Daniel Craig and Ruth Negga to star in Macbeth in March 2022 — Page 2

SouthernCakes said: "How do we know Ruth Negga? Feel like I know her name but not sure why?"

I loved her in Preacher TV series. She also has the movie Passing coming up next month

mattmarkowski99 said: "Begins previews on March 22nd and opens April 28th at the Lyceum Theater. Directed by Sam Gold

https://deadline.com/2021/09/daniel-craig-broadway-macbeth-ruth-negga-spring-2022-1234846541/"

Tickets start October 6 and 8!!!! Wowza

Dollypop said: "I have never seen a good stage presentation of this play--from the Stratford CT production where the set was made of lycra that was stretched, pulled and poked to suggest different locations, to the Kelsey Grammar version that was produced on an apparent budget of $20.00, to the Lincoln Ceneter production, where the witches were treated like The Supremes. Somewhere in the mix was Ethan Hawke's performance where his incessant shouting caused him to lose his voice several times a week and an Alec Baldwin production that looked like it took place in a leather bar.

We'll see how this one fares."

I don't usually love it on stage either, but the Patrick Stewart/Kate Fleetwood production directed by Rupert Goold (also at the Lyceum) in 2008 was outstanding. That production was electric.

@Dollypop

Sounds like you’ve been unlucky in your Macbeths. As mentioned above, the Goold production was excellent (I didn’t get to see it live, but I love the film translation they did for it). Carrie Cracknell did a really strong production at the Young Vic some years ago. Then in NYC, we had Erica Schmidt’s recent production at the Lortel, with a cast of young women – that was excellent. And Yukio Ninagawa’s production from the 80s came back to NYC a couple years ago, and I thought that was also brilliant. And those are just the ones I’ve personally seen – Macbeth is done all the time, everywhere. There’s bound to be plenty of duds, even among the high-profile production.



On that note though - It does seem strange to me that we’re getting yet another production of Macbeth on Broadway in such a relatively short amount of time – compared with many Shakespeare plays that have barely been produced in NYC recently, let alone on Broadway. I get the criticisms about wishing they would put their star power toward new talent. From an audience standpoint though, I don’t really care. I’m used to see people do and re-do Shakespeare. I once saw 6 productions of 12th Night in less than 2 years.



And yeah, I think Hogan raises a good point. Rudin’s specialty as a producer was attracting high-profile stars, and pairing them with some combination of iconic roles and/or significant directors/playwrights. Many worried that we wouldn’t see as much of that after Rudin’s downfall, but this is a good example of that.

I would’ve thought the critically acclaimed off Broadway production of Othello that Daniel Craig did would of moved uptown.

It will take both Daniel and Ruth, many hour and days and weeks and months to learn their lines. Shakespeare is notoriously difficult to learn, as we now speak very different than they did 450 years ago.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Sam Gold isn't exactly a bad director, so much as he's a wildly inconsistent director. Not just in quality, but also in style. Lest we forget that this is the same man who directed Fun Home to perfection. Lest we forget that he was also Annie Baker's go-to director when she was putting out her most significant works. And we've gotten things like A Doll's House, Part 2 - and so on. Not to mention he's done some revivals that were incredibly safe, ordinary, and devoid of any creativity.

So I feel like he's just kind of a wild card of a director. None of us really knows what he's going to do with Macbeth. And even if it is sort of in the same vein as his Hamlet and Lear, personally I'd rather see him do these weird, messy, playful reinterpretations of classics than to see him do one of his more stale, ordinary productions.

As I write this, it also occurs to me that Macbeth might be more in his wheelhouse than Hamlet or Lear. The latter 2 plays are more steeped with heavy meaning, thematic resonance, and complicated philosophical explorations - and Gold didn't really capture any of that. Macbeth is still Shakespeare of course, so it still has a lot of that. But it's somewhat more accessible - somewhat more of a plot-driven, more compact in its structure, more viscerally thrilling, and overall more straightforward. We might find that Macbeth is a better complement to Gold's unwieldy, mood-driven direction.

500 a ticket for decent tickets. They really think people are going to spend that after the pandemic despite Craig being in it?

ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "MACBETH will now play the Longacre, not the Lyceum, which is a much more desirable house."

I wonder if that means the Lyceum will get Sing Street or another smaller musical...

P.S - It's amusing Diana is being replaced by a far grimmer story about British royalty...

BritCrit said: "P.S - It's amusing Diana is being replaced by a far grimmer story about British royalty..."

Technically, Macbeth is Scottish.

Count me in the camp that thinks Sing Street will play the Lyceum after all. I feel an announcement from Broccoli and company real soon...

Updated On: 12/16/21 at 12:18 PM

TaffyDavenport said: "I splurged for this when tickets first went on sale, and I feel much better having spent $150 for mezzanine row D at the Longacre than at the Lyceum. Although, had I known, I might have bought a cheap balcony seat, since the Longacre's is so much better."

We are in the exact same situation as you, having also bought $149 tix for Mezzanine Row D. They seemed to be a good combination of decent location and reasonable price. I'm not familiar enough with the two theatres to make a direct comparison, so just wondering why you feel these seats are actually better in the Longacre than the Lyceum? Thanks for any insight you can offer.