Joe MacBeth (1955) User Reviews

Always interesting, and almost a good film

[allenrogerj · 5/10 · 16 March 2007]

There are some fine aspects to this film: a fine script, good acting, competent direction using low-budget settings well, with some startling and chilling effects. Unfortunately there's much wrong with it too. Good things first. All of the actors act competently, some well. Sidney- not yet Sid- James is a revelation as a loyal hood, a natural lieutenant content with that role. The big- literally- problem is Paul Douglas as the hero. Douglas acts well, but he would have to lose twenty years and forty pounds to be convincing as the hit-man inspired to ambition by his new wife. Only a very great actor could make us ignore the fact that he's much too old and fat for his job, and Douglas isn't great. In appearance, he'd be better suited to Grégoire Aslan's role as the Duca, well though Aslan acts, giving the impression that he gave the job of second-in-command to Joe because he's too comfortable to be a threat and suggesting that it's because it makes Lily accessible that he's promoted Joe. Ruth Roman makes a convincing Lady Macbeth, both affectionate and exasperated by Joe, only awakening to her conscience when she sees a woman and child murdered because of her plans. The supernatural aspects, Walter Crisham as the house's butler/tutelary spirit, indifferent to his masters or their guests or killers and Minerva Pious (some name!) as the fortune teller who sets the plot going are both good at being both real characters and unearthly. The only other problem is Bonar Colleano, in a very difficult part: good as the young man over-ambitious for a father who knows his own limitations, very good when he learns of his wife's and child's deaths and becomes an avenger, but he isn't convincing in between as a man who can pull the gang behind him to take on Joe. Ken Hughes directs briskly, but has the nerve to slow down- the long silent shot, following Colleano's movements, when Lennie learns his family are dead is a chilling and effective scene and the action scenes use economic means well, relying on the acting skills of the characters to carry them through. In short then, a curiosity, but an interesting one.

Shakespeare reworked as UK-made 'American' crime drama: Nice try, no cigar

[bmacv · 6/10 · 22 November 2004]

Before his befuddled attempt to rework Shakespeare's tragedy into an urban mob movie, Philip Yordan had more than an honorable career as a screenwriter: When Strangers Marry, Whistle Stop, Suspense, The Chase, Reign of Terror, Edge of Doom, Detective Story, Johnny Guitar, The Big Combo (to cite only titles in or near the noir cycle). Perhaps Joe Macbeth's production in the United Kingdom proved the impetus for its being adapted from the ill-starred 'Scottish play,' adding one more element originating in Great Britain to satisfy all the codicils in the deal. But Yordan's writing is far from the major shortcoming in a movie that, despite occasional spurts of interest, falls short of satisfying.

For starters, it's hard to buy the usually sympathetic Paul Douglas as a plausible pretender to the throne, even a weak-kneed and vacillating one (Douglas was nearing 50 – as well as the end of his life – at the time). True, his striking at the king is prompted (if not prodded) by his ambitious wife – Ruth Roman, here steely and matronly (she was a sadly underused actress). But both are upstaged by Bonar Colleano as a smoldering agent of revenge and retribution – in much too underdeveloped a role.

Then, the milieu, which seems to be New York City and an estate on Long Island, strikes an inauthentic note, having been filmed on sound stages across the big pond (the street scenes are shabbily Victorian rather than raffishly New World). In a genre where atmosphere ought to be preeminent, Joe Macbeth stays imprecise and generic.

Last, the direction fell to the workmanlike Ken Hughes, who had some experience in British suspense thrillers, including some that might now be termed 'Britnoir:' The House Across The Lake and The Long Haul are two of the more notable of them. But he really doesn't have much to bring to the party, and once or twice stoops to low-comedy touches grindingly at odds with the tone of the movie.

The most arresting aspect of Joe Macbeth (and aspect, alas, which becomes an albatross), is a misguided fealty to the Bard of Avon. Lest anyone overlook its Elizabethan pedigree, Joe Macbeth piles on the homages. Banquo becomes 'Banky' (the ever watchable Sid James) and MacDuff 'Duffy;' the three witches are downsized to one, a has-been actress reduced to telling Tarot cards (Minerva Pious, in a delightful turn; her cauldron becomes a kettle where she boils chestnuts on a pushcart); we even have Roman doing the 'Out, damned spot' scene (luckily, Douglas was spared 'Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow'). The trouble is, when you start noticing all the literary allusions and waiting for the next one to pop up, the movie you're watching has ceased to engage you on its own terms. Nice try, but no cigar.

"The knife knows where to go. Follow it!"

[hwg1957-102-265704 · 7/10 · 4 May 2020]

Made at Shepperton Studios in England, this is a loose adaptation of Shakespeare's play 'Macbeth' set in the world of American gangsters and I thought it came across very well. Part of the interest is to see how the Scottish play is echoed in the film and where it diverts but on its own terms it is a rattling good yarn with atmospheric noir cinematography by Basil Emmott and confident direction by Ken Hughes who often made a low budget stretch effectively. The banquet scene is particularly well done.

It is helped by a near perfect cast. Standing out for me were Ruth Roman as the ambitious Lily MacBeth, Sidney James as the seasoned Banky and Grégoire Aslan as the outgoing kingpin Duncan, not forgetting Walter Crisham as the dry butler Angus who has seen mobsters come and go. Continuity for the film was done by the splendidly named Splinters Deason.

This was much better than expected and gripped from beginning to end.

A pretty valiant effort

[HotToastyRag · 7/10 · 9 November 2021]

William Shakespeare's classic gets a re-telling and new setting to the 1950s in Joe Macbeth. How to make the bloodbath accessible to a modern audience? Make the main characters gangsters, of course! It was a great concept, and since I love the lead actor, Paul Douglas, I was very excited to see it. For the most part, it was a really valiant effort. The plot was pretty close, but with some substitutions that would make more sense in 1955. Instead of three witches, there's a Thelma Ritter wannabe who tells fortunes with tarot cards. Instead of Macduff and Banquo, the characters are renamed Duffy and Banky. King Duncan of Scotland is instead Duncan, kingpin of the American crime gang. Towards the end, it did get a little melodramatic (like the end of Scarface), but I'm sure there are some folks who won't mind. After all, it's a re-telling of Shakespeare - isn't it supposed to be melodramatic?

Ruth Roman, who shows off her lovely figure in some great gowns, plays the evil Lily Macbeth who encourages her husband Paul Douglas to bump off the head of the crime syndicate so he can replace him. She does a great job, reminiscent of Joan Crawford or Eleanor Parker, who could have also played Lady Macbeth. Paul is perfect casting, with his softie demeanor making him an easy target for his wife to manipulate.

Paul Douglas fans will love this movie, although they'll probably wish it had been made with a little bigger budget. I'm always interested in seeing "understandable" versions of Shakespeare stories, since in their native language, I usually can't understand what the characters say. As an unexpected treat, I got the biggest kick out of seeing Sidney James (from the hilarious Carry On series) in a drama, and with an American accent!

A Shakespeare's "Macbeth" by Simple Simon

[melvelvit-1 · 6/10 · 17 April 2014]

A fortune teller predicts a rapid, bloody rise to the top for a mid- level mobster and it soon comes to pass with a little help from the goon's ambitious wife...

I'm sure it sounded like a good idea at the time (still does, actually) but this underworld updating of Shakespeare's MACBETH was criminal in more ways than one and reminded me of those "Classics Illustrated" comics I had as a kid. "Simple" sums it up and a too-old Paul Douglas hammed it up shamelessly, coming off more like "Curly" from THE THREE STOOGES than the Bard's vacillating thane. The idea that the Chicago syndicate (at least I think that's what it was since I heard "the Detroit mob is moving in" at one point) could bump each other off left and right with impunity was only one of the film's many preposterous conceits but this low budget Brit noir (a Columbia picture filmed at Shepperton Studios) still had its moments, nonetheless, albeit few and far between.

The classic tale's all there from "Banky"s ghost to the damned spot on Lady, er Lily, Macbeth's hands trotted out in "Cliff's Notes For Dummies" fashion and Ruth Roman as the power behind the crime kingpin's throne was, well, Ruth Roman. She's like Arlene Dahl, Faith Domergue, Rhonda Fleming, Debra Paget, and a host of others from that era: they knew their lines and didn't bump into the furniture but their acting rarely rose above "competent". "Decorative" was the operative word for these gals and most faded away once their looks went but Ruth actually made a pretty good character actress later on in her career. I understand an underworld-set MACBETH was tried again with MEN OF RESPECT in 1990 and it's gotta be better than this.

MacBeth Goes Gangster

[jrross-62642 · 4/10 · 6 September 2023]

It's not a good idea to recreate this tragedy with only gangsters. I found no interest in cheering for any of them because they are all despicable. There are ways to lure the audience into the protagonist's mindset and demonstrate his internal conflicts. A few well known quotes from Shakespeare's doomed character would've developed this gangster version into a character worthy of pity. Allowing him to voice his feelings of regret with such paraphrases as "I've murdered sleep. I'll never rest easy again" would show that the character is troubled.

His last words in this version were the typical lines of a Hollywood gangster: Ending with "I'm the kingpin!" is pretty lame and made me think "Good riddance." How about showing the strength and determination of a once respected character with a revision of the original MacBeth's last words? Maybe something suitably corny for the times like "Try your best, Lennox; and let the first one who cries like a punk swim with the fishes."

In any case, this version needed a character worthy of the audience's sympathy. Without this critical element, Joe MacBeth does a disservice to the Shakespearean tragedy and is no more than a typical, empty Hollywood movie of the period.

Sid James plays it straight in powerful reworking of Shakespeare story

[Igenlode Wordsmith · 8/10 · 15 March 2007]

When you're talking about Shakespeare on film, the usual suspects are the foreign classics of Kurosawa and Kozintsev -- Kenneth Branagh and Laurence Olivier star-directing -- Leonardo di Caprio and Heath Ledger playing for the teenage market. "Joe Macbeth" I'd never even heard of.

I only went to see this picture because it was billed as a chance to see Sid James in a straight dramatic role: surely one of Britain's most ubiquitous and unsung supporting actors. Before becoming a household name identified with the "Carry On" series, he supported stars ranging from Vivian Leigh to Charlie Chaplin and Burt Lancaster, turning up in everything from "The Titfield Thunderbolt" to Nigel Kneale's "Quatermass" and a remake of "The 39 Steps" -- plus any number of other productions of the period -- but almost invariably as comic relief.

In "Joe Macbeth", however, he plays a central part in the plot as New York gangster 'Banky', whose murder is the step too far that sets his friend, colleague and newly self-elevated boss, Joe Macbeth, on the road to oblivion. The role is played absolutely straight (in an American accent throughout), and Sid James convinces as the grizzled enforcer whose loyalty is beyond question. Within the skewed morality of the film's setting, Banky, who just wants his son out of the racket, is one of the good guys; and it is with his death that Macbeth's actions tip into the indefensible, both in his own perceptions (witnessed by the appearance of 'Banky's ghost') and in ours.

With next to no idea of what to expect from the film, I was very impressed. In 1954, this must have been one of the first screenplays to make the connection between Shakespeare and film noir: the rewrite fits with uncanny accuracy. Macbeth's wife is the prototypical tough-as-nails dame whose ambition pushes her lover/dupe into waters deeper than he knows, while the ruthless wars, power struggles, family loyalties and even the banquets slip into the Mob template like a glove. Once it has been pointed out, the low budget -- night-time shooting, small number of sets, tight camera angles -- is self-evident, but virtue has been made out of necessity. Killings take place 'off-stage', telegraphed by the flat, unforgiving thud of the executioner's gun, scenes are claustrophobic, and the tension of the unseen is nail-biting.

With the exception as mentioned of Sid James (playing against type), the actors were all unknown to me, but the performances were excellent. The only uncertain note I felt was struck by Bonear Colleano, as a weak and somewhat petulant Lennie who is convincing enough as a youngster constitutionally unsuited to life in the Mob, but less so when the worm supposedly turns: Banky might have had the seniority to take over from 'Mac' when his men rebel, but his son's sudden elevation as heir-apparent by all these hardened killers leaves a credibility gap. But this may be a question of direction; in the 'banquet scene', we certainly see a Lennie who has gained the self-control to become dangerous.

Paul Douglas as Macbeth is superb, veering from bull-like power to pathos in an instant, and capturing audience sympathy as the bloody protagonist who destroys himself step by reluctant, reasonable-seeming step: when the machine-gun's bullets finally rip through his body, it can only be release. Ruth Roman shines as the wife who urges him against his visceral, slow-thinking instincts, tries to hold his crumbling empire together against the odds, and yet breaks down when she walks in on the slaughter of the innocent; the tone of their marriage is set from their first scene together, where she slaps the wilted wedding bouquet across his face after he keeps her waiting two hours at the altar, yet there is a genuine charge between them. Joe Macbeth's fall may come, in true noir style, from a doomed passion for a ruthless woman, but her ambition for their marriage is ultimately a defensive one, and neither will leave or betray the other. When she dies at his hand, it is with the intent of making a last stand at his side.

Gregoire Aslan made an impression on me as the smooth-talking /capo/ whom Mac is driven to murder and replace, and Walter Crisham as pale Angus the butler, who has seen a succession of mobsters come and go in the house by the lake and taken care never to evince too close an interest in any of them. Shakespeare's three witches are encompassed in one volume by Minerva Pious as Rosie, tarot reader and failed actress, who takes pointed pleasure in quoting lines from "Macbeth" to its namesake -- perhaps the most obvious of the many allusions to the characters and actions of the original play.

The homage is quite explicit, extending at times to close paraphrasing of the dialogue, yet it is impressively unforced. For all its echoes, the adaptation is a free one, a story and milieu in its own right and not a gimmick; it is as unafraid to make sweeping changes as it is to add ironic references back to the source text. It has touches of black comedy, of horror and of pure gangster action, shifting more or less effortlessly between them. I found it a very powerful film.

The Bard takes a beating.

[st-shot · 4/10 · 19 March 2017]

In this British made crime thriller the makers attempt to apply pedigree with an updated version of Shakespeare's Macbeth but from the outset it becomes clear that this dog does not hunt. Working with a bare bones outline the the film for the most part relates in name only.

Joe Macbeth (Paul Douglas) is a respected strong arm man for "Kingpin" Lennie, more than happy with his situation. Wife Lily (Ruth Roman) is ambitious however and she begins to hector Joe about moving on up which would entail removing Lennie in a permanent sort of way. Joe vacillates but Lily remains steadfast.

The possibilities are plentiful with this modern day version of one of Shakespeares most accessible plays but more than likely due to budget and time the makers of the film never even attempts to elevate Bill's words; a bit galling given he's a hometown boy. Director Hughes is either too clueless or lazy to hone scenes into a decent hybrid. If we need further proof just look to his abysmal leads as mouthpieces. Bombastic likable lug Douglas is too soft from the outset and his descent into paranoia shrill. Roman's Lady M shows some early promise as she slaps Joe into line on her wedding day for running late from a whack but director Hughes doesn't seem to want to trust her with more than a sentence or two at a time and Roman who has the look and cynicism in her voice never gets a chance to deliver the memorable lines of as good a female character you would find in all of drama.

Mac does have an imaginative moment or two with a flower hag representing the three witches and a smug butler making short work of the gatekeeper scene to go along with a cold offing of the "Kingpin" as well as Ms. Macbeth's exit but overall given the original material and its author this film is not only bad it insults English Literature along the way.

Can't WAIT Until It's Available Again SOMEWHERE!!!

[jack-115-853599 · 9/10 · 15 July 2022]

I have only seen this ONCE about 10 years ago and have been furiously searching for it ever since!! It thoroughly broadened my perspective, perception and understanding of the original play. From what I remember the performances were mesmerizing, most notably Paul Douglas and Ruth Roman who positively SIZZLED as Lily Macbeth and is easily the best thing I have ever seen her in. When I find it I definitely plan to capture it. I HIGHLY RECOMMEND!!

A nice modern reworking of Shakespeare's "Macbeth"

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 11 December 2011]

There's an automatic problem inherent with watching an updated version of any famous Shakespearean play--a huge percentage of the audience knows how the story will go. So, in the case of "Joe MacBeth", I knew pretty much where the movie was going at all times--though a few times it was cute seeing the updated characters (such as the fortune teller instead of Hecate the witch). But it's still a very hard sell, as there just aren't that many surprises. But such an updated version IS possible--as Akira Kurosawa's "Throne of Blood" was one of his best films even though, it too, was based on "Macbeth".

The film begins in 1950s America. Paul Douglas plays the title character--the number two man in the mob. However, his brand-new wife (Ruth Roman) isn't at all happy with the wealth and power and she constantly manipulates and nags Joe to want more. Eventually, her hand leads to Joe killing the boss--but like the Shakespearean tale, you KNOW that Joe won't survive for long because of his infamy.

The best thing about this film is Ruth Roman as Mrs. MacBeth. Much of it is because she was the most interesting character in the play and much is because she did a very nice job of playing a cold-hearted lady spider! And, the second best thing (in my opinion) is that it's NOT the traditional Macbeth with its Tudor/Stewart language! While not a brilliant film, it is clever and a nice reworking of the story--and I loved the gangster lingo. It also had a dynamite ending--and I loved the butler! But in my opinion, it still doesn't even come close to "Throne of Blood" in quality.

By the way, the real life MacBeth was NOT a such a bad guy and Shakespeare pretty much screwed up the story. If you want to find out more, look for the name 'Mac Bethad mac Findlaích'--that's the non-Anglicized version of his real name.

THE POWER BEHIND THE THRONE

[stusviews · 8/10 · 8 August 2023]

A tightly plotted noir based on one of the most tightly plotted of all of Shakespeare's plays. Joe MacBeth is a hit man for the mob, mean and ruthless and not only good at what he does--very good--but also perfectly content with where his skills have taken him; his ambitious young wife is the voice in his ear, urging him to claw his way higher, all the way to the top if possible, and by any means necessary--including murder. Paul Douglas is a big, intimidating bear of a man, all business all the time; a young Ruth Roman--gorgeous, interesting as always, and costumed in a whole slew of eye-catching gowns--is his won't-take-no-for-an-answer bride. Great performances all around, including from as impressive a gaggle of tough guy types as the movies have ever seen. A "Godfather" for its time, pared down, amped up, and without all the bells and whistles--that still works today. One of the best gangster films ever made. See it.

Good B-list cast, terrible Z-list production values......

[Spudling2 · 12 March 2011]

Paul Douglas is the hapless gangster who kills his way to the top of the tree. Ruth Roman is the vicious, ambitious wife who pushes him on his ever more destructive way. Sid James, Gregoire Aslan,Bonar Colleano and Robert Arden are amongst the welcome familiar faces in support. Unfortunately this interesting cast and Philip Yordans' excellent screenplay -- which I assume could not find Hollywood backing -- are given British B-feature production values.

As a result, the whole film is studio-bound and drably photographed, and there is no feeling that it is set in the Thirties or, for that matter, in America, beyond that the leading actors are American and all the British supporting actors essay unfamiliar accents.

Director Ken Hughes does attempt some atmospheric shots,but too many scenes are given perfunctory treatment and emphasis is lost. It has its' moments and retained my interest -- but it could have been so much more that just a minor Shakespearean adaptation with a bit more money spent on it....