B. A. (Hons.

) English – Semester VI DSE-3

Literature and Cinema Study Material

Unit-3
Macbeth, William Shakespeare
Films : (a) Maqbool
(b) Throne of Blood

Edited by : P. K. Satapathy
Department of English

SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING

University of Delhi
DSE-3 : Literature and Cinema
Unit-3
Drama and Films

Edited by:
P. K. Satapathy
School of Open Learning
University of Delhi
Delhi-110007

 
SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 DSE-3 : Literature and Cinema
Unit-3
Drama and Films

Contents
S. No. Title Pg. No.
3.1 Objectives 01
3.2 Introduction 01
3.3 Theory of Adaptation 02
3.4 Shakespeare’s Macbeth: Outline 04
3.5 Maqbool as the cinematic adaptation of Shakespeare’s Macbeth 05
3.6 Throne of Blood: Film adaptation of Macbeth 08
3.7 Reference and Suggested Reading 10

Prepared by:
Nipun Kalia

 
SCHOOL OF OPEN LEARNING
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI
5, Cavalry Lane, Delhi-110007
 Unit 3
Nipun Kalia

Structure of Lesson
3.1 Objectives
3.2 Introduction
3.3 Theory of Adaptation
3.4 Shakespeare’s Macbeth: Outline
3.5 Maqbool as the cinematic adaptation of Shakespeare’s Macbeth
3.6 Throne of Blood: Film adaptation of Macbeth
3.7 Reference and Suggested Reading

3.1 Objectives
After studying this unit, you will be able to:
 Evaluate the close relationship between literature and films by examining the points
of association and correlation of literary and cinematic practice.
 Understand the theoretical framework of intertextuality and the connection between
the methods and approaches of literature and films.
 Describe the theoretical principles and nuances of the text.
 Identify a range of questions that can be discussed within the scope of the prescribed
texts.
3.2 Introduction
In this lesson you are going to read about the relationship between literature and films. Films
and literature are two distinct but not mutually exclusive forms of art and expression. Both
are connected and related to one another but are still unique in their manner and approach.
You are also going to read about the visual adaptations of literary works, film as an adapted
text, adaptation theory, and the cinematic text itself. To elucidate on the theory of adaptation,
we will study two cinematic adaptations of Shakespearean tragedy Macbeth namely Vishal
Bhardwaj’s Maqbool (2003) and Akira Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood (1957).
Literature is a written art form which employs language and words to create while
cinema brings to life these writings with the help of cinematic language which includes
sound, music, visuals, actors and the mise-en-scene. In order to interpret literature we use
various critical theories and literary approaches. Similarly, to read and understand a film, we
need to have a sound knowledge of cinematic language and a theoretical framework.
Moreover literature in the form of stories, tales and folklores has always been a source of
1
inspiration for films all over the world. Tales inspired from the epics, works of famous
novelists, world renowned short stories and the like have stimulated and moved various film
makers to bring those to the celluloid. There have been numerous examples of novels, plays,
dramas and even poetry adapted into films like the Harry Potter Series by J.K. Rowling,
Emma, Pride and Prejudice, Sense and Sensibility by Jane Austen, Sarat Chandra
Chatterjee’s Devdas, many of Shakespearean dramas and even films such as Troy and Oh
Brother, Where Art Thou? Which are cinematic renditions of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey.
When any literary text is adapted for screen, the purpose is not to merely copy the text
but to make the adaptation possess its own nuances and uniqueness while retaining the
essence and flavour of the original. Chidananda Dasgupta, a well-known film historian and
film critic explains that when a book is made into a film certain incidents, situations, scenes
and even characters from the text may undergo modifications, “but the very composition of
the elements, the molecular structure if you like, would undergo a transmutation.” A film
must not seem like a word by word visual translation of the text; the words on paper should
undergo visual transformations keeping the spirit of the text alive.
3.3 Theory of Adaptation
Adaptation, despite being as common as it is, has its own problems. Often, in the process of
adaptation, authenticity becomes a casualty. While some early theories of adaptation tried to
address such core as well as some minor issues based majorly on the cardinal variations
between the two media, critics like George Bluestone have raised questions regarding matters
of differences in the way the audience tend to perceive the two forms, literary and filmic,
which in turn depends upon how the raw materials available for either or both the forms
differ from each other. In a simple yet dexterous manner, Bluestone talks about how our way
of watching, coupled with the nuances of editing and the differences in the spatial and
temporal elements of the two media, makes a conspicuous impression on the form of the
narrative:
“The film, then, making its appeal to the perceiving senses, is free to work with
endless variations of physical reality... Where the moving picture cones to us directly
through perception, language must be filtered through the screen of conceptual
apprehension.” (Novels into Film 20)
He considers “three characteristics of time – transience, sequence and irreversibility” (49)
that make language the medium that it is, but he also maintains that the film posits “the
camera [to be] always the narrator, we need to concern ourselves only with the chronological
duration of the viewing and the time-span of narrative events” (49). It is this specific plane of
difference between these two forms of expression, which consequently makes adaptation a
process much more creative than mere translation.
While referring to the course that one needs to follow when adapting a narrative, Linda
Hutcheon deliberates upon several facets, the discourse and the story being paramount to the
extent of being the foundation on which the process of adaptation rests. The content on which
2
the narrative is built, which consists of settings, the cycle of events and the characters, are
alluded to as the story while discourse is how this information is transmitted and
disseminated. Needless to say, any person delving into adaptation of any kind needs to detect,
sift and comprehend the story underlying any narrative for it to become fit to be transferred
onto the celluloid. This, in turn, highlights the significance of the need to be alert and
responsive to the conventions at the heart of the literary text.
Adaptation is a term that is imbued with multiple meanings that simultaneously subsist-
the act of being adapted, the simple action of adapting or the outcome of something having
been successfully adapted. Within the context of films, adaptation is usually understood as
the process by which a book or play or any other written narrative is brought to the screen.
Even though movies employing novels as their base, is one of the quintessentially routine
means of film adaptation, film adaptation also encompasses the use of other films, comic or
graphic narratives, scriptures, drama, autobiographical accounts and non-fiction. In fact, it
won’t be wrong to say that adaptation has co-existed as well as developed with the original
screenplays, from the earliest possible days of cinema.
Allegiance to the original has always been a thorn in the side of the rose that adaptation
is. Not compromising the authenticity of the source text has always been the criterion against
which any and all adaptations are measured. Peter Hawkes and John Desmond have
commented on the precedents that conform to this convention of fidelity:
“The field has been preoccupied with the fidelity issue. The main question asked
about adaptations by reviews and critics alike has been to what degree the film is
faithful to the text. The practitioners of this approach tend to judge a film’s merit
based on whether the adaptation realizes successfully the essential narrative
elements and core meanings of the printed text. [...] How is it possible to identify the
core meanings of a text when we know literary texts are capable of supporting an
indefinite number of interpretations?” (2)
Thus, one may conclude that collations and comparisons between the original source and the
adapted version are just as inevitable as the verdicts over which of the two ends up being
better, and that such comparisons are ultimately futile.
Desmond and Hawkes further add that with “indefinite number of interpretations
available” fidelity as a sole criterion cannot be held as a compulsory practice (2). In the
absence of any undisputed standard, the issue of fidelity is definitely overrated when it comes
to comparing the film to its adaptation. Linda Hutcheon is also of the opinion that the aspect
of fidelity has to be expanded and its scope should be widened to include other criteria.
It is erroneous to compare literature and films in the sense of fidelity. Written texts are
seldom compared vis a vis the other forms of art. More so, the discussion around fidelity
gives rise to a certain presumption in creating a hierarchy between the ‘source’ text as the
original and the adaptation thereof becoming just a copy. Desmond and Hawkes reason that
“An adaptation is not a better film because it is a close interpretation as opposed to an

3
intermediate or loose one. In fact, some people argue that fidelity to a text is a sure-fire way
to make a bad film” (42). Consequently, it is pointless to emphasize on fidelity, when
‘faithful’ interpretations are not considered superior in the general sense. The quality of the
film does not depend upon the relation it shares with the text, so it is pointless to compare the
film with the ‘source’.
Linda Hutcheon, in A Theory of Adaptation contends that in our culture, adaptations have
always been there but they were never taken or accepted as something unique and
independent. Rather the ghost of the ‘original’ always haunted them. Adaptations have been
perceived as second grade, mediocre and inferior creations. The tag of adaptation on any
work renders it of any originality and the primary text ends up overshadowing the adaptation
in every respect. It is all the more pertinent that the adaptation should be looked at as an
autonomous and independent creative work rather than interpreting it using a comparative
approach. Thus, it would be a mistake to concentrate on fidelity and closeness to the primary
text, as a sole criterion of analysis.
Apart from fidelity, another interpretive technique that can be employed to analyse and
decipher adaptations is what the poststructuralists have termed as intertextuality. T. S. Eliot
has famously remarked that “no poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone”.
Many critics such as Julia Kristeva, Roland Barthes and also Hutcheon have described the
interconnections and interdependence a present text possesses with the previous ones in the
overall literary history. The same is applicable in case of cinematic adaptations also. More so,
the latest trends in the critical theory and approaches turn out to be quite useful in the
interpretation of adaptations. Another practice worth mentioning here is the concept of
deconstruction by the famous French critic, Jacques Derrida. Derrida’s deconstruction
dismantles the commonly held hierarchy established between the original and the copy. Quite
the opposite, the original actually draws importance from the copies created thereof, without
which the notion and belief of originality and uniqueness would not exist at all.
Check your Progress
1. What is the key to a successful adaptation?
2. Which of these – the novel or the film, should be given importance?
3. Can an adapted film be viewed as an independent work of art and not as merely a
version of the source text?
4. Can the adaptation stand alone, or is it necessary to have read the novel to understand
the film?

3.4 Shakespeare’s Macbeth: Outline

Macbeth and Banquo, King Duncan’s generals, come across three witches on the outskirts of
the battlefield while they are on their way home after quashing a rebellion. The witches
prophesy that Macbeth will be bestowed with the title of Thane of Cawdor and will

4
eventually become King of Scotland, while Banquo will beget kings. Macbeth and Banquo
are certainly interested to know more but the women disappear. Duncan grants Macbeth the
title of Thane of Cawdor for his triumph and valour in the recent combats and also suggests
visiting Inverness, Macbeth’s home.
Upon hearing form her husband about the title awarded and of the prophecy, Lady
Macbeth starts plotting the king’s murder. Macbeth is taken aback at first but later agrees and
they both plot together. Macbeth’s return is followed by the arrival of the king. Later that
night, when everyone is asleep Lady Macbeth gives drugged wine to the guards and Macbeth
kills Duncan and his guards. Lady Macbeth places the bloody daggers besides the body of the
dead king herself, setting the scene for the guards to be blamed for the king’s murder.
Macduff arrives at the scene and the sons of Duncan, Malcolm and Donalbain, fearing for
their lives flee to England and Ireland, respectively. Their flight arouses suspicion regarding
their guilt and Macbeth is designated King of Scotland. Overwhelmed by the feeling of
insecurity and guilt, Macbeth gets Banquo and his son, Fleance to be killed, but Fleance
manages to escape. At the banquet, Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo at the table. The vision
unsettles Macbeth which results in him acting erratically. Lady Macbeth attempts to calm him
but it does not work.
Macbeth reaches out to the witches and is told that he will remain safe until Birnam
Wood comes to Dunsinane, his castle. They tell him to be wary of Macduff and also that
“none of woman born shall harm Macbeth”. Macbeth unleashes a reign of terror which
results in many deaths, including the family of Macduff. Macduff along with Malcolm rallies
the English forces against Macbeth. Macbeth is shocked when he is told by a messenger that
it seems that as if Birnam Wood is marching towards the castle. In reality, the branches from
the forest are being used as camouflage by Malcolm’s army.
In the meantime, ridden with guilt, Lady Macbeth starts sleepwalking and discloses her
secrets to a doctor. She ultimately kills herself as the battle begins. Macduff dares Macbeth,
who upon realizing that his opponent has had a cesarean birth, apprehends that he is now
doomed. Macduff ultimately defeats Macbeth, and Malcolm is declared the king.
3.5 Maqbool as the cinematic adaptation of Shakespeare’s Macbeth
Set in the backdrop of Mumbai underworld, Vishal Bhardwaj’s Maqbool (2004) begins with
two corrupt policemen (the weird sisters in the play) prophesying Maqbool's (Macbeth) rise
to power, with the help of an astro-chart. Maqbool is able to do so by murdering Abbaji
(Duncan), the criminal patriarch who is a father figure of sorts to Maqbool. Additionally,
Abbaji's mistress Nimmi (Lady Macbeth), who is deeply in love with Maqbool instigates
Maqbool to kill Abbaji. The policemen also predict that Maqbool will remain safe provided
the sea does not enter his house but the customs agents raid his house as a result of a
smuggling deal at the sea port. Instead the agents discover Nimmi lying dead. She has in the
meanwhile also given birth to a child; the paternity of the child remains uncertain, whether it
is Maqbool's or Abbaji's. Upon witnessing that the newborn is being duly taken care of by the

5
newlyweds, Guddu (Fleance) and Sameera, Maqbool drops the idea of taking away his new
born and decides to give up vengeance and violence. Subsequently, Maqbool is killed by
another gangster named Boti, an accomplice of Guddu. With Maqbool dying in the final shot
the screen gradually turns red as the commotion and noises slowly disappear into
nothingness.
According to Poonam Trivedi (2007) and Douglas Lanier (2007), Vishal Bhardwaj’s
Maqbool stands out among the cinematic adaptations of Macbeth for its judicious narration,
the emphasis on the Maqbool-Abbaji (i.e., Macbeth- Duncan) bond – which in turn makes
Abbaji's killing even more nuanced, considering the addition of a father-son trope, its
inventive recasting of witches as the two corrupt policemen and possibly the most noteworthy
is the modified romance between Nimmi and Maqbool as an illicit affair. Maqbool, Nimmi,
Abbaji, and the others are all entangled in a web of deceit, ambition, desire and lust. Maqbool
ends up killing Abbaji not only because of his love for Nimmi but he is also consumed by the
resentment at the thought of serving under Guddu, who Maqbool thinks would take over as
Abbaji’s heir as his son in law. All this drives Maqbool to kill Abbaji the night before the
wedding of Sameera with Guddu is to take place. Similarly, Nimmi’s revulsion for Abbaji is
a result of their age difference - his appearance disgusts her and he is old enough to be her
father – and the fact that Abbaji has a new mistress in his life.
Moreover, Maqbool’s resolve to kill Abbaji gets further strengthened, when he comes to
know from the policemen that Abbaji might have killed his own mentor to become the leader
of the gang. Ultimately, upon the killing of Abbaji, everyone has a doubt regarding
Maqbools’ intentions which results in the regrouping of the gang and eventually isolating
Maqbool. The killing of Abbaji in the middle of the film is seen by some critics as a
premature denouement which results in creating a structural imbalance; nevertheless this can
also be understood as a result of drastic rearrangement of the connections binding Nimmi,
Maqbool and Abbaji. According to Lanier the second half of the film “closely parallels
Macbeth in plot, motifs, and character” (Lanier 2007, 217)
The adaptive approach followed by Bhardwaj in Maqbool, showcases the meticulousness
and ingenuity of the filmmaker in retaining the astute elements of the play, demonstrating the
film as an ultimate tribute to Shakespeare. For example, a meeting of Maqbool's gang
replaces the banquet scene, in which both Kaka and Guddu (Banquo and Fleance) are
missing. However, when the dead Kaka is brought back, Maqbool is the only one who thinks
that Kaka is looking at him and is alive. Maqbool is visibly disturbed upon making an eye
contact with the dead Kaka. More so, Kaka’s terrorizing gaze is linked to the dying look that
Abbaji gives to Maqbool, while Abbaji’s blood splashes on the face of Nimmi, who like Lady
Macbeth becomes increasingly possessed by imaginary bloodstains. The supernatural
dimension of Macbeth is fascinatingly reworked in allegorical terms, even while the setting
of corrupt politics and crime is depicted in realistic terms. The ‘coming of sea’ in the film is
the proposed parallel with the ‘Birnam Wood walking’ of the play, which would have had to
be dropped in any literal transposition.

6
 Various Adapters of the play have frequently altered the ending of Macbeth. While some
like Eugène Ionesco and Roman Polanski have portrayed a cyclical structure of violence,
others like Giuseppe Verdi and William Davenant have underscored a coming back to order
from chaos. Bhardwaj presents a more balanced approach, on one side he refuses to return to
order – the criminal underbelly of Bombay remains violent and corrupt – but on the other
hand the taking care of Nimmi’s new-born by Sameera and Guddu, is a redemptive act rooted
in humanity and non-violence.
Vishal Bhardwaj makes use of a wide range of tactics and approaches in order to adapt
the Shakespearean text in fascinating and charming visual ways. For example, Maqbool is
seen preparing food in a big cauldron, the day before murdering Abbaji, as he plans for the
killing. And after a while, he hallucinates the same cauldron filled with blood, a visual which
offers additional provocation for what he is about to commit. So, as Bhardwaj takes liberties
with the Shakespearean play and departs from it time and again, he nonetheless blends
together in a skilful manner the cauldron and dagger scenes of the play which displays his
astute understanding of their meaning. The fact that he is able to integrate them in a
drastically new background also highlights his craftsmanship. The policemen predicts the
possibility of rain which he adds that is rather unusual for the time, ultimately comes true and
produces an anxious and tense setting before the murder. The entire scene is akin to the
cinematic translation of the Shakespearean practice of mirroring an unnatural chaos in the
natural order.
In addition to the change in the setting from the Scotland of sixteenth century to the
present day Mumbai underworld, Bhardwaj adds local flavour to the play in the form of
language and speech. The characters in the film use a range of words, from colloquialisms in
“Mumbaiya Hindi” to Urdu, replicating the cosmopolitan culture of the city of Mumbai. In
place of noble generals and royalty, the film portrays men from the Bombay underworld and
places them in Muslim world of Maqbool.
In an attempt to adapt or reconstruct, a filmmaker relies on the source – a novel, story or
play - intensely focusing on each character, subplots, language etc. The film maker is bound
to make certain modifications or may be ends up inventing new details keeping in mind the
demand of the world he belongs to. But at the same time the film maker has to remain careful
of not losing the essence of the original so that the film does not end up becoming a mere
appropriation. Bhardwaj's strength lies in his ability to indigenize Shakespeare successfully at
multiple levels – language, plot, setting, characters, conventions, etc. – without tempering and
weakening the complexity in the Shakespearean tragedy. The presence of Bollywood
trademarks in Maqbool may be as much a case of choice as of obligation. Weddings and
festivities, dances, catchy music, songs and even the inclusion of an item number, could be
problematic and bizarre for some but it is also somewhat impossible at times for a Hindi film
director to escape the influence and dominion of Bollywood itself.
What sets apart Maqbool from all the other adaptations of Macbeth is the meticulousness
and the clever inventiveness with which Vishal Bhardwaj repositions the original play. The
7
way he transfers the play to a completely original and fresh socio-cultural background is
unparalleled; but Maqbool is not only that, it goes beyond that, it surpasses that ingenuity.
Bhardwaj realizes the sadness and suffering of the “forbidden” love which Nimmi and
Maqbool share. The intense scene of Nimmi dying in Maqbool’s arms prepares the viewers
for what is about to come. The strength of Maqbool lies in the fact that Vishal Bhardwaj is
able to utilize and involve the conventions of Bollywood in creating a filmic adaptation of the
Shakespearean play, which as a result makes Maqbool one of the noteworthy films of the last
twenty five years. Not only in Bollywood but even at the global level, Maqbool is one of the
very few Shakespearean adaptations, which have been able to capture the nuances and
complexities of the play while rooted in a local flavour.
Check your Progress
1. Characterize the relationship between Maqbool and Nimmi. If the main theme of
Maqbool is ambition, whose ambition is the driving force of the narrative—
Maqbool’s, Nimmi’s, or both?
2. Is it valid for people from countries outside England to interpret Shakespeare in their
own language and from their own cultural perspective? Give reasons
3.6 Throne of Blood: Film adaptation of Macbeth
Akira Kurosawa’s cinematic rendition of Macbeth, Throne of Blood (1957) effectively uses
the combination of filmic techniques involving sound, image and silence to create an
adaption, which while retaining the flavour and feel of the play, avoids the Shakespearean
language and dialogues. The film opens on a sombre note, a desolate landscape covered in
fog and silence. With no music, the sound of a howling wind breaks the silence and a chorus
starts chanting:
“A proud castle stood in this desolate place
Its destiny wedded to a mortal’s lust for power
Here lived a warrior strong yet weakened by a woman
Driven to add his tribute to the throne of blood
The devil’s path will always lead to doom”
The mysterious chanting along with the ominous and gloomy music sets the stage for the
eerie atmosphere and the impending catastrophe. The unnerving mood is further
supplemented by the presence of fog in the mise en scene which increases a feeling of doubt
and vagueness. Akira Kurosawa has taken certain liberties with the opening of the film and
has deviated from the actual play; as per the stage directions, it is supposed to be “Thunder
and Lightning” but he chooses a graver and solemn beginning. While the three mysterious
women plot to meet Macbeth in the beginning of the play, Kurosawa employs an anonymous
chorus as a prologue.

8
 In the original play, the first scene ends with the well-known lines by the witches: “Fair
is foul and foul is fair: / Hover through the fog and filthy air.” The lines depict obscurity and
uncertainty while simultaneously cautioning the spectator against relying on their
perceptions. ‘Filthy air’ is suggestive of the prevalent corruption and also of the events to
follow. Despite the changes made by Kurosawa in the film adaptation, he uses the lines from
the play and creates a visual translation through the deft use of sound and image in the
opening scene. The ‘fog’ is literally manifested, causing disbelief and uncertainty in the mind
of the viewer, while the invisible chorus highlights the ambiguity and the vagueness prevalent
in “fair is foul and foul is fair”. Whose voices are these? Are these witches speaking? Are
they present in their absence?
This ambiguity is transferred to both Washizu (Macbeth) and Miki (Banquo) when they
first emerge. Like files in a cobweb, they seem to be lost in the forest. They wander aimlessly
in the fog, ride around the forest, incapable of finding a way out. Kurosawa avoids the use of
any dialogue and instead employs the natural sounds in the forest - of the horses galloping
and the occasional crescendo of the haunting music. This combination creates an unsettling
mood which adds to an unnerving ambience for the audience. The silence forces the audience
to contemplate the predictions made by the witches in the same manner that Washizu as well
as Miki do in the film. Kurosawa introduces these two characters just like Shakespeare does
in the play but whereas Shakespeare employs words, Kurosawa uses total silence.
Kurosawa uses dialogues so judiciously in the film that he repeatedly avoids them even
in the most critical of the situations. Before Lord Tsusuzki’s (Duncan) killing, in order to
heighten the tension, the usage of sound is bare minimum. Apart from the intermittent
musical prompts here and there, the single prominent sound is of the rustling of Asaji’s (Lady
Macbeth) gown against the floor, which adds a haunting effect to the scene. Her appearance
also comes across as intimidating and frightening because of the contrast that the glaring
whiteness of her costume poses against the background that is dull and dark, which in turn
makes her appear deviously akin to the sorceress in the film. Possibly, the banquet scene
turns out to be the gloomiest in the film. While in the play, Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo
at the banquet after the murderers inform him about having successfully killed his friend
Banquo.
In Throne of Blood, the ghost of Miki appears in front of Washizu before he is informed
by the murderer that Miki is dead and Miki’s severed head is also produced as a proof. What
proceeds turns out to be frightening and dreadful. Upon hearing from the murderer that he
was unable to kill the son of Miki, unlike the play, Washizu is not merely annoyed but he
goes on to slay the murderer. All the while the camera stays focused on Washizu as he
intently witnesses the slow death of the murderer. Here also, hardly any words are used and
the scene makes an effective use of the sounds coming from the dying man. Without using a
single word from Shakespeare, Kurosawa makes the viewer aware of the sheer evil in
Washizu in this terrifying shot.

9
 Kurosawa also takes certain liberties with the story of the play in Throne of Blood. One
of the major differences is the relationship involving Noriyasu (Macduff) and Noriyasu
(Macduff). In order to take the revenge for the murders of his wife and son, Macduff kills
Macbeth at the end of the play. No such reference is made in the film and Noriyasu’s role is
far less significant as compared to Macduff’s. After Tsusuzki’s murder, Noriyasu along with
Kunimaru (Duncan’s son Malcolm) flees and appears only later when they march against
Washizu towards Cobweb Castle. One of the most remarkable scenes is of Washizu’s death.
Unlike the original play where Macbeth dies off stage, Throne of Blood shows Washizu
betrayed by his own army in a similar fashion as he betrayed Tsuszuki. In the scene, Washizu
is caught in the barrage of arrows until one pierces his neck. He frantically tries to escape the
continuous bombardment. The scene is extended as Washizu, walking with arrows sticking
out of his body, makes his death an absurdity. This haunting image of Washizu, along with
his horrified screaming elicits sympathy for him in death, regardless of all the wrongs done
by him.
What marks Throne of Blood as a significant adaption of the Shakespearean play is the
film’s bravery. The audacity with which Kurosawa tweaks and removes parts of the original
play renders beauty to the film by keeping the soul intact. Rather than relying on the language
and dialogues to display the craftsmanship of Shakespeare, Kurosawa makes use of
disconcerting and upsetting imagery and sound. This fearless tempering with the original play
makes Throne of Blood an intense watch, even six decades after its release.
Check your Progress
1. Compare and contrast Akira Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood as the cinematic adaptation
of Shakespeare’s Macbeth.
2. “Shakespeare films in other languages and those made in Hollywood do not belong to
the English cultural heritage and should not be used to teach Shakespeare in schools.”
Do you agree? Give reasons
3. Film is a composition of pictures rather than words, as one would find in a
novel/drama. Explain with reference to Akira Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood
3.7 Reference and Suggested Reading
Bhardwaj, Vishal, dir. 2004. Maqbool. Performers Irfan Khan, Tabu, Pankaj Kapoor, Piyush
Mishra, Ajay Gehi, Ankur Vikal. India. Kaleidoscope Entertainment.
Bluestone, George (1957) Novels into Film: The Metamorphosis of Fiction into Cinema.
California: University of California Press.
Brennan, Joseph (2013) “‘Throne of Blood’: Exploring how Shakespeare can be Adapted
Without the Bard’s Dialogue.” Available online: https://the-artifice.com/throne-of-
blood-shakespeare-macbeth/

10
Brode D (2000) Shakespeare in the Movies: From the Silent Era to Shakespeare in Love.
Oxford University Press: New York.
Chadha, Kalyani, and Anandam P. Kavoori (2008) “Exoticized, Marginalized, Demonized:
The Muslim ‘Other’ in Indian Cinema.” In Global Bollywood. Edited by Anandam
P. Kavoori and Aswin Punathambekar. New York: New York University Press. 131-
45.
Desmond, John M, and Peter Hawkes (2006) Adaptation: Studying Film and Literature. New
York: McGraw Hill.
Jess-Cooke, Carolyn (2006) “Screening the McShakespeare in Post-Millennial Shakespeare
Cinema.” In Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-First Century. Edited by Mark
Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 163-
84.
Hutcheon L (2006) A Theory of Adaptation. Routledge: New York and London.
Kott J (1967) Shakespeare Our Contemporary. Methuen: London.
Kurosawa, Akira dir. 1957 Throne of Blood. Performers Toshirô Mifune, Isuzu Yamada,
Takashi Shimura. Japan. Toho Company.
Mambrol, Nasrullah (2017) “The Sociology and Aesthetics of Film Adaptation” Available
online: https://literariness.org/2017/07/27/the-sociology-and-aesthetics-of-film-
adaptation/
Rajadhyaksha, Ashish (2003) “The 'Bollywoodization' of the Indian Cinema: Cultural
Nationalism in a Global Arena.” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 4.1 (April): 23-39.
Sen, Suddhaseel. “Indigenizing Macbeth: Vishal Bhardwaj's Maqbool.” In Asian
Shakespeares on Screen: Two Films in Perspective. Special issue, edited by Alexa
Huang. Borrowers and Lenders: The Journal of Shakespeare and Appropriation 4.2
(Spring/Summer 2009).
Singh, Vijay (2004) “Maqbool is Not an Underworld Story.” The Rediff Interview. Available
online: http://health.rediff.com/movies/2004/jan/29vishal.htm
Trivedi, Poonam (2007) “'Filmi’ Shakespeare.” Literature/Film Quarterly 35.2 (April): 148-
58.
Suzuki, Erin (2021) “Lost in Translation: Reconsidering Shakespeare’s Macbeth and
Kurosawa’s Throne of Blood” Available online:
https://lfq.salisbury.edu/_issues/48_2/lost_in_translation_reconsidering_shakespeare
s_macbeth_and_kurosawas_throne_of_blood.html

11