Mid-Term

I think Throne of Blood surely had two shades of Shakespeare's Macbeth. In Throne of Blood Washizu is revisited by the ghosts of the General in which he kills, because he poses a threat to his position. Another event that happened similar so the events in Shakespeare's Macbeth was howWashizu was defeated in battle by the prophesy of men coming in the trees but, he didn't meet his death in that way. I thought that there was too much similarity between the two stories that one couldn't say they were almost the same, I believe they were actually the same. One huge difference between Throne of Blood and Macbeth was the wives.Washizu's wife wasn't as half as ambitious as Macbeth's wife, this I think is a important factor that showed that Throne of Blood isn't just a remake of Shakespeare's Macbeth.

The arrow scene at the end of the film was one of the realistic. The arrows that were launched at Washizu were real and you couldn't say that his facial expressions weren't good enough of good acting because they were 100% real expressions weren't good enough of good acting because they were 100% real expressions. Of course the scene was dangerous but, I think that's the factor which made the scene so famous. If the arrows were done with special effects in my opinion I think the scene would have been considered great instead of famous.

Overall I think that Shakespeare's Macbeth and Noe theater took a little from both
of the Theaters, and they came together to create Throne of Blood. As I before stated there were elements of Macbeth, I don''t believe that there were too many elements of Macbeth taken. If there too many elements taken I think people would have saw Throne of Blood as just a copy or remake of Macduff. Scenes like the Forest and the castle help to create a feel to create a feel similar to that of Macbeth.