There was a lot of rhyming which Shakespeare only used when ending an act or when the witches were casting a spell. Hecate is not casting a spell but still rhymes throughout her monologue. The witches speak in iambic tetrameter not iambic pentameter. The witches are not portentous but silly fairies like the fairies in Midsummer Night's Dream, which does not match their appearance in Act 1. And here's the clincher: two of the songs they are supposed to sing and dance around to are known to have been written, not by Shakespeare, but by Thomas Middleton, who used them in his own play The Witch, which was written some ten years after Macbeth. It is thought that Middleton, who was working for the King's Men at the time, was asked to tart up this old play by the addition of some new scenes and dialogue featuring Hecate, a character from The Witch. Act 3 Scene 5 and parts of Act 4 Scene 1 are the result.
Not really. The Disney people claim that they used elements of Shakespeare's play Hamlet in creating the story of Simba, but believe me, they are few, far between and very superficial. As in, they are both stories about the son of a king whose uncle murders his father and succeeds to the throne. And that's about it. In fact, the plot of The Lion King much more closely resembles the Shakespeare plays Richard III and Macbeth than Hamlet. (Scar=Richard=Macbeth; Simba=Richmond=Malcolm)
This is the first line of Sonnet 18 by William Shakespeare. Shakespeare suggests that the memory of beauty will be immortalized in the sonnet. (see related question)
Shakespeare was a real person. We have the records of his baptism, his ownership of property, his marriage, the birth of his children and his burial. You can visit his grave, millions do. Some people try to claim that the real man Shakespeare was not the same person as the playwright Shakespeare, but this doesn't make him a myth.
A lot of kings get killed in Shakespeare plays, and it is difficult (or indeed well-nigh impossible) to learn any lessons from it. For example, in two plays, Richard III and Macbeth, two kings get killed. In Richard III, Richard kills his nephew Edward V but at the end of the play Richmond kills Richard. In Macbeth, Macbeth kills Duncan, but at the end Macduff kills him. It is suggested that it is a bad thing when Macbeth and Richard kill kings but a good thing when Macduff and Richmond kill kings. Ah, but those were bad kings. But Richard II was a bad king and it was still a bad thing when he gets killed by Henry IV in Richard II. And Henry VI was an astonishingly bad king and it is at best a matter of indifference when he gets killed. And our feelings about King John when he gets killed are indeed ambivalent.The nearest you can come to a common theme in all of these regicides is that it is bad to kill a legitimate king (even a bad one like Richard II) but it is OK to kill a king with a poor title to the throne. Whether or not a person has a good title to the throne is determined using the sensibilities of Shakespeare's time: the throne should pass to the eldest son of the former king. At times this is in conflict with the historical basis of the plays--eldest sons were not automatically entitled to succeed in Republican Rome (Julius Caesar), early Scotland (Macbeth), or Viking Denmark (Hamlet). In fact, Macbeth and Claudius succeeded to the throne perfectly legitimately, but it would not seem so to an Elizabethan audience. To them, Octavian, Malcolm and Hamlet would seem legitimate whereas Brutus, Macbeth and Claudius would not.Unfortunately, at the end of Richard III, the throne is taken by a claimant with an absolutely terrible claim to the throne: Richmond, later to become Henry VII and Queen Elizabeth's grandfather. Richmond's best claim to the throne was that he had married the sister of Edward V (in much the same way that Claudius's claim to the throne was enhanced by his marriage to Gertrude).The issue of succession to the throne was a hot issue in Shakespeare's day, where an unmarried woman was queen. Even after the succession of her nephew James, there was uncertainty. Shakespeare's treatment of kingship tends to support orderly, lawful succession and to vilify anyone who interferes with that.
According to the historical record, Macbeth [c. 1014-August 15, 1057] might have sought revenge for the unprovoked, unpopular, unjustified, unjust invasion of his family's lands by King Duncan I [d. August 14, 1040]. Duncan was killed by his own men before Macbeth could claim his right to do so. Instead, Macbeth's claim to the throne was recognized. Additionally, 14 years later, Duncan's aged father Crinan [d. 1054], the hereditary abbot of Dunkeld, rebelled against Macbeth's rule. This time, Macbeth claimed his right to kill the rebel before anyone else did. According to the Shakespearean play, the future King Malcolm III [d. November 13, 1093] sought revenge for the murder of his father, Duncan, by Macbeth. But he didn't want to carry out the killing himself. He might have thought that put him on the same level as Macbeth: killing a king in order to become king. So Malcolm saw to his revenge by having as his avenging angel Macduff. Macduff had his own reasons for ending Macbeth's reign and life. Macbeth had planned the Fife Castle massacre by which Macduff's entire family and household were stabbed to death.
He was in King Duncan's old castle the Macbeth rightfully claim after killing King Duncan, and his sons Malcolm and Donalbain flee the scene and go to England and Israel.
Critics claim that the planned economy, unlike the market economy hinders economic growth.
Democracy
a welfare state.
Duncan named his son, Malcolm, as heir to the throne of Scotland. This decision set the stage for the events that unfold in Shakespeare's "Macbeth," as Macbeth, driven by ambition, seeks to usurp Malcolm's rightful claim. Duncan’s choice highlights the themes of legitimacy and the moral consequences of ambition in the play.
Not really. The Disney people claim that they used elements of Shakespeare's play Hamlet in creating the story of Simba, but believe me, they are few, far between and very superficial. As in, they are both stories about the son of a king whose uncle murders his father and succeeds to the throne. And that's about it. In fact, the plot of The Lion King much more closely resembles the Shakespeare plays Richard III and Macbeth than Hamlet. (Scar=Richard=Macbeth; Simba=Richmond=Malcolm)
Macbeth changes from a war hero in to a evil murderer because all he wants to do is claim power of the throne Macbeth changes from a war hero in to a evil murderer because all he wants to do is claim power of the throne
an empty theory that is merely true by definition.
Socialism
Probably you are referring to Shakespeare's Macbeth? In that case, it's Macduff. In fact he goes to Malcom, son and heir to king Duncan, who has fled to England. He persuades him to use English aid and claim the throne. MacBeth executes MacDuff's family when he finds out about his trip, and MacDuff swears vengeance. He then leads the English troops to Scotland and kills MacBeth in single combat.
Malcolm claims that Scotland will suffer more troubles because he knows that Macbeth's tyrannical rule will lead to further chaos and bloodshed. He believes that Macbeth's reign has brought corruption and instability to the country, and that continuing in this way will only bring about more suffering for its people.
Critics claim his best movie was Jailhouse rock.