The Great Femme Fatale

Lady Macbeth is arguably of the most notorious femme

fatales to ever grace classic literature and theatrical pieces. She

embodies a sultry gloom that incites both terror and lust within

viewers. She is also most likely one of the most intricate and

outspoken characters to feature in Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”. She

has cunning and a ruthless manner, struggling to endure a toxic

internal conflict of conscience versus aspiration. It is just to say

that, given the complexity associated with Lady Macbeth’s

character, some productions better coin her demeanor than others.

Contrasting Jeremy Freeston’s 1997 production and Rupert Goold’s

2010 rendition of “Macbeth”, we can ascertain commonalities and

variations between the characters of Lady Macbeth in both

versions. Exclusively observing acting, aesthetics and casting, it is

apparent that Goold’s rendition of Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”

transcends Freeston’s oeuvre.

Lady Macbeth is portrayed by Helen Bexendale in the original

production and by Kate Fleetwood in Goold’s production. If we are

to equate the acting, we must also be mindful of the styles born by

the individual renditions and also of the effectiveness of the acting

in those specific circumstances. In the 1997 movie, Bexendale

characterizes Lady Macbeth as a Machiavellian vixen, starving for

control in an almost sinful, lusting manner. Her tones and facial

expressions are oft overplayed, and her demeanor is largely

controlling, or domineering. Through brusque movement and

hardhearted speech, Bexendale effectively translates the cruel and

intimidating woman that is Lady Macbeth. Considering her soliloquy

before the doctor and her lady-in-waiting, she exudes an aura of

fragility and insecurity, but not exactly insanity. Her pitch doesn’t

have that “quivering” quality, nor are there impulsive or unforeseen

movements or deliverances of lines. Despite a soft and touching

delivery, Lady Macbeth’s soliloquy in Freeston’s production is far

from impacting. Though she essentially portrays Lady Macbeth’s

destructive craving for power, Bexendale appears to come short in

the portrayal of Lady Macbeth’s insanity. Goold’s 2010 movie,

starring Kate Fleetwood, is much more effectual in conveying the

internal havoc occurring within Lady Macbeth. Perhaps the most

blatant instance of this would be during her soliloquy. Fleetwood

releases guttural screams that resound ache and culpability, gorily

scrubbing her hands and bleaching them. She sobs and tears trickle

down her pallid face whilst she delivers her speech, masterfully

using pauses and emphasis to give authenticity to her words. We

are thrown into a state of confoundedness, almost experiencing an

internal conflict of our own, questioning how it is possible to feel

compassion for this immoral, repulsive character.

Bexendale quite compellingly embodies the murderous and

licentious character of Lady Macbeth. The aesthetics surrounding

her, namely hair and makeup; costumes; and appearance notably

contribute to this. All of her dresses shine a grim vermilion, like

fresh blood or a red rose in bloom. Red, whilst bearing the

connotations of passion and rage is also the color of sensuality and

desire. Her hair is dark brown like strong, pure coffee, with the

dark quality of ebony, or moist bark. The color of her hair aids in

giving Bexendale a certain enigmatic and menacing quality as she

plays the part of Lady Macbeth. Additionally, her tresses are

interwoven with golden string, embodying both her delight in power

and riches, but also contributing to the striking, sensual aspect to

her character. Her makeup is unadorned but I suppose that this fits

the general gist of Freeston’s production. The aesthetics present in

the 2010 rendition of “Macbeth” greatly differ to those in the 1997

film. Given that Goold’s “Macbeth” is set in the era of the second

world war—circa the 1940s—as opposed to Freeston’s setting in the

Scottish middle ages, Lady Macbeth’s costumes are much more

erotic. Fleetwood wears tailored outfits, accentuating the shapes

and curves of her body. Her neckline, as seen in the kitchen scene

with Patrick Stewart, dips very low. To add to her sensuality, she

wears heels and curls her hair—in the similar fashion of a 20 th

century pinup girl—sporting red lipstick and thin lines of jet-black

eyeliner, portraying her as the ultimate vixen. Her hair is an inky

black, reminiscent of crow’s wings or coal dust, enhancing her

obscure and shrewd character. Personally, I find the aesthetics

around Lady Macbeth’s character to be significantly superior in the

2010 film. Her sultry, murky, showgirl type appearance emphasizes

her dual personality and scheming manner—she is genuinely

terrifying.

Contrasting the acting and aesthetics of both the 1997 and

2010 productions of “Macbeth”, focusing solely on Lady Macbeth

and the actresses who portrayed her, we come to a substantial

question: who best played her part? It must be said Goold’s casting

of Lady Macbeth is far superior to Freeston’s. In the 1997 film,

Bexendale bore sharp features and somber, shadowy eyes,

contributing to her charisma in the film. Additionally, she spoke

with a pronounced Scottish accent, which gave her credibility as

Lady Macbeth as well as functioning as a sort of enticing attribute.

One was required to linger on her every word to fully grasp her

speech. Fleetwood was much more gaunt in appearance and

expressive in manner, this probably accentuated by her age. She

had a certain refinement to her movement, and a bite to her

speech, almost playing with hiatuses and stress in dialogue to

convey emotion—especially in her disturbed delivery of Lady

Macbeth’s soliloquy. Perhaps this was in part due to the obscure

mood of Goold’s production, or because the film was set in a more

modern era, but it seemed easier to appreciate and sympathize

with Fleetwood’s portrayal of Lady Macbeth. Though both

Bexendale and Fleetwood were able to convey the abstruse and

serpentine character of Lady Macbeth, Fleetwood better articulated

and interpreted her insanity—which is what chiefly appeals to

viewers—and was able to both terrify and sadden, whilst the latter

actress left viewers more or less unmoved.

Observing acting, aesthetics and casting, it can—disputably—

be said that the character of Lady Macbeth in Goold’s “Macbeth” is

considerably better than in Freeston’s. Bexendale—who featured in

the 1997 production—was able to express Lady Macbeth’s longing

for control and deceitful character, but lacked in making her lunacy

authentic. Fleetwood portrayed Lady Macbeth with a sort of

intimidating poise, managing to incite a medley of fright,

bewilderment and grief within viewers, ultimately winning us over.

It is rather exciting to consider how sometimes, irrespective of the

genre or setting of a production, we are still capable of

distinguishing a better portrayal of a character.