What the fuckign fuck is the point of a story, wherin the protagonist is the villain all along?

This scene is beyond kino

>Unmodernized Shakespeare dialogue is fucking cringeworthy
It's a shame you think that, because it's actually pretty fucking great

I liked how burnam wood coming to dunsinane hill meant the ashes of the burned forest, way better than the original meaning where they strap twigs to themselves and pretend to be trees or some shit. They didn't even have to change the dialogue as well

>I couldnt understand a single fucking word they said
jesus christ, go back to school.

OP real answer. He transitions from sympathetic to evil slowly through the story, giving us understanding for his motives and actions

Every protagonist is the villain according to one point of view.

I'm pretty ok with the Shakespearean English just because Macbeth is so short and I've read it and seen so many adaptations.

I couldn't understand a fucking word because Fassbender did that garbled throaty growly barky shit that all actors do to try to sound tough now.

To make you try thinking about the character's goals and motivations for what they are rather then the way they're presented.

I'm surprised you didn't cover this in high school English, OP? Are you from a non-Anglo country?

He was never sympathetic. One of the first scenes establishes him as respected among his peers for being good at killing people. Then I think in the next scene or even the same scene where he talks with the witches he starts talking about his dark thoughts and desires for power. That's like act 1 scene 2 or 3 out of 5 acts. He was evil from the beginning but just had no motivation until then

YOU ARE SERIOUSLY BLOWING MY MIND RIGHT NOW BRO

Maybe he did a different play

Alright, haven't actually read or watched it but have heard some friends talking about it so I assumed I knew what I was talking about

What you said is what teachers like to say but I've always disagreed with it, just my opinion

How is a man who loses to his predetermined destiny unsympathetic?
It's not like he had a choice. Even if the prophecy was self-fullfilling, it was still there to fullfill itself.
He's lost in a closed loop which is what causes is madness. That's the tragedy of Macbeth

I've always felt that he has free will throughout the play. I think that's where the really powerful parts come from, the fact that he has free will.

Macbeth is a story about justice.

Macbeth is a character who doesn't know how to be just. He solves all his problems with violence, which causes more problems, which he then solves with more violence, and he gets what's coming to him.

I don't know. It's one of those self fulfilling prophecy things. Like if the witches never said anything to him in the first place, he probably never would have told his wife, and she never would have goaded him on to taking the throne. I think he has about as much free will as Oedipus did.

Same here, started watching without captions (not a native speaker but I don't usually use captions), didn't understand a lot, so turned the captions on. Still couldn't understand most of what was said.

But god damned Shakespeare sounds good. That paa paa paa man. Even if you don't understand what is said it still sounds so fucking good.

Based Brannaugh.

My biggest complaint about the movie was Madeline Cuntlizziard as Lady macbeth. Bitch cant speak english and Shakespearean dialogue seemed like too much for her.

what the fuck is Saint Crispin's day?

Is it like Kwanza?

It's coming up on October 25th so maybe you should start getting ready for it.

Based Arkapaw. He's single handedly turning mediocrity into kino

Fuck you I liked it. I mean, RnJ deserves a proper adaptation, but there is nothing wrong with playing with the convention. I think that movie did a great job with it and I don't understand why it gets trashed so hard.

the dialogue wasn't modernized in that RnJ. That movie was the same thing that OP was complaining about. Modernized movie with original dialogue

Avaunt, plebian. Methinks you dull.

The point, ideally, should be to force the conclusion that the viewer is a monster for identifying and not condemning the actions of an evil person. It's should be a commentary on the human condition, suggesting that the viewer is not so far from being a similar villain. Not many attempts at this are successful, as it's far, FAR too easy to be ham fisted in the depiction.

Probably the best example is Michael Corleone, as far as film goes. He is presented as a criminal with good intentions and a dedication to family, but steadily declines into bitterness, neglect, and apathy.

all those pretty colours and effects and it wasn't even half as good as Welles fatass in Chimes at Midnight.

>hannibal
>villain
jack please go