is, must detect it before his mind. He must hear the sound in Macbeth's listening attitude, in the awe on his face, before the physical sound reaches his ear. He, like Macbeth, must be in doubt as to whether he has heard or only imagined" (pages 19-20).  He later writes, "Does Lady Macbeth faint, or only pretend to faint, following the discovery of the murder? The point has been much debateed. Everything she says or does in this scene is necessarily pretense. She is compelled by the situation to ape the symptoms of fear. But the acting by her body of an assumed fear is the surest way of opening a channel to the genuine fear she is trying to hide" (page 20).  Later in the same essay Goddard discusses the idea of Macbeth being the Third Murderer. One of the points he brings up is, "The Third Murderer's next speech is his longest. To the First Murderer's 'His horses go about,' he replies: 'Almost a mile; but he does usually -- /So all men do -- from hence to th' palace gate/Make it their walk.' Dashes, in place of the more usual commas, help bring out what is plainly a slip of the tongue on the Third Murderer's part. He has begun to reveal what in the circumstances is a suspicious familiarity with Banquo's habits, when, realizing his mistake, he hurriedly tries to cover it with his plainly parenthetical 'so all men do' an his consequently necessary substitution of 'their' for 'his.'" (page 25).  He also points out that "He is the first to recognize Banquo" (page 25) and "The Third Murderer is more perturbed than the others at the escape of Fleance" (page 25).  In relation to the Porter's scene (and specifically his line "I pray you remember the porter"), Howard Feperin writes, "That other play, which Wickham advances as Shakespeare's 'model for the particular form in which he chose to cast act 2, scene 3, of Macbeth, and possibly for the play as a whole,' is The Harrowing Of Hell in the medieval English mystery cycles...Between his crucifixion and resurrection, Christ comes to hell (represented as a castle on the medieval stage) and demands of Lucifer the release of the souls of the prophets and patriarchs. In all versions, the arrival of Christ is heralded by strange noises in the air and thunderous knocking at the castle gates. In the York and Towneley plays, the gate of hell has a porter appropriately named Rybald, a comic devil who breaks the news to Beelzebub of Christ's arrival and questions David and Christ himself as to his identity... the cyclic play of the Harrowing of Hell would have been easily evoked by the business of Macbeth, 2.3, in the minds of many in Shakespeare's audience who still remembered the porter. Moreover, the memory of the old play would strongly foreshadow the outcome of Macbeth as well, since Christ's entry into and deliverance of the castle of hell also looks forward to Macduff's second entry into Macbeth's castle and triumph over the demonic Macbeth at the end of the play" (pages 93-94).  About the end of the play, Howard Felperin writes, "Yet the scene is also an eerie and unsettling repetition of an earlier scene in the play. For Malcolm's language and gestures cannot help but recall those of Duncan after the victory over Cawdor and Macdonwald, a new era of freedom and love that proved only too fragile and temporary, anything but an apocalyptic triumph of good over evil" (page 105).  About Lady Macbeth, Robert N. Watson writes, "Her plea that the spirits 'unsex me,' according to a recent study, contains a specific request that her menstrual cycle be intermitted: 'Make thick my blood,/Stop up th' access and passage to remorse,/That no compunctious visitings of nature/Shake my fell purpose'" (page 154).  Published in 1987.

- Macbeth: A Guide  by Alistair McCallum  -  This is a volume in The Shakespeare Handbooks series. McCallum goes through the entire play, scene by scene, and also offers bits of other information here and there, as well as short passages on the play by other authors.  Regarding the Porter and the bit about "equivocation," McCallum offers this: "The Gunpowder Plot - the unsuccessful attempt to blow up King James I and Parliament, prevented at the last minute on November 5th, 1605 - was at the forefront of the public mind at the time of Macbeth. The religious activist on his way to Hell is almost certainly a topical reference to Father Garnet, an English Jesuit priest hanged in 1606 for complicity in the plot. At Father Garnet's trial, there had been lengthy argument about the permissibility of 'equivocation,' the use of ambiguous, misleading language in order to avoid outright lying. Most observers were outraged at the defendant's attempts to escape the charge of perjury by claiming the right to equivocate" (page 38).  And regarding the brief moment with the Doctor in the scene with Malcolm and Macduff, McCallum writes, "The 'King's Evil' was the name given to scrofula, a disfiguring disease of the lymph glands in the neck. The belief that the monarch's touch could cure it lasted from the reign of Edward the Confessor until well into the 18th Century. Many scholars believe that the brief episode mentioning King Edward's ability to heal the Evil was inserted specially, as an indirect compliment, for a performance of Macbeth given before King James I in 1606" (page 67).

- A Macbeth Production  by John Masefield  -  In this book, John Masefield offers advice to a hypothetical group of players on the staging of the play. Masefield is one of those who believes that Shakespeare's original text was much longer than the version we have now. He writes, "The text, as it came from him, must have been of a sublime excess, at least seven hundred lines longer than the play preserved to us" (page 8). I'm not sure where he came up with that figure, but he writes, "I suspect that a wonderful scene has gone from the beginning of Act III; to mark the division made by the murder between Macbeth and his Wife, each being ruined by it so differently. One can speculate upon its nature; and upon the reasons for its cutting. Burbage may not have liked it, as being a little too like madness. The appearance of the third murderer to deal with Banquo is a little odd. Then, beyond all doubt, a scene of Macduff has gone. The turning of Macduff against Macbeth is of the utmost importance to the play. Holinshed is clear upon the point; Shakespeare, who is usually sunlight upon his points, is not clear here" (page 16).  Masefield also omits Act III Scene v from this hypothetical production because it is, as he argues, "not by Shakespeare" (page 54).  Masefield makes some interesting points (though adds commas when they are not needed).  Such as, regarding the scene following Duncan's murder, "When they enter the scene, there are shall we say, from three to seven principal followers of Duncan on the stage. Each one of these knows, that Malcolm was named by Duncan, in Act One, Scene Four, as his heir. Not one of them, not even the loyal Banquo, makes any attempt whatsoever to hail him as King, now that Duncan is dead" (page 46). Regarding Macduff and Lady Macduff, he writes, "I do not doubt that in the full draft of the play, he debated with his wife the policy of going and had her full approval. Her outcry against him to Rosse, in the beginning of this scene, is surely to divert suspicion form herself. She knows, very well, the secret, bloody treachery of Macbeth; she knows that spies are everywhere and that Rosse may be one" (pages 56-57). Written in the forties, this book is clearly colored by World War II, as shown by the general tone, but also often in direct mention. For example, "You have lived through a time of atrocious, wholesale slaughterings, when a few criminal lunatics have made their once respected nations like themselves" (page 46).  And, "As your audience, like yourselves, will know something of war, the movements in these scenes must be soldierly" (page 60). Published in 1946.

- There Is Nothing Like A Thane: The Lighter Side Of Macbeth  Compiled and Illustrated by Clive Francis  -  This is a collection of anecdotes about various productions of Macbeth. Early in the book is mentioned the probable first performance, on August 7th, 1606 in Hampton Court, where "The evening started badly anyway when Hal Berridge, the boy playing Lady Macbeth, was taken ill and suddenly died backstage - according to James Aubrey Shakespeare had no choice but to take over the part himself. Thus the curse of Macbeth was born, and with it a whole portfolio of theatrical superstitions, many of which are sitll rigidly obeyed to this very day" (page 8).  Is this true? I've never heard that.  Published in 2001.

- Shakespeare In Performance: Macbeth  by Bernice W. Kliman  -  This book focuses on a few specific performances of Macbeth, both on stage and on screen. In the first chapter, Kliman writes, "Aside from familiarity with the actors, Shakespeare's audience would have had another advantage over modern audiences. At least some among them would have been aware, as few audiences can have been since, of the irony of Macbeth's fear of Banquo's progeny...Those familiar with broadsides of the Stuart Genealogy or with Holinshed's Chronicles would have known that many generations would pass before a descendant of Banquo (Robert Stuart, grandson of King Robert Bruce) was elected to the throne of Scotland in 1371... The audience's knowledge wuld have made ridiculous Macbeth's anxiety about Banquo's heirs who, it seems he imagines, will push him off the throne. The witches do not prophesy a fruitless crown for Macbeth; he simply assumes so" (page 10).  In the chapter on Trevor Nunn's production, Kliman writes, "In the scene of the revelation of Duncan's murder, Shakespeare has left directors with an interpretive crux about Malcolm's and Donalbain's decision to run away (II.iii.121). Unless the thanes immediately treat them with suspicion, their departure is strange. The sole clue that Shakespeare provides is that no one speaks anything comforting and no one hails Malcolm as king, though he had been named heir. Instead, the men are going to convene in the hall as if an election is to take place" (page 108).

- The Tragedy Of Macbeth Part II: The Seed Of Banquo  by Noah Lukeman  -  This is a serious attempt at a sequel to Shakespeare's play, not a parody or anything like that.  It takes place ten years after the events in Macbeth. The child that is hinted at by Lady Macbeth in Macbeth lives and is a grown woman, having never known her parents. Malcolm falls for her, and decides to marry her.  He says she'll be called "Lady Malcolm."  But isn't Malcolm his first name?  Syna, Seyton's daughter, plays a Lady Macbeth-type role, even speaking her lines. She says, "Never shall sun that morrow see!" (page 51), directly quoting Lady Macbeth from Act I Scene v. This sequel contains many direct references to lines from Macbeth.  The Nurse (yes, there is a nurse) says, "I am yet but young in deed" (page 66), echoing Macbeth's "We are yet but young in deed" from Act III Scene iv.  Lukeman even has the witches say, "By the pricking of our thumbs, something wicked this way comes," but they say it to Malcolm, and it's their last line of the scene.  And the scene in fact ends one line later, so it doesn't really make any sense.  Lukeman has the Porter make an appearance, and even the same Doctor.  The Doctor says, "And I, anywhere but here. Farewell, Dunsinane. Your walls I pray to never see again."  Ten years earlier he said, "Were I from Dunsinane away and clear/Profit again should hardly draw me here" (Act V Scene iii). So he's always deciding to leave, I guess.  This play is an interesting attempt and exercise, but is not much more.  Published in 2008.

- Twentieth Century Interpretations Of Macbeth  edited by Terence Hawkes  -  This book is a collection of critical essays on Macbeth. This volume seems to have a lot of critics disputing the work of previous critics, rather than offering their own original thoughts. But still, there are some interesting points.  J. Middleton Murry writes regarding the line "screw your courage to the sticking place," "When you turn the little wooden screw on a violin - in those days it was a lute or viol - to tighten a string, your fingers feel delicately for 'the sticking-place,' where the screw is tight and the string is taut; and you feel for it with a faint and subtle apprehension lest the string should snap. That is Shakespeare's figure and that is what Lady Macbeth has been doing to her soul, and by her example to her husband's" (page 24). Eugene M. Waith writes,, about Lady Macbeth's death, "Here we are confronted by the supreme irony that when she dies, tortured by the conscience she despised, Macbeth is so perfectly hardened, so completely the soldier that she wanted him to be, that he is neither frightened by the 'night-shriek' nor greatly moved by the news of her death" (page 66). R.S. Crane writes, "so that he acts in the end as the Macbeth whose praises we have heard in the second scene of the play. And I would suggest that the cathartic effect of these words and acts is reinforced indirectly, in the representation, by the analogy we can hardly help drawing between his conduct now and the earlier conduct of young Siward, for of Macbeth too it can be said that 'he parted well and paid his score'; the implication of this analogy is surely one of the functions, though not the only one, which the lines about Siward are intended to serve" (page 73). By the way, this may be the worst first sentence for a critical essay ever: "I propose to attempt to illustrate the view that Macbeth may be understood as 'the imitation of an action,' in approximately Aristotle's sense of this phrase" (page 67). It is certainly the weakest, with "propose," "attempt," "the view," "may," "approximately."  Geez, Francis Fergusson, make a bloody statement. Published in 1977.

- Macbeth Did It  by John Patrick  -  This play is a comedy about a community theatre putting on a production of Macbeth. It takes us through auditions, casting, rehearsals, and right up to opening night, focusing on all the problems of putting on community theatre.  There are also a couple of brief references to Hamlet.  The character Jill (the assistant to the theatre director) quotes from that play: "To be or not to be. That is the question."  And then again at the end: "Goodnight, Sweet Prince."  Published in 1972.

- Macbeth  by Ken Hoshine  -  This is a volume in the No Fear Shakespeare Graphic Novels series.  The illustrations are in black and white, and are pretty good. The problem is that the text is often changed from what Shakespeare wrote, presumably to make it easier for idiots to understand. But what that means is that most of the poetry is removed, and at times that the meaning is lost or changed.  Lines that could have several interpretations end up with only one if the writer rewrites the line.  For example in Act I Scene iii, after being named Thane of Cawdor, Macbeth says, "The greatest is behind."  In this graphic novel, Macbeth says, "And the best part of their prediction is still to come."  In Act I Scene v, Lady Macbeth's "unsex me" is changed to "take away my womanhood."  In Act I Scene vii, Lady Macbeth's line "But screw your courage to the sticking-place,/And we'll not fail" becomes "Just lock your courage to your crossbow, and we can't fail" (page 41), a very strange choice.  Rather than making the choice between "scotched" and "scorched," the line becomes "We have slashed the snake, not killed it" (page 90).  And Macbeth's most famous speech, in this book, becomes, "She shouldn't have died so soon - I should have heard this news some other time! Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow... Our days creep by until the end of time, lighting the way to death like candles leading us to bed. Out, out, brief candle! Life is but a walking shadow, a poor actor that struts and worries during his hour on stage and then is never heard from again. Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of noise and clamor but devoid of meaning" (page 178). Why the fuck would you change those lines?  And besides, choosing one interpretation of those first lines precludes the readers from interpreting it on their own.  Published in 2008.

- The Farndale Avenue Housing Estate Townswomen's Guild Dramatic Society's Production Of Macbeth  by David McGillivray and Walter Zerlin Jnr.  -  This play is a comedy about an amateur production of Macbeth. It begins just before the play is about to start, and ends just after it, so basically the entire play is people putting on Macbeth. Thus, we get a large amount of the text. But because of odd cuts, it's difficult to see how much the audience is intended to be able to follow the action of the play.  And how familiar with Macbeth does this assume its audience to be? For example after the murder of Duncan, Macbeth says, "This is a sorry sight." Lady Macbeth takes his hand, and then says, "My hands are of your colour." So she gets blood simply from touching his hands, rather than the whole business with the daggers. But is the audience supposed to be aware of the cut?  And should the audience be paying more attention to the silliness in the wings, or to the action of Macbeth? You would think the former, except that they go through the entirety of Macbeth. However, the end of Macbeth comes abruptly, the last line from it being "Lay on, Macduff, And damn'd be him that first cries, 'Hold, enough!'" So after seeing so much of Macbeth, to not get the end seems frustrating. The comedy is the usual stuff of missed cues and the like that comes with the territory of amateur productions. No new ground is covered, and it doesn't really lead anywhere.  Published in 1984.

- Nightshriek  by Trisha Ward  -  This is a musical play based on Macbeth, and actually uses a surprising amount of the actual text.  The first scene combines the first two witch scenes, with lines directly from Shakespeare's play.  In this version, Macbeth requests Duncan's presence in his home.  In this adaptation, it's really entirely Lady Macbeth's idea to kill Duncan - Macbeth fights her on it repeatedly.  The dagger appears after Macbeth has killed Duncan, which doesn't really make sense. Lady Macbeth's line, "What, in our house?" is changed to "What, in this place?" - a weaker line. The Murderer does not come to tell Macbeth the outcome, that Banquo is dead, but Fleance escaped. So that makes it seem that Banquo's Ghost is real, since Macbeth doesn't know for sure that he's dead. There's a scene where Macduff tells his wife he has to leave, and Lady Macduff even gets a song (and later a second song with her son).  Oddly, the famous line is changed to "By the pricking of my thumbs something evil this way comes." Why change that one word?  Also odd is that this adaptation includes a reference to Hitler (Macduff sings, "He is like a mini-Hiter"). The sleepwalking scene leads to Lady Macbeth's song, at the end of which she dies. Macbeth's famous "tomorrow" speech is left completely intact, which is great. By the way, the play's title comes from a speech just a bit before the "tomorrow" speech: "The time has been, my senses would have cool'd/To hear a night-shriek" (Act V Scene v). However, that speech is not included in this musical. Published in 1988.

Shakespeare Study: The Tragedy Of Macbeth (Part 2: Films and Television Programs)

This is the third year of my Shakespeare study. I read one play each month, and then watch as many film versions as I can get my hands on, and read as many books about the play as I'm able. June, 2012 was The Tragedy Of Macbeth. This blog entry has reviews of the film versions, as well as a list of some films and television programs that contains references to Macbeth.

Blurbs about the books that I read about Macbeth are in a separate blog entry.

Film Versions:

- Macbeth (1983) with Nicol Williamson, Jane Lapotaire, Ian Hogg, Tony Doyle, Mark Dignam; directed by Jack Gold.  This painfully bad film version suffers the most from its cast.  Nicol Williamson as Macbeth and Jane Lapotaire as Lady Macbeth are particularly horrendous.  You remember in school when you were taught iambic pentameter, and the teacher made you read it like da-dum, da-dum, da-dum, da-dum, da-dum?  And then it took a while to realize that while you keep the rhythm, you never actually speak the lines in such a pointed manner.  Well, someone should have told Nicol Williamson that.  There is a scene where he actually says the lines like da-dum, da-dum, da-dum.  It's ridiculous.  You can clap along to it if you'd like. He does it three separate times. As bad as his performance is, Jane Lapotaire's is worse.  When we first meet Lady Macbeth, she is reading the letter from her husband.  Jane Lapotaire's reading is so odd; it's like she has it partly memorized, though it's a letter she's just received.  Also, her breathy delivery becomes annoying very quickly.  And please tell Jane Lapotaire that "unsex me" does not mean "fuck me."  She lies on the bed on her back with her legs open on that line, taking a submissive pose, when really the line means that she wants to assume strength. Bitch, if you don't know what a word means, look it up. She is terrible. Macbeth's aside "Glamis, and Thane of Cawdor/The greatest is behind" is done as voice over (which you would think would set a pattern, but no).  Macbeth faces us for the "dagger" speech, which places the phantom dagger in our hands, basically - an odd choice.  The bit where Lady Macbeth is pulling (and then pushing) Macbeth to get him to move after they hear the knocking is so laughable, you have to see it to believe it. It's Macbeth, the comedy. (And then she re-enacts that silliness during the sleepwalking scene - oh boy.) Macbeth's delivery of "To be thus is nothing" is so over the top, I burst out laughing. But it's not nearly as funny as the abrupt end of his speech when interrupted.  In this version, the third murderer murders the first and second after their botched attempt to murder Fleance, something that Shakespeare did not write (in fact, in the next scene it's supposed to be the first murderer that talks with Macbeth).  In this version, Banquo's Ghost does not appear, at least not to us. We see an empty chair, not what Macbeth sees (though Shakespeare fully intended us to see Banquo in that scene, as shown by the stage direction "Enter the Ghost of Banquo").  Heccat is cut from Act IV Scene i.  The Apparitions from that scene do not appear; instead they are simply voices that we hear while forced to watch a closeup of Macbeth trying to act. There are some good things in this production.  Not every performance is awful.  For example, Ian Hogg is good as Banquo, and John Woodnutt is good as Doctor. And the Witches are pretty good. The deaths of Lady Macduff and her son are done well. There are some nice shots. I like the shot of the portcullis coming down; it's a nice image. And there are some nice camera moves.  We don't see Macbeth's death.  And what's with the weird cliffhanger ending? Geez. (time: 148 minutes)

- The Tragedy Of Macbeth (1971) with Jon Finch, Francesca Annis, Martin Shaw, Terence Bayler, Diane Fletcher, Ian Hogg; directed by Roman Polanksi.  This version of Macbeth is pretty wild, and suffers only from abundant use of voice over. In the opening scene, the three witches bury a noose and a severed hand with a dagger in the sand at a beach.  One of the witches is younger, which is cool.  There are sounds of battle over the opening credit sequence.  Act I Scene iii begins with Macbeth's line "So foul and fair a day I have not seen," thus cutting the witches' lines at the beginning.  One of the witches flashes Macbeth.  Macbeth's aside, "Glamis, and Thane of Cawdor;/The greatest is behind" is done as voice over, as is his next aside, "This supernatural soliciting/Cannot be ill, cannot be good..."  We see the execution of Cawdor right before Malcolm's line, "Nothing in his life became him/Like the leaving of it."  After Lady Macbeth reads the letter, her lines are done as voice over. After that, we go back to Scene iv for the entrance of Macbeth and Banquo. We see Macbeth's household preparing for Duncan's arrival. Lady Macbeth's speech that starts "The raven himself is hoarse" is moved to just before Duncan's arrival, and is done as voice over as she watches his approach.  (As I said, there is so much voice over in this film.)  During the feast, Macbeth does his "If it were done, when 'tis done, then 'twere well/It were done quickly" speech as voice over as he's seated next to the king, up through "We'd jump the life to come." He continues it later, away from the table, but still most of it as voice voer.  Lady Macbeth's lines about dashing the brains out of the infant are surprisingly cut.  Macbeth's "Bring forth men-children only" is oddly done as voice over, while Lady Macbeth dances with the king.
Fleance is quite young in this production. After Macbeth asks, "Is this a dagger which I see before me," we see the dagger. Its point is embedded in a physical object, not in the air. But then it vanishes, and reappears in the air, and leads Macbeth a few steps.  In this production, we see the murder of Duncan, something performed off stage in the play.  Macbeth hesitates, and Duncan wakes.  And that's when he does the deed.  We see the grooms wake, and find themselves covered in blood, confused.
In Act III Scene i, Banquo's speech is done as voice over while Macbeth is being made king. After Banquo's death, there is a shot of bear-baiting (presumably so we'll understand the reference later). The first and second murderers are dispatched after the first gives Macbeth the news of Banquo's death and Fleance's escape.  The Ghost of Banquo is pretty cool, especially the momet he's first revealed.  Act III Scene v is cut.  Act III Scene vi is cut.
Act IV Scene i begins with "By the pricking of my thumbs/Something wicked this way comes." There are many witches this time, all naked.  After Macbeth's entrance they all chant the famous lines that should have started the scene ("Double, double, toil and trouble").  It is seriously creepy.  The death of Lady Macduff's son is done fairly well. And we see others slain, as Lady Macduff sees them.
It goes right from that to Act V Scene i. Lady Macbeth is naked during her sleepwalking scene. The film then goes back to Act IV Scene iii, beginning with "our country sinks beneath the yoke." This scene then leads to Act V Scene ii.  Then back again to Act V Scene iii, beginning with the entrance of the servant.  Macbeth's "I have liv'd long enough" speech is done as voice over.  Lady Macbeth takes out the letter and reads it again. That leads to Act V Scene v ("Hang out our banners"). The beginning and end of Macbeth's famous speech is spoken alound, but from "Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow" through "the way to dusty death" is done as voice over. Macbeth's line "But get thee back, my soul is too much charg'd/With blood of thine already" is moved a bit later - he is about to kill Macduff, but says that line and stops.  There is a short scene at the witches' lair tacked onto the end for some reason.  (time: 140 minutes)

- Macbeth  (1979) with Ian McKellen, Judi Dench, John Brown, Ian McDiarmid, Roger Rees, John Woodvine; directed by Trevor Nunn.  This production boasts an obviously excellent cast.  In fact, the only somewhat weak performance is that by Griffith Jones as Duncan.  At the opening, the entire cast is in a large circle.  The witches the move to the center.  After that, there isn't really a set.  There is no scenery.  So the focus is on the performances, on the language. Apart from the actors, most everything is in darkness.  Macbeth's aside, "Glamis, and Thane of Cawdor/The greatest is behind" is spoken to us, directly to the camera.  Lady Macbeth (Judi Dench) kneels on the floor when calling on the spirits.
In Act II Scene i, Macbeth puts his hand on Fleance's shoulder in a seemingly friendly gesture. Macbeth closes his eyes during the "dagger" speech just before "I see thee still."  An interesting choice.  Then he opens them againbefore "There's no such thing."  The Porter (Ian McDiarmid) does his routine directly to us.
Act III Scene i begins with Macbeth being crowned. After Macbeth dismisses everyone, Lady Macbeth approaches him lovingly, and he directs his line, "While then, God be with you" to her, effectively dismissing her too.  We don't see Banquo's Ghost; rather, the camera is between two guests, where Banquo would be, and Macbeth looks toward the camera.  Act III Scene v is cut.
In Act IV the "double, double" bit is sung almost like a holy song in a church - interesting.  The apparitions don't appear.  Instead, the witches themselves say the lines of the apparitions, which removes a great deal of the supernatural element.  Macbeth is blindfolded, and so we don't see the lines of kings.  They're simply in his imagination.  Lady Macduff's son says, "As birds do, mother," and then goes right to "My father is not dead, for all your saying."  Thus, several lines are cut - all the lines about birds.  So it's odd that the first line, "As birds do," is left in.  Lady Macduff's lines, "But I remember now..." are delivered directly to the camera.  The Doctor is cut from Scene iii.
In Act V, Lady Macbeth is heartbreaking during the sleepwalking scene.  Oddly, the bit with Macbeth and Young Siward is cut.  So we don't see Macbeth acting fearlessly.  It's the only really bad cut in this production. Macduff enters with a bloody dagger, but not with Macbeth's head, as indicated in the text.  (time: 146 minutes)

- Macbeth  (2010) with Patrick Stewart, Kate Fleetwood, Michael Feast, Martin Turner, Polly Frame; driected by Rupert Goold.  This is a truly interesting production with some excellent performance, especially by Patrick Stewart as Macbeth. It is a more modern setting. It opens with old war footage mixed in with shots of a hospital, and it's at the hospital that we get the first line: "What bloody man is that?" (which is from Scene ii).  It's an underground hospital, and the sounds of war are audible.  There is some deliberately shaky camera work.  The Captain speaks while nurses work on him.  The Captain then flatlines, and the nurses are revealed to be the three witches, and they then do the first scene.  It's pretty awesome. Then back to Scene ii, with the entrance of Ross and Angus. It's an underground bunker, and is wonderfully creepy.  Macbeth and Banquo go down in an elevator, where they discover the witches, still dressed as nurses.  Macbeth's lines "Glamis, and Thane of Cawdor/The greatest is behind" are spoken to Banquo, not as an aside.  We see Cawdor executed. He is seated on a chair with a bag over his head, and his execution is quick - a bullet to the head.  So the next lines about "nothing in his life became him/Like the leaving of it" ring as lies, which is an interesting choice.  Lady Macbeth, in Scene v, is in an elevator. Her reading of the letter is done as voice over. When she begins to speak aloud, she seems very much the villain.  Macbeth's lair is introduced as another bunker, not a castle (though later it is shown to be a castle)  Scene vi takes place in the kitchen. Duncan enters while food is being prepared and still says, "This castle hath a pleasant seat." Banquo's lines, however, are cut.  Three of the kitchen workers are revealed to be the witches, so they are much more of a presence in this production.
An exterior night shot begins Act II - a surprise, but merely an establishing shot.  The first scene is in the kitchen.  Macbeth holds the diamond out in front of him, which then gives way to the "dagger" speech. He faces the camera during the sppech.  There is another exterior shot when the Porter is speaking - the same shot, but with a car driving away. And then an interior of the car, with Macduff and his family (which is odd, because isn't he outside knocking?).  It's a strange choice to include his family. Lennox is not there, so Lady Macduff has his lines. It works.  Actually, her son has one of the lines Lennox should speak.  But then Lennox enters, in time to look in on Duncan.  In this production, Lady Macbeth's faint is clearly a tactic, not a true faint.  Scene iv is actually outside.
At the beginning of Act III, Banquo's speech is done in a room with a large banner depicting Macbeth.  Then we have an exterior shot for the next part of the scene. Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are on horseback. Macbeth delivers his line "While then, God be with you" directly to Lady Macbeth, dismissing her.  He says "are called all by the name of dogs" rather than "are clipt all."  In Scene ii, Lady Macbeth now seems frightened of Macbeth.  The murder of Banquo is done on a train, which doesn't really make any sense, as Banquo said he was going riding.  The Third Murderer shoots the Second. Banquo then gets up, now a Ghost.  The three witches serve at the banquet. When Lennox indicates the empty chair, Macbeth actually sits on it. And then Banquo's Ghost enters from behind Lady Macbeth and steps up onto the table.  There is an odd dance in this scene.  Act III Scene v is cut.  Scene vi is weird. The Lord is instead Ross, and he is seated on a chair in a hallway (as Cawdor was), as if about to be interrogated. Lennox punches him in the face, then aims a gun at him when asking "Sir, can you tell/Where he bestows himself?"  A strange interpretation of this speech, which seems to me full of sarcasm and odd humor.  This production ends the scene with Ross saying, "Lives in the English court." Lennox then rushes off, leaving Ross alone.
In Act IV, the witches do their scene almost like a rap song. They're once again in nurse's outfits and are sort of dancing around three bodies. But, oddly, there is no cauldron bubbling. As for the apparitions, they are the bodies on the tables, but it is the witches who speak for them. But the second isn't a child. And the first and third never are properly shown, so we don't get the hint of the child carrying a tree.  But we do get the line of eight kings, the children. And the eighth does hold the mirror, and the Ghost of Banquo follows.  All of Lady Macduff's children are present, so the girl is given the line, "Nay, what will you do for a husband?" (the actual line is "Nay, how will you do for a husband?").  Macbeth is there along with the murderers, but once they enter, the rest of the dialogue is cut, and we don't see the son killed.  Oddly, we do get a shot of Ross discovering the bodies (this gives his line "They were well at peace when I did leave 'em" a different connotation). The Doctor is cut from Scene iii.
In Act V, the sleepwalking scene is really good.  The role of Seyton is one of the weaker performances; his reading of "The queen, my lord, is dead" is awful. The Messenger starts his line "The wood began to move," but Macbeth actually says it in this production.  Young Siward has a knife with which he threatens Macbeth, but Macbeth simply shoots him rather than fight him.  Macbeth shoots Macduff, but doesn't kill him. He goes to shoot him again on "Yet I will try the last," but his gun is empty.. So they fight with daggers. Macbeth gets the best of Macduff, and is about to kill him, when the three witches enter. Macbeth sees them and says "Enough." And we hear Macduff kill Macbeth as the witches exit. Macduff does carry Macbeth's head, which is odd considering they didn't fight with swords but with small blades - it must have taken him a while to cut it off.  (time: 159 minutes)

- Shakespeare The Animated Tales: Macbeth (1992) with Brian Cox, Zoe Wanamaker, Patrick Brennan, Clive Merrison; screenplay by Leon Garfield; directed by Nikolai Serebryakov.  Voice over begins this production, giving a bit of brief back story. The witches are great. Act I Scene i is before the the title card. Then we see the battle scene, which goes right into Duncan's speech in which the Thane of Cawdor is sentenced to die. Scene iii begins with Banquo's lines. Macbeth's aside, "Glamis, and Thane of Cawdor/The greatest is behind" is done as voice over, as is "The Prince of Cumberland! that is a step/On which I must fall down, or else o'er-leap..."  When Lady Macbeth reads the letter, we actually hear Macbeth's voice in voice over. Her other lines are done as voice over. While Duncan eats, Lady Macbeth does her "unsex me" speech. And Macbeth does his speech, but the beginning is cut. It starts with, "He's here in double trust," and is done as voice over.
Act II begins with Macbeth's line to the servant, thus cutting Banquo and Fleance. We see the dagger during the "dagger" speech. It is like a shaft of light aimed down. The Porter is cut. Cut are the lines in which Macbeth says he killed the two grooms. Scene iv is cut.
Act III begins with Macbeth being crowned. Scene iii is cut, but we see it during Scene iv when the Murderer gives his news. The second time Macbeth sees Banquo's Ghost, it is in his wine glass. Scenes v and vi are cut.
Macbeth's line "I am in blood/Stepp'd in so far..." from Act III Scene iv is given at the beginning of Act IV as he goes to the witches.  The apparitions are basically as described in the text, rising from the cauldron. The line of kings, however, is cut. The murders of Lady Macduff and her children are shown briefly while we hear Macbeth give the order. Most of Scene iii is cut, the scene beginning with Macduff's line "My children too?"
Act V begins with Lady Macbeth's line "Out, damned spot!" The Doctor and Gentlewoman are cut, so it's not completely clear that Lady Macbeth is sleepwalking. Scene ii is cut. So is Scene iii.  The "tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow" speech is done as voice over, and ends with the line, "Out, out, brief candle" (thus cutting the most famous lines of the play).  Scene vi is cut.  The fight between Macbeth and Young Siward is cut. Oddly, the line "Out, out, brief candle" is spoken again as Macbeth's head is lifted on the sword. Then, also oddly, the production ends with the Old Man saying, "God's benison go with you, and with those/That would make good of bad, and friends of foes!" (from Act II Scene iv).  (time: 26 minutes)

- Throne Of Blood  (1957) with Toshiro Mifune, Isuzu Yamada, Minoru Chiaki, Akira Kubo; directed by Akira Kurosawa.  This adaptation obviously moves the location from Scotland.  It begins with messengers giving the king news of the battle, first dire, then good.  As Washizu (the Macbeth character in this production) and Miki (Banquo) make their way to the castle, they become lost and find a hovel. Inside is one witch (rather than three), singing. She tells Washizu he's Lord of the North Garrison, and one day will be Sovereign, and that Miki is commander of First Fortress and that one day his son will rule.  She then disappears.  When they arrives at the castle, Washizu is made Lord of the North Garrison and Miki is made commander of First Fortress.  In this version, when Washizu has decided not to pursue his evil dream, Asaji (the Lady Macbeth character) points out that Miki could tell the Lord of the spirit's prophecy. She warns him that the Great Lord will saly him if that happens.  Suddenly the Great Lord and his men approach. He will stay there in order to attack Inui, who betrayed him during the battle.  Asaji doesn't seem at all loving in this production. She is played bery still, and often looking forward, rather than connecting with Washizu (though she does face him at times).  She says she'll get the sake (with sleeping potion) to give the guards, and Washizu is silent - an excellent moment, in which he agrees through his silence. Asaji even hands Washizu the weapon with which to kill the Great Lord.  Then the camera remains on her while he is gone (another incredible moment). Suddenly she seems frighted, and Washizu returns with the spear. Without any dialogue, Asaji takes the spear and puts it by the guards. She then returns and washes her hands. It is Asaji who shouts that there are intruders. We then see Washizu stab the guard, while saying "Traitor."  The Prince immediately suspects Washizu (which is not in the play) and that is why he decides to flee, along with Noriyasu. They go to the castle where Miki is in charage and announce at the gate that Washizu is responsible for the Great Lord's death. But arrows come at them from within the castle, forcing them to leave.  Miki fears Inui will attack the castle. Interestingly, it is Asaji who says the line about having not bloodied her hands for the sake of Miki's son. Another twist is that Asaji announces she is pregnant. Washizu had decided to name Miki's son as heir at the banquet.  Then Miki and his son fail to show up.  Suddenly Miki's Ghost appears, and Washizu reacts angrily. Asaji has to speak on his behalf to the other guests. Then Miki is gone again. His Ghost returns, scaring Washizu, who says, "I'll slay you yet again." In the play, Lady Macbeth stops him before he can reveal anything so directly damning.  Oddly, it is after everyone leaes that the murderer enters with Miki's head and tells them that his son was wounded but escaped.  But we don't have the scene where the murderers are assigned the task, nor the scene when they attempt to carry it out.  Washizu kills the murderer.  Rumors abound in the castle that Miki's son has gone to Inui, and that Noriyasu and the Prince have done likewise.  Asaji's child is stillborn. Washizu rides forth to find the spirit again. The spirit tells him, "Until the very trees of Spider's Web Forest rise against Spider's Web Castle, you will not be defeated in battle."  But, unlike the play, he does not name the person that he has to fear, and there is nothing about no one born of woman.  We don't see Asaji sleepwalking, but we do have a scene in which Asaji scrubs her hands in a basin as if in a trance, and Washizu actually witnesses her do it.  And then of course the trees arrive. Washizu's own men shoot arrows at him inside the castle.  The shots of the arrows hitting around him is incredible.  And finally one goes through his neck. So it's a very different ending from the play (and he doesn't really die in battle).  There is no explanation of the trees being used to hide their numbers as there is in the play. And here it seems that they're to be used more as cover from arrows.  After Washizu is dead, the men with the trees are still advancing, not knowing of his death. And the film ends there.  So Asaji never kills herself.  (time: 109 minutes)

- Teenage Gang Debs  (1966) with Diane Conti, Joey Naudic, John Batis, Linda Gale, Sandra Kane; screenplay by Hy Cahl; directed by Sande N. Johnsen.  This incredibly loose adaptation stars Diane Conti as Terry (the Lady Macbeth character), a teenager who is new to town and wants to join a gang called The Rebels.  Nino introduces her to the gang, but when she learns that Johnny (the Duncan character) is the gang's leader, she attaches herself to him, despite the fact that Johnny already has a girl, Angel. So Terry and Angel have a cat fight, and Terry wins, so she becomes Johnny's girl.  They go have sex (under a handmade sign, "Rebels Forever") while everyone else dances.  Johnny wants to carve his initials on her shoulder, but she's not into it, so she flirts with Nino (the Macbeth character).  But he's having none of it. So she calls him a chicken (just as Lady Macbeth accused Macbeth of cowardice).  She tells him she wants him instead of Johnny because of the whole cutting thing. To prove he's not a chicken, Nino fucks Terry in Johnny's room, knowing he'll then have to fight Johnny.  Nino tells Johnny he's taking over the rebels. Terry hands Nino the knife that he'll use to kill Johnny (in the lamest knife fight ever in a film).  Terry also convinces Nino to let the other guys take turns with Annie, Nino's old girl.  Terry then urges Nino to attack other gangs so he'll be the leader of the toughest gang in the city. When a guy wants to quit the gang to get married, Terry convinces Nino to kill him before he can go to the cops (she tells Nino that he knows too much).  Because of Terry's influence, Nino becomes a tyrant, saying that no one can quit the gang (in the past, quitting was no big deal). Unlike Lady Macbeth, Terry never has trouble sleeping.  Finally the other girls turn on Terry and cut her up.  (time: 72 minutes)

- Macbeth  (2005) with James McAvoy, Keeley Hawes, Joseph Millson, Vincent Regan, Richard Armitage; directed by Mark Brozel. This adaptation of Macbeth, part of the Shakespeare Retold series, sets the play in a modern restaurant.  Joe Macbeth (James McAvoy) is the main chef in a restaurant owned and run by Duncan (Vincent Regan).  The film begins with the three witches, this time three bin men in a dump truck.  Ella Macbeth (Keeley Hawes) is the restaurant's hostess, and when we're introduced to her, she is measuring the space between silverware, making sure everything is precise.  In the kitchen, there is a bit of play regarding the title of the play, as those in the kitchen know not to say a certain chef's name, but to refer to him as "the Scottish chef."  Joe and Billy (the Banquo character) run into the three bin men in the alley. They tell them that the restaurant will get three stars, and that Joe will get everything, which then Billy's son will get. Immediately, it is revealed that the restaurant did get the rare three-star rating. Duncan owns the restaurant, and his son Malcolm will inherit it someday, but he needs Joe to train Malcolm. Duncan jokes with Joe that if he got run over by a bus tonight, Malcolm wouldn't be ready, and Joe would get the restaurant - a bit contrived, but okay.  Ella reminds Joe of how much work he's put into the restaurant, but that Joe will get all the glory.  She says, "You're too full of the milk of human kindness, Joe."  (This film uses the milk image quite a bit.)  As in the play, we don't see Duncan's murder. Joe tells Ella he can't go back in the room, so she takes the knife and does it herself (this is a second knife, one that they intend to be found).  We get a shot of the two of them washing their hands, and Ella says, "A little water, and we're clean."  Joe doesn't sleep that night.  There is no Porter, so it's Joe that goes to see who it is in the morning. Peter Macduff is one of the waiters, and he is there to see Duncan, because Duncan wants to go over the wine list before his press interviews.  This film oddly has a reference to The Merchant Of Venice.  A health inspector arrives unexpectedly and says he doesn't appreciate it when someone makes him "work for my pound of flesh, if you'll excuse my Shakespeare."  It's weird for him to actually say "Shakespeare," because if the people of this film's world are aware of Shakespeare, then wouldn't they be aware of Macbeth?  It's a detail that really doesn't work, and takes you out of the film for a bit. There is a scene in which Ella sings Janis Joplin's "Mercedes Benz" as she applies makeup. An interesting choice, if the story of that song is true - that Janis said she had to record it that night because there was going to be no tomorrow.  Joe tells Ella he imagines terrible things. Ella says, "What's done is done."  Joe Macbeth waits all night for the three bin men to return. When they do, they tell him to watch out for Macduff. And in their speech they utter phrases from the play such as "the sound and the fury" (actually in the play it's just "sound and fury") and "all our yesterdays." Joe asks about Billy, then about himself.  One tells him, "Pigs will fly before anything happens to you." Another says, "Pigs will drop on your head before you're harmed." Billy tells Joe he's expecting another baby, which of course gets Joe to thinking about the bin men's prediction. Billy and his son Freddy go cycling together in the morning. Interestingly, Joe asks Billy, "Do you ever think about those bin men?" And Billy responds, "No. Never."  Which is a lie. And it's the reverse of the play.  Joe hires a guy to kill Billy and Freddy, but of course the murderer doesn't kill the boy. The banquet scene is done at breakfast. Billy hasn't arrived. At first, instead of his ghost, Joe gets a video message from Billy on his phone, which freaks him out. Ella tells everyone that Joe hasn't been himself. And then Billy's Ghost does appear. Joe begins to lose it, making mistakes in the kitchen, and then attacking a customer who complained. We see Peter Macduff at home briefly, with his wife and two daughters. He then goes to Malcolm with his suspicions about Joe. Joe tells the murderer to kill Peter Macduff.  Interestingly, this production mentions the child that Lady Macbeth alludes to in the play. Ella says it was prematurely born and died soon after (she says this to restaurant patrons).  The murderer kills Macduff's family, and it's a detective who tells him, not this film's version of Ross.  We actually see Ella's suicide (which is sort of combined with the sleepwalking scene).  Joe, when he's told, says he feels nothing.  Peter comes to kill Joe, and there is the sound of a helicopter landing on the building. "Pigs will fly," Joe realizes, which is a bit lame. Peter then kills him.  Malcolm runs the restaurant, and at the end he steps out for a cigarette and sees Freddy on his bicycle, hinting that Freddy will take over, probably violently.  (time: 87 minutes)

- Scotland, PA  (2002) with James LeGros, Maura Tierney, Christopher Walken, Kevin Corrigan, James Rebhorn, Amy Smart, Andy Dick; written and directed by Billy Morrissette.  This dark comedy adaptation of Macbeth sets it in a restaurant in the 1970s.  It opens with the three witches; however, in this version they are three hippies seated on a ferris wheel after the carnival has shut down for the night.  They're smoking pot and eating. One of them drops the bucket of chicken. One says, "It was foul." Another jokes, "The fowl was foul?"  The girl says, "And the fair was fair."  This is all play, of course, on the line, "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" from Act I Scene i.  Duncan's is a restaurant owned by Norm Duncan (James Rebhorn). He plans to leave it to his son Malcolm, but Malcolm isn't interested - he wants to be in a rock band. And Norm's other son, Donald, is interested in theatre.  Joe and Pat McBeth (James LeGros and Maura Tierney) work at Duncan's, and of course are very interested in running it some day.  Douglas (the film's Macdonwald character) is the assistant manager, and Joe McBeth learns he's been stealing money, so he and Pat arrange for him to be fired. Duncan makes McBeth the new assistant manager.  Joe and Pat kill Duncan in the restaurant, and Pat gets a burn on her hand as a result.  Right after it's done, Pat says, "Mac, it's done. It can't be undone" - an interesting combination of her early line "What's done is done" (Act III Scene ii) and one of her last lines, "What's done cannot be undone" (Act V Scene i).  Lieutenant McDuff (Christopher Walken) arrives to solve the murder. Because Malcolm and Donald have no interest in the restaurant, they sell it to the McBeths for a low price.  The McBeths change the restaurant, add the drive-through, and it becomes a success. Things go well. But then McDuff returns, and McBeth begins to think that his friend Anthony "Banko" Banconi (Kevin Corrigan, in the Banquo role) is a problem. This is because Banko is asking a few questions, not because of a prophecy as in the play - in this version, Banko has no son. Meanwhile Pat keeps putting ointment on the burn on her hand, and running her hand under water, though the burn had healed long before.  McBeth kills Banko, and at a press conference for the restaurant, Banko's Ghost shows up. McBeth goes to find the three hippies. When he arrives, he discovers the carnival is gone. But suddenly it reappears. We don't see what they tell McBeth then, but later they call him up and he goes to them again, and they tell him he should kill McDuff's entire family. He doesn't do that, but instead lures McDuff to the restaurant in order to kill him. Meanwhile, Pat cuts off her hand in order to rid herself of the burn once and for all, and bleeds to death. McDuff kills McBeth in the fight. And at the end the restaurant becomes McDuff's.  This is a fun film, and Maura Tierney is particularly fantastic in it. (time: 104)

Related Films:
- "The Scottish Play": An Explanation  (2004) with Ian McKellen.  In this interview, Ian McKellen talks about the Trevor Nunn production, about Judi Dench's performance, and about the rest of the cast. He does discuss the decision to not have Banquo's Ghost be visible in that scene.  (time: 33 minutes)

Films With References To Macbeth:
- Below  (2002) with Matt Davis, Bruce Greenwood, Olivia Williams and Zach Galifianakis; directed by David Twohy.  This ghost story on a submarine during World War II has a Shakespeare reference.  Olivia Williams finds a book on the walkway of the boat.  It's a copy of The Tragedies Of Shakespeare, opened to "Macbeth."  On the first page is the inscription, "Property of Lt. Brice," which leads Olivia to discover a few things.
- The Exorcist III  (1990)  with George C.Scott, Ed Flanders, Brad Dourif; directed by William Peter Blatty.  In an early scene in the police station, Lt. Kinderman (George C. Scott) says, "Do you know what Macbeth is about? I'll tell you.  It's a play about the numbing of the moral sense."  Then a little later he says, "And the autopsy? When, please?"  The response is, "Tomorrow."  George C. Scott says, "And tomorrow and tomorrow," finishing the line from Act V Scene v.  In a much later scene, Brad Dourif says to George C. Scott, "I like plays.  The good ones.  Shakespeare.  I like Titus Andronicus the best.  It's sweet."  Like in Titus Andronicus, there are decapitations in The Exorcist III.
- Gnomio & Juliet  (2011) with James McAvoy, Emily Blunt, Matt Lucas, Michael Caine, Maggie Smith, Jason Statham, Ashley Jensen; directed by Kelly Asbury.  This animated film features the tale of Romeo And Juliet as portrayed by garden gnomes and other lawn ornaments.  So while obviously this film is mostly Romeo And Juliet, it does contain references to other Shakespeare plays, including Macbeth. When Juliet opens the gate, a dog is on the other side.  So she slams it shut, shouting, "Out, out."  A man in the distance finished the line for her: "Damn Spot, over here, boy."  Get it? (Macbeth, Act V, Scene 1.)  (time 84 minutes)
- L.A. Story  (1991) with Steve Martin, Victoria Tennant, Richard E. Grant, Marilu Henner, Sarah Jessica Parker; directed by Mick Jackson.  This beautiful and magical and hilarious comedy has several references to Shakespeare.  The first is a reference to Richard The Second.  The second is a reference to Macbeth.  While Harris (Steve Martin) waits for his girlfriend in his car, he tells us this, in voice over: "Sitting there at that moment, I thought of something else Shakespeare said. He said, Hey, life is pretty stupid, with lots of hubbub to keep you busy, but really not amounting to much.  Of course, I'm paraphrasing. 'Life is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.'"  That line, of course, is from Act V Scene v, and is spoken by Macbeth.
- Something For Everyone  (1970) with Michael York, Angela Lansbury, Jane Carr; directed by Harold Prince.  This wonderful dark comedy has a reference to Macbeth.  Near the end of the film Conrad (Michael York) tells Lotte (Jane Carr) not to forget to turn out the lights.  Lotte responds, "Of course not, dear Conrad.  Farewell.  Farewell until we meet again.  In thunder, lightning, or in rain."  The opening lines of Macbeth are, "When shall we three meet again?/In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"  Those lines are, of course, spoken by the first witch.  And in Something For Everyone, Lotte is about to work her own sort of witchcraft on Conrad.

Television Programs With References To Macbeth:
- The Black Adder (1982) with Rowan Atkinson, Tim McInnerny, Brian Blessed.  This series has many Shakespeare references.  The first episode of the first season is full of references to Shakespeare, including one to Macbeth.  While searching for Henry Tudor (who by the way is played by Peter Benson, who played Henry The Sixth in the BBC productions), Edmund (Rowan Atkinson) comes across the three witches.  They tell him, "Today has brought misfortune, but one day - oh, glorious day - one day - oh happy day - you shall be king."  Oddly, in the closing credits the three are named Goneril, Regan and Cordelia (from King Lear).
- Blackadder The Third  (1987) with Rowan Atkinson, Tony Robinson, Hugh Laurie.  The episode titled "Sense And Senility" has quite a few Shakespeare references, including a few to Macbeth.  The Prince (Hugh Laurie) is going to take elocution lessons from two actors. Baldrick tells Blackadder that his uncle was in a play called Macbeth. His uncle played the second codpiece.  "Macbeth wore him in the fight scenes."  Blackadder asks, "Did he have a large part?"  Baldrick answers, "Depends who's playing Macbeth."  Blackadder then says, "Incidentally, Baldrick, actors are very superstitious. On no account mention the word 'Macbeth' this evening, all right?"  Baldrick asks, "Why not?"  Blackadder answers, "It brings them bad luck and it makes them very unhappy."  The actors, soon after arriving, mention "the Scottish play."  Blackadder says, "By 'the Scottish play,' I assume you mean Macbeth."  The two actors freak out, and perform a little routine to exorcise the evil spirits. Realizing they'll do that each time he says the name of the play, Blackadder makes the most of it.  Later, the actors are instructing the Prince to roar at the start of the speech, one of them giving examples from Hamlet and Julius Caesar. Then the other says, "And from your leading character in a play connected with Scotland." Before the first actor can give his performance, Blackadder enters saying, "That's Macbeth, isn't it," which leads to their ridiculous ritual.
In the final episode of the series, titled "Duel And Duality," there is a reference to Macbeth. Blackadder agrees to take the place of the Prince in a duel with the Duke of Wellington (Stephen Fry), planning to have his cousin Mad McAdder, a homicidal Scotsman, fight the duel in turn for him.  McAdder, however, is not interested.  Blackadder returns home to tell the Prince the plan is off.  But before he can, the Prince tells him: "It has been a wild afternoon full of strange omens. I dreamt that a large eagle circled the room three times, and then got into bed with me and took all the blankets. And then I saw that it wasn't an eagle at all, but a large black snake. Also, Duncan's horses did turn and eat each other, as usual."  A reference to Act II Scene iv.
- Slings & Arrows (2003-2006) with Paul Gross, Stephen Ouimette, Martha Burns, Mark McKinney, Susan Coyne.  The second season is all about Macbeth. In the first episode, titled "Season's End," a woman tells Geoffrey that she liked Hamlet "well enough," but says she's curious what he'll do with Macbeth.  Geoffrey tells her they're not doing Macbeth.  Richard, drunk, apologizes to Geoffrey about that horrid woman (from the first season). Geoffrey replies, "Richard, what's done is done," which of course is Lady Macbeth's line from Act III Scene ii.  Richard wants to do Macbeth because a certain actor is available, and Geoffrey ultimately accepts the challenge of directing Macbeth.
In the second episode, titled "Fallow Time," Anna gives Geoffrey Oliver's boxes of notes for staging Macbeth. Ellen asks Geoffrey about the character of Lady Macbeth, wondering how exactly she is weak. "When does she crack, and why?" Geoffrey finally opens the boxes of notes.  The elementary school puts on Macbeth. Geoffrey and Ellen go to see it to show their support. We see the scene when Macbeth and Banquo meet the witches, and then quickly several other scenes. The bloody dagger is on a wire, so the audience actually sees it. We see Duncan's murder and Banquo's murder.  And of course Oliver shows up in the elementary school production.  During the first table read, they discuss the curse. The actor playing Macbeth does the "dagger" speech before the table read.
In the third episode, titled "Rarer Monster," Geoffrey and Oliver discuss the element of evil in the play.  The Romeo And Juliet director, after mentioning the name of the Scottish play, falls off the thrust and breaks her neck.
In the fourth episode, titled "Fair Is Foul And Foul Is Fair" (which is a line from the first scene of the play), Geoffrey tells Oliver that he doesn't like his Macbeth.  They rehearse the Ghost of Banquo scene.  And of course Geoffrey is talking to Oliver - an empty chair to everyone else in the theatre.  At the night of the first preview, Geoffrey fires Henry, the actor playing Macbeth.
In the fifth episode, titled "Steeped In Blood," Richard, upon learning that Henry was fired, goes to see Geoffrey. Geoffrey immediately says, "If this is about Henry, what's done is done," once again quoting Lady Macbeth from Act III Scene ii.  Jerry, the understudy, goes on for the second preview.
In the sixth and final episode of the second season - titled "Birnam Wood" - Macbeth opens, with Henry back in the lead role. Oliver decides to go out as the Ghost of Banquo.
- Star Trek  (1966-1969) with William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley.  The episode "All Our Yesterdays" (written by Jean Lisette Aroeste; directed by Marvin Chomsky) has a reference to Macbeth in its title.  The title is taken from Macbeth's famous speech from Act V: "All all our yesterdays have lighted fools/The way to dusty death."  The episode is about a planet's inhabitants having escaped the impending destruction of their world by traveling into the past.  There are no other direct references to Macbeth in the episode. However, Kirk is accused of witchcraft and says, "There are no witches."  And as we know, there are three witches in Macbeth.

Shakespeare References In Writer's Digest

I was going through some old copies of Writer's Digest (I tend to procrastinate, and so do my spring cleaning in the summer), and of course came across a couple of references to Shakespeare.

The first is in the August 1988 issue (I said they were old copies).  In an article about Joe Gores, James McKimmey quotes him as saying, "One of my favorite Shakespeare lines is: 'There is a tide in the affairs of men, which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune...'" (page 35).  That line, by the way, is from The Tragedy Of Julius Caesar, Act IV Scene iii.  It is in a speech that Brutus says to Cassius.

The second is in the Write It My Way column by Willard R. Espy in the December 1988 issue.  The short piece is titled, "Bard's Barbs, or, Shook Up Over Shakespeare," and is about the rules of grammar, pointing out that if Shakespeare broke the rules then everyone should be able to.  Espy writes, "At this writing, readers of The New York Times are debating vigorously in print whether you and I (or is it you and me?) are entitled to say "Between you and I" because Shakespeare once did" (page 7).  Then, toward the end of the piece, he writes, "Once only, in all his poems and plays, Shakespeare wrote 'between you and I.' Scarcely a ringing endorsement of the solecism" (page 7). There is also an illustration of Shakespeare writing, and the scroll in his hand says, "All's Good that ends Well."

It took me a while to find it, but for those who are curious, the one instance of "between you and I" is in The Merchant Of Venice.  In Act III Scene ii, Bassanio reads the letter he received from Antonio: "Sweet Bassanio, my ships have all miscarried, my creditors grow cruel, my estate is very low, my bond to the Jew is forfeit; and since, in paying it, it is impossible I should live, all debts are cleared between you and I, if I might but see you at my death."

Shakespeare Study: The Tragedy Of King Lear

This is the third year of my Shakespeare study. I read one play each month, and then watch as many film versions as I can get my hands on, and read as many books about the play as I'm able. May, 2012 was The Tragedy Of King Lear. This blog entry has reviews of the films, and little blurbs about the books. (Scroll down for the film reviews.)

Related Books:

- Critical Essays On King Lear  edited by Linda Cookson and Bryan Loughrey  -  This book of essays is aimed more at students, and actually includes stupid questions at the end of each essay like "Did you find any problems in accepting the first two scenes of King Lear?" (page 30).  And there is actually a section in the back titled "How To Plan An Essay."  But the essays themselves are fairly interesting, particularly the one written by Andrew Gurr about Albany.  Gurr writes, "Albany's second attempt to assert himself, after Lear dies, is even more uncomprehending. He addresses the other survivors, Kent and Edgar, an dinvites them to share the rule in his place... No doubt he too, like Lear, is weary of the struggle, and wishes to relinquish responsibility for the future.  But by doing so he is attempting to reproduce precisely the mistake Lear made at the outset of the play, and which has now finally killed him. Lear's 'darker purpose' involved several basic errors.  Above all of them, though, was his plan to give up his own authority, to abdicate in favour of 'younger strengths,' retaining he pleasures while giving up the burdens.  This abnegation of responsibility, the division of the kingdom, prompts all the troubles that follow.  Now Albany is proposing to repeat Lear's mistake, dividing the kingdom once again between two of nobels, Kent and Edgar" (page 117).  He also writes about the different endings in the Folio and Q1: "Edgar and Albany stand together at the end, the authorities of the future, and one or other of them makes the final statement. Here we return to the alternative versions. In the earlier text, the Quarto, Albany speaks the lines, finally acknowledging that in these circumstances we must 'Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say.' He has twice tried to speak what he thought ought to be said, and presumably has now realised the foolishness of both attempts to assert normality. Now he accepts that speaking from the heart, what we feel, is better than speaking conventionally... In the revised text in the Folio, the words are Edgar's.  They must be spoken in reproof.  He tells Albany that the conventional words of authority are of no use here" (pages 117 - 118).  This book also contains essays on the opening scenes, the trial scenes, and the character of Edgar, among other topics.  Published in 1988.

- William Shakespeare's King Lear - New Edition  edited and with an introduction by Harold Bloom  -  This is a volume in the Modern Critical Interpretations series, and includes criticism by Northrop Frye, David Bevington, Ralph Berry and Millicent Bell, among others.  In relation to the storm scene, Northrop Frye writes, "Similarly, there are links, however mysterious and fitful, between natural and human events, at least on the top social level. Comets, earthquakes and other natural disturbances don't just happen: they happen at crucial times in human life, such as the death of a ruler.  Not necessarily a Christian ruler: there were, as we saw, such portents at the time of the murder of Julius Caesar. So Lear has some ground for expecting that the order of nature around him might take some notice of his plight and of his daughters' ingratitude, considering that he's a king" (page 19.)  This book also includes a lot of good stuff about that first scene in which Lear divides his kingdom.  In one of the footnotes to Paul A. Cantor's essay, he writes, "Briefly stated, Jaffa's thesis is that the intent of Lear's original plan was to give Cordelia the bulk of his kingdom (the middle portion), while giving Goneril the extreme northern and Regan the extreme southern portion, regions their husbands already controlled as feudal lords. Lear intends to marry Cordelia to the Duke of Burgundy, a foreign power strong enough to give her support but not strong enough to conquer and absorb Britain (as the King of France might). Jaffa is the only critic of the play to have articulated the strategy of Lear's original plan, but he was not the first to note that Lear enters act 1, scene 1 with a division of the kingdom already worked out (after all, maps have been drawn up and Lear's counselors Gloucester and Kent are evidently already aware of the details when the play opens)" (page 81).  About this same scene, Ralph Berry writes, "The opening ceremonial has its purpose, like all ceremonials. Elder Olson puts it well: 'if Lear is giving up his authority and still wants security and dignity, he can only trust to their love; and his insistence upon their public profession of it is an attempt to have it warranted and witnessed as a formal part of the compact of the delivery of property and power.' The public affirmation of love is an exercise that no power in the world disregards" (page 86).  Later in the same essay he writes, "This division is not really arbitrary.  Since the great dukes already possess their regional structures, Lear's planned settlement merely formalizes the present state of affairs with the addition of heartland areas.  It also maintains the present jealousies and rivalries of the inheritors, which are neatly contained within a triadic system. The map of Britain that Lear unfolds is a working diagram of a settlement that corresponds reasonably well to the current situation and its realities. The future will have to depend on the fertility of the three daughters, anyway - or their husbands" (page 91).  In Robert Lanier Reid's essay he writes about Edgar's speech, "Most readers have viewed this extraordinarily long and colorful catalogue of sins, like the pretense of demon-possession, as part of a tour-de-force performance, a disclosure purely theatrical, having nothing to do with Edgar's real life, his moral and psychological self.  But consider what a deeper dimension the play assumes if we take the list, at least in part, as Edgar's genuine confession. Has Edgar (like Prince Hal or, more to the point, like the promiscuous Gloucester) led a self-indulgent life of privilege? This reading would give considerably more weight to Edmund's resentment of his 'legitimate' half brother" (page 122).  Millicent Bell writes, regarding the laws about clothing, "In King Lear, Kent says of the upstart steward Oswald, 'nature disclaims in thee - a tailor made thee' - that is, made the person he has become by dressing up a person that 'nature' had no role in creating - though he had previously been no more than a 'three-suited...worsted-stocking knave,' limited by ordinance to three suits a year and plain woolen stockings instead of silk" (page 138).  She also writes, "A modern audience will miss the topicality of Lear's odd remark to Edgar in his beggar's rags, 'I do not like the fashion of your garments. You will say they are Persian attire, but let them be changed.' A Persian embassy had arrived in London early in the reign of James I; there was a 'fashion' for Persian silk fabrics and even costume, marking the beginning of the English assimilation of exotic identities" (page 138). Published in 2010.

- Shakespeare's Revision Of King Lear  by Steven Urkowitz  -  In this book, Steven Urkowitz takes the position that the King Lear of the Folio is Shakespeare's own careful revision of the Quarto.  He writes, "Now, however, although critics maintain considerable differences in particular details, they generally agree that the Quarto text is drawn in some way from Shakespeare's foul papers and the Folio text is derived in some way from a playhouse promptbook used by Shakespeare's company. Critics disagree on why there are differences between the Quarto and the Folio, and on which text to follow in specific instances" (page 6).  Later he writes, "The fair copy of a play was submitted to the Master of the Revels for censorship. (His endorsement was required 'at the latter end of the said booke they doe play.') McKerrow argues that since the fair copy served the double functions of license and promptbook, as a valuable asset the acting company would not release it to a printer if another copy of the play was also available. If the author's working draft was in the possession of the acting company, then that draft rather than the fair-copy promptbook would be given to the printer when the company approved publication" (page 10).  This book contains a chapter on the variations in entrances and exits.  In that chapter, Urkowitz writes, "One major anomaly introduced by 4.3 is Kent's description of Lear's 'soveraigne shame,' which, he says, keeps the king from meeting with Cordelia. But when Lear next appears onstage in 4.6 he is notably silent about Cordelia's presence in England. Though he as ample opportunity in this scene to express the 'shame' ascribed to him, he does not. Further, Lear's ingenuous surprise when he awakens to discover Cordelia before him in 4.7 argues against his having any prior knowledge of her arrival from France. And the clear, humble humanity Lear expresses sounds in no way like 'shame.' The 'news' supplied in 4.3 interferes with any direct or simple understanding of Lear's emotions at the moment of reunion" (page 53).  In the chapter on Albany, he writes, "Here and in the later instances Albany's pattern of delay seems to be a characteristic response to heightened emotional stress. Delayed response in a case when we would expect an immediate reaction is a typical Shakespearean device for showing a character under great psychological pressure" (page 113).  Later he writes, "Since the official promptbook was a legal enticement to perform only the words which were approved in it, it seems unlikely that the book would be so altered after it had been licensed. As a practical consideration, the most convenient and economical time to make changes in a play script is before the preparation of the promptbook.  After the book is made and approved, individual actors' parts must be copied out.  Changes such as those found in King Lear involve complex passages of dialogue and would necessitate a recall and a painstaking revision of actos' prts at least, if not also a new submission of the book for approval by the censor" (page 147). Published in 1980.

- William Shakespeare's King Lear  adapted by Brian Farrens; illustrated by Ben Dunn  -  This is a graphic novel adaptation of the play (part of the Graphic Shakespeare series).  At just under fifty pages, it's basically an outline of the play.  It begins with Lear dividing his kingdom, so the opening dialogue between Kent and Gloucester about Gloucester's sons is cut.  This book completely messes up the beginning of Act II.  It assigns Edmund's lines to Edgar and Edgar's lines to Edmund, so that Edgar asks Edmund, "Have you not spoken 'gainst the Duke of Cornwall?"  And then Edgar tells Edmund to fly because he hears Gloucester coming.  Of course, that makes no sense.  And Edmund remains to talk to Gloucester.  By the way, Gloucester looks much too young in the illustrations.  (I have found that Shakespeare books aimed at children seem to get more wrong than right.  While the idea of turning children onto Shakespeare is a noble one, it seems these books actually do more harm than good.)  It seems Cornwall kicks Gloucester in the head, and then the servant intervenes, before an eye is plucked out.  In fact, we don't see his eyes being plucked out at all.  In the drawings it looks merely as if Gloucester's eyes are closed when Cornwall (not Regan, for some reason) says, "Let him smell his way to Dover."  In this version, Edgar actually leads Gloucester to a sort of cliff, with just a small drop - maybe six feet - and lets him jump.  Published in 2009.

- King Lear: The 1608 Quarto And 1623 Folio Texts  edited by Stephen Orgel  -  As its title suggests, this book contains both the Q1 and Folio texts.  This is a great volume, because all modern editions (or most, anyway) of King Lear are conflations of the two versions, left to the editors' discretion as to which will be used for any given passage.  The book also contains an introduction, as well as an essay on the theatrical world of Shakespeare.  It is in that essay that he tackles the subject of those idiots who think someone else wrote Shakespeare's works: "The Baconions, the Oxfordians, and supporters of other candidates have one trait in common - they are snobs. Every pro-Bacon or pro-Oxford tract sooner or later claims that the historical William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon could not have written the plays because he could not have had the training, the university education, the experience, and indeed the imagination or background their author supposedly possessed.  Only a learned genius like Bacon or an aristocrat like Oxford could have written such fine plays" (page xxii).  In the introduction he writes, about the daughters' different responses to Lear's request, "From Goneril and Regan's perspective, these performances are noble ceremonies, hyperbolic and therefore appropriate responses to their royal father; from Cordelia's, they are merely specious shows, cheapening the king because they are inherently dishonest.  If we look at the scene this way, it constitutes a debate between rhetoricians and plain-speakers, and it includes a good deal of the Elizabethan distrust of the theater as well - the fear that its representations will be taken for, and will thereby undermine or subvert, reality. Significantly here, it is the villains who are the performers" (page xxxiv).  A little later he writes, "Lear dividing the kingdom among his three daughters, moreover, is following the dictates of English law: primogeniture applied exclusively to male heirs. If there were only daughters, they inherited equally - Lear's willfulness in the matter is manifested merely in his determination to give Cordelia a better portion than her sisters" (pages xl - xli).  In a footnote to Q1 (by the way, titled The History Of King Lear), he writes, "Nothing can come of nothing (quoting a famous scholastic maxim derived from Aristotle, nihil ex nihilo fit)" (page 6).  The same note is given for the Folio (The Tragedy Of King Lear): "Nothing will come of nothing (quoting a famous scholastic maxim derived from Aristotle, nihil ex nihilo fit)" (page 144).  Notice the difference in the two readings.  Published in 2000.

- King Lear: Shakespeare In Performance  by Alexander Leggatt  -  This book focuses on a few specific productions of King Lear, both on the stage and in film and television.  In the chapter on John Gielgud and Harley Granville Barker, Alexander Leggatt writes, "Barker told him, 'The prevailing note must be kingly dignity; always, when in doubt, return to that'" (page 20).  Later in that same chapter he writes, "Cathleen Nesbitt recalls a moment Barker spent with the actor who confirms Lear's report that he has killed Cordelia's hangman: 'You must let the audience feel you have seen a miracle - you have - you are not accustomed to miracles - you are a rough soldier...your heart must beat faster when you say, "'Tis true, my lord, he did"'" (page 22).  In the chapter on Peter Brook and Paul Scofield, Leggatt writes, "On the day of the opening the actors were told to do an 'easy, underplayed' run-through to save their energies for the evening.  According to Charles Marowitz, 'The result was astounding. Actors who had been belting out the verse since the first readings were suddenly giving scaled-down, unfussingly true performances. Basic relationships, so long obscured during erratic rehearsals, suddenly became crystal clear'" (page 40).  On that same page he writes, "He told the company in rehearsal that 'In verse which is properly spoken, each character plays his own rhythm - as personal as his own handwriting, but what often happens in Shakespeare is that everyone shares a generalised rhythm that passes impersonally from one to the other.'"  In the chapter on Adrian Noble, Michael Gambon and Antony Sher, he writes, "The Fool (in a scene we shall return to later) died hanging out of a barrel" (page 71).  That's interesting.  It would seem then that when Lear later says his poor fool hang'd, he's actually referring to his Fool in this production, rather than to Cordelia.  Later in that chapter Leggatt writes, "The production opened with a tableau in which the Fool and Cordelia were seen stretched out on the throne, their necks connected by a rope; it turned out to be a game they were playing - though of course the joke would become earnest in Lear's 'And my poor fool is hang'd'" (page 77).  And then, "Trying to anatomise Regan, the mad Lear stabbed the Fool, who was sitting in a barrel. Dying, he hung out of the barrel, a grotesque jack-in-the-box" (page 77).  An odd choice, as Shakespeare wrote no death scene for the Fool.  Published in 1991.

- Playing Lear  by Oliver Ford Davies  -  This book describes in detail an actor's journey through a production of King Lear, focusing on the rehearsal period and creating (or finding) the character.  In an early chapter titled "First Reading," Oliver Ford Davies writes, "In Kent and Gloucester's opening speeches there's immediately something I'd never realized.  They seem to know that Lear is going to divide his kingdom, and divide it evenly between Albany and Cornwall - not, I note, between Goneril and Regan. They assume men are going to rule, and as Cordelia as yet has no husband she's presumably counted out in their eyes" (page 14).  About the Fool, he writes, "Playing him young or female never seems to me to work well.  The text suggests to me an experienced man who's seen it all. I think it much more likely that the part was written for the 'quick, dwarfish, and charmingly ugly' Robert Armin, the regular 'clown' in Shakespeare's later company, than for a boy who doubled it with Cordelia" (page 48).  About soliloquies (or rather the lack of them for the part), he writes, "Had Shakespeare followed his usual path and given Lear soliloquies, we might know why he's dividing up his kingdom, what he thinks of his children, and how he reacts to his growing madness. One reason for this absence of soliloquy must be that Shakespeare conceived his Lear as fatally lacking in self-awareness. Lear doesn't tell us who he is, not because he won't, but because he can't. His discovering of self comes only through madness" (page 59). Later he writes, "James Frain has been talking to me about problems he's finding with Edmund's soliloquies. I pass on the best advice I've been given: assume that the audience not only understand your position but are sympathetic to it. In other words, don't defy, or wheedle the audience; talk as if they're on your side. Thus when Edmund says 'A credulous father and a brother noble' (I.2.177), he assumes this should be the judgement of any rational human. By denying Lear soliloquies, Shakespeare is cutting off the character's chance of explanation and empathy" (page 126).  About the passage when Lear talks about the injustices, Oliver Ford Davies writes, "I'm struck by an unexpected parallel with our own monarch. Queen Elizabeth II, who has reigned for fifty years, must have seen myriad examples of injustice, naked ambition, hypocrisy and double-dealing. She will presumably go to the grave with her secrets undisclosed. So might Lear, but instead he goes mad and out it all tumbles. Lear hasn't 'learned' about injustice, he knew it all the time. It was just repressed, screened off" (page 138).  Later he writes about the part of Lear, "It's a brave piece of writing, but it's not easy to play. It confounds all the actor's craving for sympathy, variety, comedy, ironic detachment, and intelligent overview" (page 171). The book is well written, apart from Oliver Ford Davies' penchant for assigning singular nouns plural verbs.  For example, he always takes the word "audience" as a plural noun.  But the most ridiculous case is when he writes "Chicago are particularly interested as they have a summer Shakespeare festival" (page 116).  How did the editor not catch that?  Published in 2003.

- Understanding King Lear: A Student Casebook To Issues, Sources, And Historical Documents  by Donna Woodford  -  This book is not all that well written, but what makes it useful is the inclusion of portions of related historical documents, such as Holinshed, speeches of King James, and Nahum Tate's version of King Lear.  A large portion of the book is dedicated to Alzheimer's Disease, including a lengthy interview with two people who cared for one's mother while she suffered from the disease.  This is a recent interview, and the two subjects aren't that intelligent, so its inclusion in this volume is questionable.  But there are some interesting bits.  Woodford writes, "The Paracelsians, or those physicians who practiced the theories of Paracelsus, an early-sixteenth-century Swiss physician, believed that there was a close relationship and interaction between the microcosm, or small world, of man, and the macrocosm, or large world, of the universe.  That is, they believed that people contained the same essential elements that were found in the rest of the universe: sulfur, salt, and mercury; and, therefore, events in the universe could affect people's physical or mental health. The same disturbance of elements that caused an earthquake or thunderstorm might well cause a physical or mental problem in a person" (page 33).  Later she writes, "St. Mary of Bethlehm hospital, more commonly known by its corrupted name, Bedlam, was establed in 1247 and became the first hospital devoted exclusively to the care and housing of the insane. But while the inmates were provided with food and shelter, curing their madness was not always the only activity or even the first priority of the hospital. During the early modern period, visits to Bedlam to see the made people were a popular form of entertainment" (page 50).  In the chapter on kingship, Woodford writes, "He also gives Lear a fool, and James I was the first English king since Henry VIII to have an official court fool; Shakespeare even gives Lear's two sons-in-law the titles of James's (sic) two songs.  James's (sic) eldest song, Henry, was the Duke of Cornwall, and his younger son, Charles, was the Duke of Albany" (page 59).  In the chapter on family Woodford writes, "Legally Edmund is not his son, but his 'breeding' has been at Gloucester's 'charge' in two senses: he fathered him, and he has paid for his upbringing. Gloucester has supported him, admitting that 'the whoreson must be acknowledged' (1.1.20), and though Edmund is both illegitimate and younger than Edgar, Gloucester claims that his eldest, legitimate son is 'no dearer in my account' (1/1/19), another phrase that can suggest both an emotional and a financial tie. Edmund is just as dear, or just as beloved, as Edgar, but he is also just as dear, or just as pexpensive, in Gloucester's financial accounts" (page 89).  Because this book is aimed at students, there are questions at the end of each chapter.  Unfortunately for students, most of these questions are awful.  Published in 2004.

- The Dresser  by Ronald Harwood  -  In this play an old man tries to get through a production of King Lear during World War II. We hear parts of the play, but what the audience sees is what's going on backstage, particularly the relationship between the actor and his dresser.  At the beginning we learn that the actor went a bit mad, throwing off his coat just as Lear does, and landed in the hospital.  After the play, Geoffrey (who played the Fool) says, "You give your all for almost an hour and a half, then vanish into thin air for the rest of the play. The next one hears of me is you saying that I'm hanged. But why?  By whom?"  Sir (the actor playing Lear) responds, "My theory is that, in William's day, Fool and Cordelia were played by one and the same person" (pages 76 - 77).  It's interesting that so many people take Lear's line about his poor fool being hanged to mean his actual fool.  Nothing yet has convinced me that he's not talking about Cordelia.  This play ends with Norman (the dresser) singing the Fool's song, "He that has a little tiny wit,/With hey, ho, the wind and the rain."  Published in 1980.

- A Thousand Acres  by Jane Smiley  -  This adaptation of King Lear is set on a farm in the midwest.  Larry (Lear) wants to divide his farm among his three daughters, Ginny (Goneril), Rose (Regan) and Caroline (Cordelia). Of course, Caroline gets cut out of the bargain. She leaves and marries Frank (France).  Harold (Gloucester), an old friend of Larry's, runs another farm, and has two sons - Loren (Edgar) and Jess (Edmund).  Jess has returned from the Pacific northwest, and gets involved with both Ginny and Rose (as in the play).  There are many details in this book that are taken directly from the play.  For example, Smiley makes a point of saying that Rose takes Ginny's hand, and Larry says, "That's right. Hold hands." Ginny replies, "Why shouldn't we?" (page 180). Compare that to Lear's line, "O Regan, will you take her by the hand," and Goneril's response, "Why not by th' hand, sir?" (from Act II Scene iv).  But there are many differences. For one thing, this book is told from the perspective of Ginny, and because of that, we don't follow Larry out into the storm.  And Larry is much more of a villain.  He beat and sexually abused Ginny and Rose when they were young.  Harold is blinded, but by an accident, not directly by another character, though later we learn that Peter (Cornwall) did have a hand in it, as he had emptied the water tank which might have saved Harold's eyes.  Pete dies, but is not killed by a servant.  Ginny tries to poison Rose, but fails. Larry dies of a heart attack. Caroline and Ginny are still alive at the end of the book.  The story has a nice, slow build, but then seems to cheat by suddenly have Ginny move away (her telling Ty that she needs a thousand dollars, and Ty responding that he happens to have that exact amount in his pocket is completely retarded).  And then time passes. And we just sort of learn of Larry's death, but it has no weight or importance. But maybe that's the point, that nothing is resolved.  I don't know; I had basically stopped caring about the characters. By the way, there is also a reference to The Merchant Of Venice. Rose says to Ginny, "You think a breast weighs a pound? That's my pound of flesh" (page 303). Published in 1991.

Film Versions:

- King Lear (1982) with Michael Hordern, John Shrapnel, Norman Rodway, Michael Kitchen, Gillian Barge, Brenda Blethyn, Penelope Wilton, Anton Lesser, John Grillo; directed by Jonathan Miller. This production doesn't have much in the way of sets, but this play is all about the performances, and this production has some excellent performances.  Particularly good are Michael Hordern as King Lear, Michael Kitchen as Edmund, Norman Rodway as Gloucester, Anton Lesser as Edgar, John Grillo as Oswald, John Shrapnel as Kent, Penelope Wilton as Regan, John Bird as Albany.  Basically the entire cast is good.  The only performance that bothered me was Frank Middlemass as the Fool.  With the abrasive and loud way he speaks, he reminded me of an annoying character from The Benny Hill Show.  Plus, he's an older man, and it seems from the text that the Fool was intended to be a young man (especially if he doubled Cordelia, as seems to be the case).
Goneril doesn't look at King Lear when telling him how much she loves, which is an odd choice.  She's looking out, as if lost in thought. This production generally sticks to the Folio reading.  Lear says, "Although our last and least, to whose young love" as opposed to the Q1 reading, "Although the last, not the least in our dear love" when approaching Cordelia.  Likewise, Kent says "Reserve thy state" instead of Q1's "Reserve thy doom." King Lear and the Fool are shown in closeups during the storm scene.  Lear sings "For the rain it raineth every day" with the Fool.  In the storm, when Gloucester talks about Edgar, Edgar is off screen, which is a shame - we really should see his reaction. Though this production sticks mainly with the Folio, it does include the fake trial of Goneril and Regan in Act III Scene vi, which is not in the Folio. When Regan and Cornwall question Gloucester, we see it from behind the chair where Gloucester is bound.  We don't see Gloucester at all throughout the scene (until the very end), and it's totally intense.  Julian Curry (as Cornwall) and Penelope Wilton are particularly good in that scene.
I'm a bit confused by Edgar's whole Jesus thing - when playing the mad beggar Tom, he wears a crown of thorns and has wounds in his hands.  A strange anacronism, as this play takes place before the Jesus tale.  In Act IV Scene ii, Goneril says "I must change arms at home," which is the Q1 reading (it's "must change names at home" in the Folio). Act IV Scene iii is cut completely - and this may be because this production is generally sticking to the Folio.  This scene only appeared in the Quarto.  Edgar carries Gloucester to the "cliff."  Gloucester says "So should my thoughts be sever'd from griefs," which again is the Folio reading (it's "be fenced from griefs" in Q1).  The scene when Lear finally recognizes Cordelia is wonderful.  The doctor says "The great rage, you see, is kill'd in him," which is the Folio reading (as opposed to "cur'd in him" in Q1).
The last scene is excellent, and Michael Hordern really shines as he cradles Cordelia's body. And I love Albany's delivery of "That's but a trifle here."   After Lear says "my poor fool is hang'd" (referring to Cordelia), he lifts her arm, and lets it drop, then says, "No."  He lifts it again, and again it drops, and he says again, "No," and then "no life."  It's incredibly heartbreaking.  His repetition of "never" is also excellent.  And when he says "Pray you, undo this button," he grasps at his neck, as if his collar is too tight and he can't breathe, but there is no button clasped, and his neck is free. Kent and Edgar still make the pretense of undoing a button, for which Lear thanks them - another wonderful moment. And Lear dies thinking that perhaps Cordelia lives. (time: 185 minutes)

- King Lear  (1953) with Orson Welles, Natasha Parry, Bramwell Fletcher, David J. Stewart, Margaret Phillips, Beatrice Straight, Alan Badel, Micheal MacLiammoir; television director: Andrew McCullough; stage director: Peter Brook.  This was a live television broadcast of King Lear.  It features some good performances, but some terrible cuts.  Most of Edgar's scenes are cut.  Edmund is cut completely, and Oswald is given several of his lines.  This greatly changes the play.  This production begins with Lear's line, "Give me the map there."  Lear (Orson Welles) actually rips up the map and hands pieces to Albany (Arnold Moss) and Cornwall (Scott Forbes).  Cordelia (Natasha Parry) is seated between her two sisters.  Lear says, "five days," following the Folio reading.  The first scene ends with Regan's line "Next month with us," thus cutting the important dialogue between the two sisters.  Scene ii is completely cut (the scene with Gloucester, Edmund and Edgar).  Scene iv begins with Kent's line, "Now, banish'd Kent."  The Fool seems frightened at first.  He then crouches at Lear's feet, and Lear pets him like a beloved animal.  The Fool actually breaks an egg to demonstrate the two crowns.  Goneril kisses Oswald on the mouth at the end of the scene, hinting at a sexual relationship between the two, which is interesting.  The very beginning of Scene v is cut, the mention of Gloucester  The short scene ends with Lear's line, "I would not be mad."
Act II Scene i is cut completely.  Again, no Edmund, Edgar and Gloucester.  However, Gloucester does give his lines in Act II Scene ii, beseeching Cornwall to not put Kent in the stocks.  Scene iii is cut, and it goes right into Scene iv, as one continuous scene, when Lear enters.  The scene begins with Regan saying, "I am glad to see your highness."  Then it goes back to the beginning of the scene when Lear notices Kent in the stocks. And then Goneril enters.  The scene where Regan and Goneril ask him why he needs twenty-five or even one servant is great.  After Lear says, "the terrors of the earth," we hear a clash of thunder.  Kent is still left in the stocks at the end of the scene, which is odd.
Then at the beginning of Act III Kent is let out by the Gentleman.  Kent gives him the order to find Cordelia.  Act III Scene iii is cut.  The Fool goes into a windmill, where he discovers Edgar, who is disguised as Tom.  The huge problem, of course, is that we haven't been introduced to Edgar before this.  So we have no idea why he's disguised as Tom O'Bedlam.  Nor do we know his relation to Gloucester.  During Edgar's long speech in which he describes how he loves dice and so on, he is seen in closeup.  When the camera pulls back, Lear and the Fool get caught up in Edgar's speech, repeating some of his phrases back to him, such as "hog in sloth" and "fox in stealth."  Scene v is cut, and it goes right to the trial of Goneril from Scene vi.  Gloucester then enters, saying he's heard a plot of death against Lear.  Then Lear leaves and Fool says, "And I'll go to bed at noon."  And then Regan and Cornwall enter and grab Gloucester.  And we get the blinding of Gloucester, as well as the death of Cornwall and the servant.
Act IV Scene i is cut. Goneril, not Regan, has the line, "Let him smell his way to Dover," about Gloucester, leading Albany to say, "Goneril, you are not worth the dust which the rude wind blows in your face."  Regan then has her lines to Edmund, in which she asks about her sister and tells him not to be familiar with her (from Act V Scene i), but these lines are said to Oswald, which makes no sense at all.  Why would Regan be interested in Goneril's steward?  Then we go to Act IV scene iv.  Then we jump to the middle of Act IV Scene vi, with Lear's line, "they cannot touch me for coining," thus cutting all of the stuff with Gloucester and Edgar.  Lear is clutching a starfish, and has seaweed in his hair.  He speaks to himself, as Edgar is not there.  What happened to him?  But then Gloucester stumbles in, unaccompanied by Edgar.  And Lear pardons the adulterer, but since the lines about Edmund being a bastard have been cut, these lines don't matter so much.  Gloucester has not been established as an adulterer.  The actor playing Gloucester merely has his eyes closed, with some blood between the eyes and bridge of the nose - not very effective.  Because Edgar has mysteriously disappeared from this production, Gloucester says the final line of the scene: "Far off, methinks, I hear the beaten drum."  Act IV Scene vii begins with Cordelia's line, "How does the king?"  Orson Welles fucks up and says to Cordelia, "They have some cause, you do not," which completely screws up the scene.  The line, of course, is really, "You have some cause, they do not." 
After Lear says, "Do not abuse me," Oswald enters (in place of the cut Edmund) and says, "Some officers, take them away" (from Act V Scene iii).  Regina takes Oswald to be her lord and master, which again makes no sense.  Why does she want Goneril's steward to be her master?  Then Albany says, "Oswald, I arrest thee on capital treason."  Albany then reads the letter from Goneril that Edgar reads in Act IV Scene vi of the play, but in this production it begins, "Beloved Oswald, let our reciprocal vows be remembered."  And this is where it moves even farther from the play.  Regan grabs and strangles Goneril (apparently killing her, though it lasts like two seconds), and Oswald stabs Regan, then himself.  Then Oswald suddenly utters Edmund's lines about meaning to do some good before dying, and reveals his plan to have Lear and Cordelia killed.  None of this is in the least bit believable. Then Lear enters, dragging Cordelia instead of carrying her (a poor choice), but everyone is gone.  He seems to be saying "Howl" to himself, which doesn't make much sense.  But then people suddenly come back into frame.  As Lear says, "Never," he climbs back into his throne, leaving Cordelia on the floor at his feet.  Why return to the throne and leave Cordelia?  Is that really more important to Lear in his last moments?  Absolutely not.  But he dies without saying his last lines urging Kent to look at Cordelia's lips.  Albany says the last lines of the play as in Q1, though I don't think the choice was made to follow Q1 but rather because Edgar is not even in the scene.  He left a long while ago (off to some better production, I imagine).  After the production, Alistair Cooke thanks Peter Brook. By the way, Micheal MacLiammoir is credited as playing "Poor Tom," not Edgar, for the only scene in which he appears is one in which he's disguised as Tom.  (time: 82 minutes - and that includes the introduction)

- King Lear (1974) with Patrick Magee, Patrick Mower, Ann Lynn, Beth Harris, Ronald Radd, Robert Coleby, Ray Smith.  This production suffers from some terrible cuts. Though I do wonder if the DVD is somehow at fault, for the back of the DVD case says that the film is 156 minutes, and yet the DVD is actually only 120 minutes.  So am I missing 36 minutes?  There is one cut especially that makes me think so.  But more on that later.  There are some good performances, particularly by Beth Harris as Goneril and Ronald Radd as Gloucester.
In the first scene, after Gloucester's line "braze to it," it then skips to "Do you know this noble gentleman?"  A very odd cut, because it fails to mention Edgar and also fails to hit home the fact that Edmund is a bastard.  And because of this cut, some of Edmund's possible rationale for being villainous is gone.  The sting is gone from the opening speeches.  Also, Edmund is busy talking to two women, so he's not present for Gloucester's words about him.  A really terrible cut right at the beginning.  Lear seems a bit bored with the formality of dividing his kingdom.  Cordelia's asides are cut.  She is seated at Lear's feet.  Lear says "last and least," following the Folio reading.  France's first two speeches are cut, wherein he asks what Cordelia has done, and then asks Burgundy what his decision is.  The first thing he says is his acceptance of Cordelia. Lear (Patrick Magee) has a sort of nasal whine and a grating quality to his voice.  Much of Goneril and Regan's dialogue at the end of the scene is cut.  Goneril's last line "and i' th' heat" leads to a shot of a fire, before which Edmund sits.  But Edmund's speech comes out of nowhere since Gloucester's lines were cut from the first scene, and he didn't even hear the little that was spoken.  He says his soliloquy to himself rather than to us, to the camera.  And his second soliloquy just before Edgar's entrance is likewise said to himself, but sadly most of it is cut (and that's one of my favorite speeches in the play).  I really like Beth Harris as Goneril in the scene with Oswald (Act I Scene iii).  Kent's speech is to himself rather than to us, which seems wrong.  After all, he's telling us that he has disguised himself and will likewise attempt to disguise his voice.  Why would he tell himself that?  Most of the stuff with the Fool is cut, before Goneril's entrance.  Scene iv ends with Lear's line "the shape which thou dost think/I have cast off forever," thus cutting the exchange between Albany and Goneril, and the bit with Oswald.  In scene v, again a lot of the Fool's lines are cut.
In Act II, Edmund draws his sword and puts it against Edgar's neck before saying "Pardon me."  A nice moment.  Oddly, Act II Scene ii begins with Kent and Oswald fighting, having cut all of the dialogue that led to the fight.  Almost immediately Cornwall and Regan enter to stop the fight.  And more of Kent's following lines are cut.  A lot of the fun is cut from the play in this version.  When Lear speaks of Regan's eyes, we get an extreme closeup shot of her eyes, which is a bit silly.  Patrick Magee is really good as Lear during his "We'll no more meet, no more see one another" speech to Goneril.  After Cornwall tells Gloucester to come out of the storm, Gloucester lingers a moment, looking off, before turning and following the rest inside, is a nice touch.
Act III Scene i is cut entirely.  Act III Scene iii is also completely cut.  Edgar's great long speech wherein he speaks of his love of wine and dice is completely cut.  Also cut are Gloucester's lines about Edgar ("I had a son/Now outlawed from my blood") - how can you cut those?  It's important that Edgar hears Gloucester say that.  Act III Scene v is completely cut.  After Gloucester's exit from Scene vi, we hear the Fool off camera singing the song that should have been in Act III Scene ii ("hey ho the wind and the rain").  We do have the trial scene.  Ronald Radd is particularly good as Gloucester in Act III Scene vii.  The plucking out of Gloucester's first eye is done off camera.  We see the shadow of it.  The second is plucked out during a black screen.  The servants' lines are cut from the end of Act III.
In Act IV, Edgar's lines about the fiends are cut.  In Scene ii, Goneril kisses Edmund after she says "Welcome, my lord."  Goneril says, "I must change arms at home," following the Q1 reading.  She kisses Edmund again when the text indicates it.  When Albany enters, all he says is "What have you done? Tigers, not daughters, what have you performed?"  Then Goneril goes into her "Milk-livered man" speech.  So cut are all of Albany's great lines, like "You are not worth the dust which the rude wind/Blows in your face."  How can you cut that?  Oddly, this production does include Act IV Scene iii, but then - even more oddly - only includes the scene's first few lines and last couple of lines, thus cutting out everything about Cordelia.  It goes right into Scene iv, but only the last lines of that scene are retained, starting the messenger's line.  Act IV Scene v is completely cut (thus we lose Regan's jealousy of Goneril regarding Edmund, something we absolutely need for their actions in the last scene to make sense).  I like that the camera slowly pulls back so that we can see the ground in front of Gloucester when Edgar tells him he's within a foot of the cliff.  Oddly, Gloucester slowly falls to the ground after stepping "over the cliff."  Edgar has the lines about Tom looking like a fiend, an odd choice considering that the lines about the fiends being inside Tom were cut.  Gloucester kneels before Lear, so Lear's line about pardoning the man's life is given to Gloucester.  And the bit about adultery is directly related to Gloucester in this production.  Lear sits on the ground next to Gloucester for his line about pulling off his boots, and Gloucester reaches out as if to obey, but can't find them.  A nice moment.  After Lear runs off, there is a fade-out, then a fade-in, though we're still in the same scene.  Was footage deleted?  Because the next line is Gloucester's "Now good sir, what are you?"  So the exchange between Edgar and the Gentleman is cut.  Edgard unfolds the letter without breaking the seal - the wax was already broken - and his line, "Leave, gentle wax" is cut.  After reading the letter, Edgard dumps the coins onto Oswald's body.
Lear sleeps on a chair, and is carried out on it to Cordelia and Kent, rather than the two of them going in to see him.  An odd choice.  After Cordelia asks, "Sir, do you know me?" Lear says, "Be your tears wet?"  So lost are many of the scene's great moments.  Lear should answer, "You are a spirit, I know."  Also cut is his line "I am mightily abus'd," plus the lines about thinking he should know her and Kent.  And ridiculously cut is the line where he acknowledges her, "I think this lady/To be my fair child Cordelia."  And so cut is her response, "And so I am, I am."  But there is an odd cut there, and this is when I began to truly suspect that the DVD is somehow missing scenes.  After all, the box says the film is 36 minutes longer than it is.  Maybe that's it.  Because how can you cut what is the most emotional and important moment in the entire play?
In Act V, Edgar's speech about having sworn to love both sisters is cut.  Act V Scene ii is cut.  Albany's lines are cut. It goes from Kent's line "Your servant Kent" to Lear's "And my poor fool is hang'd."  He actually does undo the button at Lear's neck when Lear asks.  Edgar says the final lines.
One more note on the time: In the production notes of the DVD, the director says that he had to fit the play into five 25-minute segments.  That would put the total at 125 minutes.  So it seems the 156 minutes listed on the case is just wrong.  But are five minutes still missing, or were there more credits?  (time 120 minutes)

- King Lear (1998) with Ian Holm, Timothy West, Paul Rhys, Finbar Lynch, Victoria Hamilton, Barbara Flynn, Amanda Redman, David Burke; directed by Richard Eyre.  This production features some excellent performances, particularly Ian Holm as King Lear, Barbara Flynn as Goneril, Timothy West as Gloucester, and (for the most part) Victoria Hamilton as Cordelia.  There are, as usual, some annoying cuts, and the soliloquies are done poorly, and asides seem to be avoided altogether.  Also there is not much in the way of sets - a great deal of the action seems to take place in a big orange box.  The solar eclipse is shown during the opening credits, an interesting idea, and a good one.  For the Elizabethan crowd would have needed no reminder of that recent event.  But a modern audience might need some indication.
In Act I, we see Edgar and Edmund at the beginning.  Then Edmund exits just before Gloucester and Kent enter.  After Gloucester's line, "who is yet no dearer in my account," the production suddenly jumps to Edmund's soliloquy from the beginning of Scene ii, here done as voice over.  Hmm.  Then back to Scene i.  I love Edmund's look when Gloucester says, "and away he shall again," showing he didn't know he was to be once again sent away.  When Lear enters, everyone is seated around a table.  Lear laughs after saying "unburdened crawl toward death," showing he doesn't mean that at all.  Lear gets up and walks around the table so that he is behind Cordelia when he says "doth love us most" - and he kisses her head.  Cordelia's asides are cut.  Lear says "the last not least," following the Q1 reading. Cordelia is excellent in this first scene.  Lear gives Kent "five days," which is the Folio reading.  Interestingly, part of France's first speech is cut - the part that finds fault with Lear - "or your fore-vouched affection/Fall'n into taint."  Edmund watches the first scene, and makes himself visible to Goneril and Regan during their conversation at the end of the scene.  Scene ii begins with Gloucester's entrance, as we already had Edmund's soliloquy.  Gloucester is really good, but Edmund, by looks plays the villain a bit much.  Right after Gloucester exits, Edgar enters, thus cutting my favorite of Edmund's speeches.  Instead he goes right into "O these eclipses do portend these divisions."  In disguising himself, Kent puts on a wig.  And he does change his voice.  After the Knight reports that Oswald would not return, a lot of lines are cut, including Lear's response, "He would not!" A poor choice in cuts.  The Fool is old in this production; he should be younger.  We see some of Lear's followers, and Goneril certainly has a point in her complaints about them.  Goneril is really good; she is distraught at Lear's curse of sterility.  The words do affect her, as they should.  The beginning of Scene v, when Lear gives Kent the letter, is moved into Scene iv, just before Goneril says, "No, no, my lord/This milky gentleness..."
Act II begins with Edmund's line, "Brother, a word," thus cutting Curan.  We have a shot of Edgar running through the woods - and hurrah, it's the first time we're allowed out of the orange box.  But then we're right back inside it for the beginning of Act II Scene ii.  Kent's lines at the end of Scene ii are cut, so we lose Cordelia's letter.  The stocks used in this production would have kept him from getting at the letter anyway.  Oddly, Edgar's soliloquy to open Scene iii is also cut.  He only says the last line, "Edgar I nothing am," and then wipes dirt on his face.  We start to hear the sounds of the storm when Regan tells Lear to return to Goneril, dismissing half his train.  There is a wardrobe problem.  Regan's clothing is not gorgeous, and it does look fairly warm.
Act III Scene i is cut.  And we are, thankfully, out of the orange box for the storm.  The very beginning of Scene ii is done in a wide shot, which is unusual.  The storm is sometimes too loud, and it's hard to hear certain lines.  it doesn't seem that Edgar hears Gloucester's lines about him, which is a shame.  It's important that he hears those lines, and that we see his reaction.  But instead we get a two-shot of Gloucester and Kent.  The trial is scene is included.  Edgar's soliloquy at the end of Scene vi is done as voice over.  His last line ("Lurk, lurk") is cut.  The plucking out of Gloucester's eyes is intense.  When Cornwall says, "Give me your arm," Regan simply walks away.  The servants' lines are cut from the end of Act III.
Edgar's lines are cut from the beginning of Act IV.  And yet it is he whom we see while hearing the lines of Gloucester and the Old Man, until "I stumbled when I saw."  Oswald's lines are cut from the beginning of Scene ii.  We do get Scene iii, and while the Gentleman speaks of Cordelia, we see her, knelt before candles, armored.  In Scene v, when Regans says, about Edmund, "pray give him this," she kisses Oswald.  An interesting choice.  Oswald's last line is cut from the scene.  Oddly in Scene vi we hear a seagull, as if they really were by the ocean.  And they are standing on sand.  Gloucester puts hi hands down on it.  The scene begins with Edgar's line, "Come on, sir; here's the place."  So the lines when Edgar asks, "do you hear the sea?" and Gloucester responds, "No truly" are cut.  So in this production they really are by the ocean?  That's not right.  At least they're not on a cliff.  Also cut are the lines where Gloucester acknowledges a change in Edgar's voice.  That's a line that should not be lost.  Gloucester doesn't stand.  He falls from his kneeling position.  And most of the following dialogue is cut before Lear's entrance, including all the stuff about Tom being a demon. Weird cuts.  Lear lifts Gloucester's bandage before saying "I remember thine eyes well enough."  The fog machine got a bit too much work in this scene.  Everyone steps out of the fog.  When Oswald is slain, he quickly tells Edgar to take the letters to Edmund, skipping the bit about the purse.  Edgar takes and opens the letter before Gloucester asks, "Is he dead?"  After Scene vi, it skips to Edmund's speech about how he's sworn love to both sisters.  And the speech is done as voice over as he looks at Regan.  He then kisses her, and then Regan asks if he loves Goneril (from the beginning of Act V Scene i).  We see a section of that scene, up to Goneril's line "I will go."  Then we go back to Act IV Scene vii, but only for the dialogue between Cordelia and Kent.  Then it goes back to Act V Scene i, when Edgar gives Albany the letter.  Then back to Act IV Scene vii for the Cordelia/Lear dialogue.  Lear stands before "Where have I been?"  And he does actually kneel before Cordelia says "No sir you must not kneel."  And he stands again on "Remember not these garments."  The Doctor says "the great rage, you see, is kill'd," following the Folio reading.
Then we go to Act V Scene ii.  Edgar and Gloucester run in the sand, amid explosions.  Because it's the sand, Edgar's line about the bush is ccut.  He leaves Gloucester in the sand and says, "If ever I return to you again."  There is then a closeup of Gloucester as he screams.  Then Edgar returns.  During the dialogue between Lear and Cordelia at the beginning of Scene iii, there is a rope tying Lear's two hands together, so that when he puts his arms around Cordelia he has to put the rope over her head to hug her - an interesting bit of foreshadowing.  Goneril's aside about how she has poisoned Regan is cut.  Goneril kisses Edmund in front of Albany while the trumpet sounds.  But this scene is done indoors, without a lot of soldiers around, which is really odd.  Some of Albany's lines are cut, the ones that make him seem a bit of a dolt - "Great things of us we forgot!" and "Run, run! O run!"  Lear sets Cordelia down next to the covered bodies of Goneril and Regan.  He uncovers them, and that leads to his line, "This is a dull sight."  It is Edgar that undoes Lear's button.  A bit of religious action at the end - Lear is looking up when he says his lines about looking at Cordelia's lips, as if she's a spirit he sees.  Albany's lines at the end are oddly cut.  Edgar says the last line to the camera.  (time: 140 minutes) 

- King Lear (2008) with Ian McKellen, Frances Barber, Monica Dolan, Romola Garai, William Gaunt, Philip Winchester, Jonathan Hyde, Ben Meyjes, Sylvester McCoy; directed by Trevor Nunn and Chris Hunt.  This is an incredible production by The Royal Shakespeare Company, with fantastic performances all round.  Seriously, this is a great cast.  As always, there are some cuts that annoy me, but far fewer than usual.  And there is the addition of a scene not written by Shakespeare (but not containing any newly written lines, thankfully).
Act I begins with a very formal entrance of King Lear, with everyone kneeling before him.  There is no dialogue, and this scene leads to Gloucester and Kent's dialogue.  It's a great idea, because it makes it so they're remarking on what they learned in that meeting.  Edmund is present for their dialogue.  Edmund takes his father's speech in good stride, with a certain amusement.  And I love his reaction to "away he shall again" - played to show he wasn't aware that he was to be sent off again.  Lear reads his speech from note cards, a strange choice.  He seems pretty happy.  Goneril seems honest in her profession of love for her father.  Cordelia's asides are cut.  Regan seems unsure at first what to say - this request has caught them by surprise.  I love Regan's reaction to her portion of the map, as if trying to see if Goneril got the better deal.  Cordelia nods her head yes after Lear says, "Speak again."  She seems incredulous at first, as if perhaps Lear can't mean this.  Lear says "five days," following the Folio reading.  France's lines after "So many folds of favor" are cut.  It goes right to Cordelia's "I yet beseech your majesty."  Lear bringing the crown over to Cordelia and then saying "Nothing" through it to her is a bit much.  But it's great that France and Burgundy are well fleshed out and distinct characters.  Interestingly, Goneril and Regan seem like good people, so when Cordelia chides them in her farewell, she seems out of line (an interesting choice).  Edmund's soliloquy is to us (except the first few lines), and he is clearly having a bit of fun, and is pleased with himself.  He is handsome, and isn't acting the villain, which is great.  This production includes Edmund's great speech about astrology.  Edgar needs spectacles to read, just as Gloucester does (and Edmund does not) - a nice touch.  Edmund gives Edgar a dagger.  I like that Oswald is made nervous by Goneril's instruction to serve Lear less well than usual.  But then he laughs with her over her words about Lear.  Lear's men are rowdy, firing guns and such.  The bit the Knight says about Oswald, "Sir, he answered me...he would not" and Lear's response "He would not!" are sadly cut.  The Fool sits on Lear's lap.  he then plays the spoons while giving his rhyme. He then sings his next bit, which as the text presents it.  The Fool is not young, but also not as old as Lear.  He's my favorite Fool so far.  He is actually funny.  Goneril has a good argument, and is kindly to Lear, at least at first. Goneril fights tears after Lear's curse of sterility.  Lear's line to Kent about him not being speedy is cut.
In Act II Curan is actually in this production, which is great.  Edmund draws his sword but does not tell Edgar to do likewise.  But he does take back the dagger that he gave him, and uses it to cut his own arm.  I love Cornwall's delivery of "Edmund, I hear that you have shown your father/A child-like office."  But I wish we could have seen Gloucester's reaction to "If he be taken he shall never more/Be fear'd of doing harm."  There is odd carnival music in the background during the Kent/Oswald scene.  And for once, you actually feel a bit for Oswald.  Cornwall is amused by some of Kent's insult to Oswald.  When Kent is stocked, Regan throws her glass of wine in his face.  The music then starts up again when everyone but Kent exits.  A strange choice, because it makes it seem that Regan's train is just as rowdy as Lear's.  Edgar removes his spectacles before putting dirt on his face.  Goneril holds out her hand - Regan hesitates, then goes to her and takes her hand.  Interesting.  When Lear says he shall not weep, Regan steps toward him, but Goneril stops her.  And it's then we hear the storm.
Act III Scene i is included, which is wonderful.  Lear removes his coat and tosses it, so the Fool removes his own coat to put over him. But Lear tosses that too.  Then when Kent arrives, he takes off his coat to cover Lear. In Scene iii, there is a strange change.  There is another man, and Gloucester hands him the letter and key, and tells Edmund, "He will lock the letter in my closet" (instead of "I have locked the letter in my closet").  Then, after Gloucester exits, the man returns and, seeing that Gloucester is gone, gives the key to Edmund.  Edmund's last few lines from the scene are cut.  Edgar does not hear Gloucester's words about him.  The trial is included.  Lear is clearly mad at this point.  Lear says, "You, sir, I entertain for one of my hundred" to Kent, not Edgar, an odd choice, as Lear has already added Kent to his men.  But the "Persian" line is still directed to Edgar. 
There are several changes to the end of this scene.  Edgar says "Lurk, lurk" before the others have exited (the rest of his speech is cut).  And nearly right after Kent and Lear have gone, a gun is put to Gloucester's back. It's Cornwall's men.  This is an odd choice, because it means they must have seen Lear exit, but did not stop him.  And then they confront the Fool, who says "This is a brave night to cool a courtesan," a line from the end of Act III Scene ii (and this is after he's given his final line - "And I'll go to bed at noon").  The men then hang him (thus this production decided that Lear's line at the end about his "poor fool is hang'd" is actually about his Fool rather than Cordelia).  While they're hanging him, the Fool says "I'll speak a prophesy as I go," which is the nxt line after the "courtesan" line.  He then gives his prophesy, and is hung.  All of that is different from the play.
Gloucester's line "You are my guests. Do me no foul play, friends" is cut.  Regan shows him the letter when she says "And false."  Regan does care for her husband when she realizes he's been hurt.  The servants' lines are included.  One of them is a woman.
It is the woman who has the lines of the Old Man in Act IV Scene i.  This scene begins with Edgar's line, "But who comes here," the rest of his speech being cut.  And she says, "We have been your tenants" rather than "I have been your tenant." It being a woman instead of an old man, the line "I'll bring him the best 'parel that I have" promises a cross-dressed Edgar (which of course doesn't happen).  As Tom leads Gloucester away at the end of the scene, he says his lines about "five fiends," which in the text comes just a bit earlier.  Goneril is in a sexy outfit when she kisses Edmund (with long black gloves), but her breasts seem uncomfortably squashed within the outfit.  That scene ends with her line "I'll read and answer," cutting the dialogue between Albany and the Messenger at the end.  Act IV Scene iii is cut completely.  Oswald's last lines from Scene v are cut. Gloucester says, "Here, friend, is a jewel" rather than "Here, friend, 's another purse; in it a jewel."  We see Edgar when Gloucester says "If Edgar live, o, bless him."  Lear enters after Edgar's line "This is above all strangeness," and so cut are Edgar's lines about Tom being a demon.  Lear delivers the "adultery" lines directly to Gloucester.  Lear is barefoot when telling Gloucester to pull off his boots.  Lear touches Gloucester's head when he says, "This is a good block."  Edgar opens the letter without saying his line about the wax and manners. Lear kneels before Cordelia tells him not to.  For some reason, they cut Lear's line, "If you have poison for me, I will drink it" (that's the worst cut of this production).  The Doctor says, "The great rage, you see, is kill'd in him," following the Folio reading.
In Act V, Edmund kisses Regan after "That thought abuses you."  Goneril says "I know the riddle" to Edmund.  When Albany starts to read the letter that Edgar gave him, Edmund returns, but does not hand him a paper.  His line about the "true strength and forces" is cut.  Also cut is Edmund's speech about having sworn love to both sisters - that's a shame.  After Edgar leaves Gloucester, it is suddenly night - and there are sounds of explosions - it's actually really well done.  Goneril kisses Edmund before the duel (as Albany watches).  And she screams when Edmund is slain.  Albany's line "Great thing of us forgot!" is cut.  Edmund says "to th' prison" instead of "to th' castle."  Albany's great response to Edmund's death is cut ("That's but a trifle here").  When Lear says his "poor fool is hang'd" he is speaking of the Fool, not Cordelia, which then changes his "No, no, no life" to seem to be a general statement rather than about Cordelia in particular.  Edgar undoes Lear's button. Kent pulls out a pistol on his final lines, and steps away to kill himself.  An oddly, Edgar's last lines (the final lines of the play) are done as voice over, the only voice over in the entire production.  (time: 156 minutes - though the box says 173 minutes)

- King Of Texas  (2002) with Patrick Stewart, Marcia Gay Harden, Lauren Holly, Colm Meaney, David Alan Grier, Julie Cox, Roy Scheider; screenplay by Stephen Harrigan; directed by Uli Edel.  This adaptation sets King Lear in Texas during the days of the wild west.  It's an interesting setting, and it actually works well, at least for a while.  Where the film goes wrong is when it strays from the play.  Patrick Stewart plays John Lear, a man who owns a large ranch and 200,000 acres of land in Texas.  He has many men who work for him, and is respected.  He is introduced seated at his desk, a large map of his land on the wall behind him.  His daughter Claudia leads him out to a celebration.  Menchaca arrives on horseback, angry at Lear because Lear has hung two of his men.  Lear explains that they were cattle thieves. There are hints of some relationship between Claudia and Menchaca. We are also introduced to Henry Westover (Roy Scheider in the Gloucester role), and his two sons, Thomas (Liam Waite in the Edgar role) and Emmett (Matt Letscher in the Edmund role).  Thomas is drunk and dishonors himself in front of Lear.  Emmett suggests he take off for a while until their father cools down.
Lear soon tells his three daughters - Susannah (Marcia Gay Harden in the Goneril role), Rebecca (Lauren Holly in the Regan role) and Claudia (Julie Cox in the Cordelia role) - that he is dividing up his land and giving it to them. This scene is not done before a large crowd, but involves only Lear, his three daughters, and the two husbands. Lear says, "I wanna get all this settled now so there won't be fighting amongst you after I'm gone" (in the play Lear says "that future strife/May be prevented now").  Susanna asks who gets which part.  Lear responds that it depends "on who loves their father the most."  Susanna, caught off guard, is told to speak first.  We get a reaction shot of her husband, which is great.  Her husband is named Tumlinson, and is played by Colm Meaney.  Lear says he'll spend half of the year with Susanna and half at Rebecca's house.  This is interesting, because this is before Claudia has answered and upset him.  So in this version he was never planning on living with her (it seems indicated by the text that perhaps Lear was originally planning on living with her). And where is Claudia to live? Claudia says, "I have nothing to say."  Lear says, "Nothing can come of nothing," which is actually the Q1 reading.  Tumlinson stands up for Claudia (so for the moment taking on the role of Kent as well as Albany - though of course he's not banished).  In this production there is no France/Burgundy scene (Menchaca is basically the France character).  Also, this production gives Lear a son, who was killed a while back (Lear had intended to leave everything to him). 
Looking at the map, Highsmith (Patrick Bergin in the Cornwall role) says he wants the disputed land that belongs to Menchaca.  Susannah says that would start another war, that her husband wouldn't stand for it.  So we see the division between the two husbands right away.  Claudia rides off to Menchaca.
Westover and Emmett are riding back to their own ranch.  And we learn that Westover promised Thomas' mother that he would leave all his land to Thomas.  Emmett says, "I learned to live with being a bastard a long time ago."  When they arrive home, they find that all their horses are gone.  A man named Williams arrives shortly to see if they might sell him some more of their horses, and it's hinted that Thomas sold him the others.
The Fool character in this production is a black named named Rip (Davd Alan Grier), who is the only one who seems allowed to talk back to Lear.  Lear takes him on the round-up because he's the only man who can make him laugh.  Rip even sings for him.  Warnell, one of Susannah's men, whips Rip, and then is beaten by Lear.  It's not clear how Rip got separated from the other men.  (And I guess Warnell is as close to an Oswald as we get in this production.)  Susannah is upset because Lear beat this man up; she says she would have dealt with the matter herself. 
Susannah and Highsmith make a pact to get that land from Menchaca.  Rebecca says they should get Mr. Westover on board. Meanwhile Thomas arrives home, and asks Emmett where the horses are, which is the first indication that perhaps he's innocent.  Westover turns Thomas out. (By the way, Thomas is an interesting choice of names for the character - because of course in the play he takes on the disguise of Poor Tom O'Bedlam.  In this adaptation, he never takes on a disguise.)
Lear's men are rowdy, taking target practice at a bell at night.  Susannah, with a rifle, orders Lear to leave.  Lear tells her, "I gave you everything."  But then oddly she says that it came at a price, her having to say she loved him when all she ever felt for him was hate.  This is a departure from the play.  She calls him an old tyrant, then says, "You worked our mother to death" (an interesting mention of a woman not spoken of in the play).  Lear says, "I'll do something - I don't know what.  You'll be sorry you lived to see it."  (In the play, these lines are "I will do such things,/What they are, yet I know not; but they shall be/The terrors of the earth.")  Susannah says the men are now her men, a way of explaining how Lear and the Fool come to be alone - though it happens earlier than in the play; after all, he hasn't yet gone to Rebecca.  Lear is a bit disoriented, forgetting which way is Rebecca's house.  And it's the first mention of madness.  "Don't let me go mad, Rip. You shoot me first."
Rebecca and Highsmith are at Westover's place, trying to convince him to join them to go to war against Menchaca.  Emmett hits on Rebecca, and they kiss.  Lear and Rip arrive.  Lear says, "I went to your house, looking for you. They told me you were here," an explanation lacking in the play.  It comes out quickly that Highsmith is planning to attack Menchaca.  Westover realizes Highsmith was lying about Lear being in on this plan.  Highsmith nearly attacks Lear, and Lear tries to take Rebecca away, but she determines to stay with her husband.
And then we get the storm scene.  Menchaca and Claudia are at Menchaca's home, talking about a storm from their childhood (this is something that obviously is not in the play).  Westover arrives to warn Claudia (after Rip told him that Claudia was there).  Claudia asks Westover to find Lear and bring him to her.  Patrick Stewart is great as Lear in the storm, yelling at the elements, "Blow! You bastard wind, blow!"  But the storm ends without Westover appearing to give him shelter.  And of course Thomas does not appear.  The storm scene is much too brief.  Next we see Lear without his shirt, playing with sticks.  And it's then that Westover appears, and Lear doesn't recognize him (so this would be Act IV Scene v, though Westover has not yet been blinded). Westover tells Lear who he is, rather than Lear suddenly recognizing him (thus ruining one of the best moments of the play).  Rip shows up; at this point in the play, the Fool has left.  From here on out, Rip is basically the Kent character.
Highsmith, Rebecca and a few men arrive at Westover's home, asking where he's been.  But at this point, why would they care about that?  After all, they're not going to get help from him, so shouldn't they be organizing their attack?  Emmett and Susannah are shown outside at a slight distance, and she kisses him.  Susannah then enters the house for the blinding of Westover, which is odd. And really, why bother blinding him?  What's the point?  He hasn't disobeyed orders as in the play. It's done with a hot poker.  Susannah, not Regan, helps.  And a servant does kill Highsmith, and it's Susannah who then shoots the servant.  Rebecca cries over her husband.  Then when Westover says he'll burn in hell, Rebecca puts out his other eye.
The film then goes to the Lear/Claudia recognition scene.  Rip is there too (again, he's Kent at this point).  This scene is done well, mostly because Patrick Stewart is an excellent actor.
We return to Westover at home, blind and alone.  But at this point, it doesn't make sense, because his character has already done everything he needed to do except reconcile with Thomas.  Westover tries to kill himself, not by jumping off a cliff but by shooting himself.  But Thomas suddenly shows up, stopping him.  He immediately tells him, "Pa, it's me, Thomas."  So there was no disguise at all in this one.  Westover realizes on his own that Emmett was responsible. In the play, Regan tells him, and it comes as a shock, which of course is much more powerful.  (Everything between Westover and Thomas is weak in this production, but not because of the acting. It just doesn't have the emotional impact that it does in the play, because it's not allowed to develop.)
Tumlinson arrives back at the main house, where Susannah and Rebecca are alone.  He quickly figures out what is happening and rides off to Menchaca's place.  He's less a part of it than in the play.  In the play, he is convinced to help in the war.  We see the battle, something that is done quickly and off stage in the play.  Emmett is killed in the battle rather than in a duel with Thomas, so his death is less momentous.  Lear wanders outside to tell everyone to stop fighting.  Claudia follows him out to stop him and is shot.  So her death was not ordered by Emmett.  This is a much weaker death.  When Tumlinson arrives, Lear walks out carrying Claudia's body (followed by Rip).  Tumlinson orders the shooting to stop, and it is stopped.  Everyone looks at Lear. Lear does actually hold a feather in front of Claudia's nose, and thinks she's alive.  Rip says it's the wind. Lear dies. There are a lot of changes here.  In addition to Emmett not having a sudden change of heart and attempting to save Lear and Claudia, Susannah and Rebecca are alive and back at the house.  Westover is still alive too.  The men bring the bodies of Lear and Claudia back to Lear's house.  Tumlinson says to Susannah, "You did this."  She looks at the bodies and says, "It needed doing."  That doesn't seem at all believable.  Rebecca asks, "Where's Emmett," so Tumlinson shows her his body too.  Tumlinson tells Susannah, "I'll see you hang for this and what you did to Westover."  Susannah rides off and then shoots herself.  But Rebecca is not poisoned, and so is still alive.  And then we see Westover and Thomas together at the end.
So this film has quite a bit after Lear's death, but doesn't have Rip say anything about doing to die (as Kent does).  And no one has any final words, as Edgar does (or Albany in the Quarto).  Shakespeare was correct in not showing us the battle. The battle is unimportant.  It's what happens to these characters that has meaning.  (time: 95 minutes)

Related Films:
- The King Is Alive (2001) with Bruce Davison, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Janet McTeer, Chris Walker; directed by Kristian Levring.  In this Dogme 95 film, a tour bus becomes lost in the desert due to the driver's faulty compass.  They have no gas and are stuck.  One man, Jack, decides he will risk walking to the nearest village for help.  Henry (David Bradley), a man who initially separates himself from the group and watches them as they try to busy themselves, says, "Is man no more than this?" He laughs to himself, then says, "It's good old Lear again."  And he begins to write what he can remember of King Lear.  As he writes quotes Edmund from Act I Scene ii: "death, dearth, menaces and maledictions against king and nobles" (he forgot a few words).  Catherine comes into his room and asks to read a book.  Henry hands her a rolled paper, and she reads from it, "I cannot heave my heart into my mouth. I love your majesty."  He tells her, "That's Cordelia."  He tells her to imagine putting on King Lear out here, and that he was thinking that she could play Cordelia.  She turns him down.  But others do not.  And they start to rehearse the first scene, in which Lear's daughters profess their love.  The guy playing Lear collapses.  Henry is now unsure whether it will work.  He says, "Poor old Lear's got the DTs. We haven't got a Gloucester."  Charles, the guy they'd like to have play Gloucester, actually says to Gina (Jennifer Jason Leigh),  "Do you think I'm blind?"  He says he'll do the play as long as she'll let him fuck her.  Henry himself takes on the part of Lear.  And of course the desert and their predicament (as well as possibly the play) begin to affect them.  Liz, the woman playing Goneril, makes out with the man playing Edmund.  She tells him she's doing it to piss off her husband, Ray (Bruce Davison).  Ray later wanders out into the desert, saying Kent's last lines: "I have a journey, sir, shortly to go. My master calls me. I must not say no."  He collapses and says the last line again.  Gina dies and Henry cries over her body.  He drags her out (rather than carry her).  Charles has hanged himself.  Around the fire, they'll all a bit mad, and the begin doing lines from the play.  It's a great scene. (time: 106 minutes)

Films With References To King Lear
- An Education  (2009) with Carey Mulligan, Peter Sarsgaard, Alfred Molina, Olivia Williams; directed by Lone Scherfig.  Several scenes take place in a school, so of course sooner or later we're going to get a Shakespeare reference.  In one scene, the students take turns reading from King Lear.  They're reading from Act I Scene iv.  The first student, as the Fool, says, "May not an ass know when the cart draws the horse? Sings. Whoop, Jug!  I love thee."  The teacher, Mrs. Stubbs (Olivia Williams), says, "When it says 'sings,' it means you sing the line.  Never mind. Lear."  Another student, as Lear, continues the scene: "Does any here know me?  This is not Lear./Does Lear walk thus? Speak thus?  Where are his eyes?/Ha!  Waking? Who is it that can tell me who I am?" Jenny (Carey Mulligan) interrupts, raising her hand.  "Oh, Miss!  Me.  I can."  The teacher, seeing Jenny's engagement ring, is disappointed in her, knowing this means she won't go to Oxford.  The edition of King Lear that I have does not indicate that Fool sings the "Whoop, Jug! I love thee" line.  And Lear's lines are, "Does any here know me? This is not Lear./Does Lear walk thus? speak thus? Where are his eyes?/Either his notion weakens, or his discernings/Are lethargied. Ha! waking? 'tis not so./Who is it that can tell me who I am?"  By the way, the Fool's answer is "Lear's shadow."  (time: 100 minutes)
- Husbands And Wives  (1992) with Woody Allen, Mia Farrow, Judy Davis, Sydney Pollack; written directed by Woody Allen.  In this, one of Woody Allen's many excellent films, Jack (Sydney Pollack) and Sam (Lysette Anthony) come out of a movie theatre that has posted on its marquis "Ran," the Kurosawa adaptation of King Lear.  Jack says, "Trust me on this, will ya? It's Lear.  King Lear.  Shakespeare never wrote about a King Leo."  Sam replies, "Well, Mr. Intellectual, Shakespeare wrote in English, not Japanese."
- Monty Python's Life Of Brian  (1979) with Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Michael Palin, Eric Idle, Terry Jones, Terry Gilliam; directed by Terry Jones.  At the end of the film Brian is crucified.  Another person being crucified cheers him up with the song, "Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life."  Toward the end of the song he says, "You come from nothing. You go back to nothing. What have you lost? Nothing!  Nothing will come from nothing. You know what they say? Cheer up, you old bugger."  "Nothing will come from nothing" is Lear's response to Cordelia's answer of "Nothing" in Act I Scene i.  (By the way, that's the Folio reading. The Quarto reading is "Nothing can come of nothing.")
- My Own Private Idaho  (1991) with River Phoenix, Keanu Reeves; directed by Gus Van Sant.  This film is steeped in Shakespeare.  While being a loose adaptation of The First Part Of King Henry The Fourth (with bits from The Second Part Of King Henry The Fourth), it also contains a funny reference to King Lear.  In the scene where the coverboys on the magazines come to life, the magazine titled Torso has an article titled "King Leer."  That magazine cover also contains references to Romeo And Juliet, Two Gentlemen Of Verona and Measure For Measure.
- Theater Of Blood  (1973)  with Vincent Price, Diana Rigg; directed by Douglas Hickox. In this movie, an actor kills his critics by methods from Shakespeare's plays.  There are references to Julius Caesar, Troilus And Cressidea, Cymbeline, The Merchant Of Venice - in his version, Shylock does indeed get his bond - Richard III, Romeo & Juliet, Othello, Henry VI Part I, Titus Andronicus, King Lear and Hamlet)

Television Programs With References To King Lear
- The Black Adder  (1983)  with Rowan Atkinson, Tim McInnerny, Robert East, Brian Blessed, Tony Robinson.  This series has a lot of Shakespeare references.  As for King Lear, in the first season, the first episode (titled "The Foretelling") includes the three witches from Macbeth, but in the end credits they're listed as Goneril, Regan and Cordelia.  Also in the closing credits is this: "With additional dialogue by William Shakespeare."
In the second episode, titled "Born To Be King," Edmund (Rowan Atkinson) wants to prove that his older brother Harry is a bastard so that he himself would be next in line for the crown.  He acquires letters written by the Queen to another man, who Edmund believes to be Harry's father.  But it turns out that the other man is Edmund's father. So Edmund is a bastard, just like the Edmund of King Lear.  (Note: though this was the second episode, a mistake was made and was listed as the fourth episode.)
- Blackadder II  (1986) with Rowan Atkinson, Tim McInnerny, Tony Robinson, Miranda Richardson.  Like the first series, this one has a lot of Shakespeare references.  In the fourth episode, titled "Money," there are several references including one to King Lear.  Blackadder (Rowan Atkinson) owes a large sum of money, and a bishop comes to collect it.  He takes Blackadder to a graveyard to show him what became of the last person who failed to pay back his loan.  There is a mad person in the graveyard who says to Blackadder, after the bishop has left, "Poor Tom's a-cold. Pity Poor Tom, for his nose is frozen, and he does shiver, and he's mad."  (Earlier in the scene he called Blackadder "Nuncle.")
- Slings & Arrows  (2003 - 2006)  with Paul Gross, Martha Burns, Stephen Ouimette, Mark McKinney, Susan Coyne.  Obviously the show's very title comes from Hamlet's most famous soliloquy.  Slings & Arrows is a show about a theatre company, and each season it focuses on one of Shakespeare's plays.  The third season is King Lear.  (There are, however, references to several other Shakespeare plays, including A Midsummer Night's Dream, Macbeth and Henry The Fifth.)
In the first episode, titled "Divided Kingdom," Geoffrey (Paul Gross) is disturbed late at night by a voice calling "Tom's a cold" (a reference to Edgar when disguised as Tom O'Bedlam). He sees Oliver in the rain.  (This turns out to be a nightmare.)  During a phone interview, the interviewer mentions that his next production is King Lear, and he asks Geoffrey how he plans to top himself.  There is a meeting to discuss how to do the plucking out of Gloucester's eyes (someone suggests using spoons, but thumbs trump spoons).  Then they discuss the storm special effects - how real to make it.  The theatre has access to some new expensive equipment that can essentially create a storm on stage.  Richard (Mark McKinney) asks Geoffrey if William Shatner will play Lear.  But Geoffrey goes to see Charles Kingman (whose last name is a bit on the nose, eh?) about the role.
In the season's second episode, titled "Vex Not His Ghost" (the title itself a reference to Kent's line at the end of King Lear), the cast is assembled for the production of King Lear.  Sarah Polley plays Sophie, who will be playing Cordelia.  When Charles meets her, he asks her how much she weighs, then says that carrying her will be a challenge.  He later tells Geoffrey that he has cancer, but still needs to play Lear.  Charles says, "I know the part. I've been studying it all my life, and now I'm living it."
In the third episode, titled "That Way Madness Lies" (the title from Lear's speech in Act III Scene iv), they players rehears Act I Scene i, and Charles becomes disoriented.  On the night of the opening of the inane musical (in the smaller theatre) there is a storm.  Geoffrey asks Oliver where Charles is, and Oliver replies, "Geoffrey, Charles just went raving into the storm. The irony is heartbreaking."
In the fourth episode, titled "Every Inch A King" (the title coming from Lear's line in Act IV Scene v, when he responds to Gloucester's question, "Is't not the king?"), it is the night of the preview for King Lear, and Charlies is having trouble with his lines.  Again, we see the storm scene, and he calls for lines from the stage manager, who is keeping track of his dropped lines on a pad.  So far: forty (and this is only Act III).  During intermission, Geoffrey helps Charles, who quotes Lear, "Here I stand your slave,/A poor, infirm, weak and despised old man" (from Act III Scene ii).  Ellen tells Geoffrey she's concerned.  Ellen says, "He's not playing Lear. He's living Lear. That's the problem." Charles doesn't shop up, and they cancel opening night.  Meanwhile the inane musical is a success.
The fifth episode is titled "All Blessed Secrets."  Things get worse, when the stupid musical moves to the larger theatre, and Lear moves to the smaller theatre.  A sad view of aging, how the world becomes smaller, and the younger, much stupider crowd takes over.  They rehearse Act II Scene iv, and Charles gets so into it, he pushes Ellen, who is playing Regan.  Ellen quits.  Charles is unable to go on again, and the play is canceled.
In the sixth and final episode of the show, titled "The Promised End," Geoffrey is forced to resign as artistic director.  He tells the cast King Lear is canceled. Charles takes Geoffrey bowling, and quotes Lear: "'Shake all cares and business from our age,'Conferring them on younger strengths, while we/Unburdened crawl toward death.' But he doesn't mean it. Of course. He doesn't really think he's going to die. No one does. I don't.  That's the real insanity of it."  And he realizes in that moment how he will do Lear.  So Geoffrey finds a new venue for the play - the church where he's been getting counseling.  And he ends up having to play Kent.  And they put on King Lear, and it's fucking great.  The performance had me in tears, with just the few bits we're shown.