Ian McKellen's Macbeth...

[fajrdrako]

One of the best theatrical experiences I have ever had was seeing Ian McKellen as Macbeth in London in 1977. Judi Dench was Lady Macbeth, though at the time I'd never heard of her before. I remember it well, though I don't know where the programme has gone.

So when I sat down on Saturday to see the Trevor Nunn DVD version of the play from 1978 starring Ian McKellen, I thought I'd be seeing the same thing. And in some ways, it was the same thing. Well, of course the words were the same, and the delivery of the main characters, and some of the lighting - which must be some of the best stage lighting I've ever seen. Sheer genius.

But other things were different, unless my memory fails me, which it might, after all this time. Changed for filming, perhaps?

It suffered a little from being a filmed version of a stage show, which is never entirely successful. But it rememinded me how and why Ian McKellen was my favourite actor of the seventies.

Comments

[lilithlotr.livejournal.com]

Preach it, sister.

Ian has been my favourite actor since the 70s, and I am DYING to see his Lear.

All other plans I'm making for the next two years are tentative. Seeing Ian and Trevor's Lear is not.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I am dying to see McKellen's "Lear" too. Not sure how I can manage it, but - well, I'm certainly going to give it my best shot.

I became a McKellen fan when he was touring with "Playing Shakespeare". He was magnificent and I was enthralled.

[lilithlotr.livejournal.com]

I never saw Playing Shakespeare live. I don't remember what I first saw him in, but I began going to London to see him around that same time.

Ian's going to tour with Lear, so I'm sure it will make North America. But if I can see it in Stratford - whatever the cost - I will

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I did manage to see his "Richard III" in Brooklyn, so there's hope. Which is not to say I wouldn't want to see it in the UK... Sadly, now that McKellen is such a big name, I don't think there are any great changes that he'll come to Canada.

[lilithlotr.livejournal.com]

I wanted so desperately to see A Knight Out when he did it in Vancouver a couple of years ago, and I could just NOT get the day off. Then, of course, he did it last month while I was chasing my band around the country. *sigh*

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I missed it both places. It's probably almost as easy or cheap for me to go to London as to Vancouver... sigh.

[lilithlotr.livejournal.com]

I know what you mean. I can see things in NYC or London easier than I can in, say, the Chicago suburbs

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes - so true - funny world, isn't it?

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

We watched that recording at school; I think it was broadcast in parts in the BBC Schools time-slot.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I wish we'd seen good stuff like that when I was in school!

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

It was an O Level set-text, so we had to. I enjoyed Shakespeare; it was Jane Austen I hated.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I loved Shakespeare always. We never studied Jane Austen in school, and though I don't hate her books (and particularly love "Persuasion") she doesn't have quite the appeal to me that she seems to have for most readers. I find her antiromantic. I much prefer Georgette Heyer, unintellectual though it is for me to say so.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't say there was much to choose between them, and at least more happens in Heyer. It's not a time-period that greatly interests me, and Austen's world is just too narrow and boring for my imagination.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, Austen does seem very narrow in scope and viewpoint. Witty, but not IMHO in a very humanistic way, and the characters are fairly artificial - deliberately so, for satiric effect. I do like the period a lot (thanks to Shelley and Byron and their friends). I find Georgette Heyer novels vary a lot in quality from one to the next.

[kiki-miserychic.livejournal.com]

I have a copy of that somewhere that I used for a school thing. It's one of my favorites as well. Having never watched the live play, maybe it was the playing directly to camera that makes it feel so different. :)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, and their technique was really very effective. It's the best use of that sort of technique I've seen, though it still isn't as good as a film-from-scratch or a live production. Still: the acting was superb.

[wanderinunicorn.livejournal.com]

Have you seen a movie "Gods and Monsters" directed by Bill Condon (who also made Kinsey) with Ian McKellen and Brendan Fraser? I'ts a kind of biography of the director Frank Whale who created the Frankenstein movies. Actually the movie shows his last days before death. It's a great movie!
Unfortunatly I've never seen Ian McKellen on the stage and I think I'll not have that lack.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, I really liked "Gods and Monsters" - thugh I hadn't reallized it was by the man who made "Kinsey" (which I also liked). Ian McKellen was wonderful as Frank Whale. I've missed a number of his movies - must make a point of finding the ones I haven't seen. He's had some very intersting roles.