Macbeth was a very greedy and unhappy man who was very susceptible to pressure. Everyone in today’s modern world fits the Macbeth mould in one sense or another. There is not a living being that has never fallen prey to peer pressure, greed or jealousy. Macbeth had always desired and dreamed of being King and ruling over the country. His wife wanted Macbeth to be King, therefore Macbeth wanted to rule even more.

A classic modern day parallel to Macbeth, who fits the Macbeth mould is Tanya Harding. Tanya was a figure skater who was not number one. Kim Campbell on the other hand was a very good skater who had potential and great talents on the ice. When Kim was competing for third place and Tanya was below tenth, Tanya lost her common sense and was filled with jealousy and greed.

The plot of The Lion King is astonishingly similar to that of Macbeth. In the start of Macbeth, King Duncan’s death is planned when Macbeth is told by the Three Witches that he can claim the throne if Duncan passes away before Malcolm is of age. Macbeth plans with Lady Macbeth the murder of King Duncan. After King Duncan is pronounced dead and murdered, his sons flee the area out of fear they might be next.

In The Lion King, Scar (being Macbeth) wants to get rid of Mufasa so that he can take over the Pride Lands with the help of the hyenas (the hyenas being the three witches) before Simba is of age. He does this by murdering Mufasa and manipulating the mind of innocent cub Simba to think it was his fault his father is dead. Scar convinces Simba that if he stays, everyone will hate him for killing his own father.

Believe it or not, these modern characters somehow fall into the skin of Macbeth.

Macbeth is a complex character with many facets to his personality, so it can be difficult to find a perfect modern day comparison. However, some modern day characters that share similar traits with Macbeth include:

1. Walter White from Breaking Bad: Both characters start out as relatively normal and likable people, but their ambition and thirst for power leads them down a dark path.
2. Frank Underwood from House of Cards: Similar to Macbeth, Frank is willing to do whatever it takes to attain and hold onto power, including murder.
3. Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader from Star Wars: Like Macbeth, Anakin is haunted by his past and the terrible things he has done in the name of ambition and power.
4. Michael Corleone from The Godfather: Like Macbeth, Michael is a tragic figure who is drawn into a life of crime and violence by his ambition and desire for power.
5. Jax Teller from Sons of Anarchy: Similar to Macbeth, Jax is a tragic figure whose desire for power and control ultimately leads to his downfall.

While these characters may not perfectly match every aspect of Macbeth's personality, they share similar themes of ambition, power, and the dangers of unchecked desire.

Walter White in Breaking Bad clearly references Macbeth.

There’s all the business with the hats. Walter gets his from a drug kingpin he destroys. Macbeth has all the business about crown and borrowed robes. Walter’s - which becomes his trademark, emblematic of taking on the new role, with growing confidence - is black (riffing also on the convention in Western movies).

The point about Macbeth is a good man becoming bad. He has ambition - he wants to be king - but he wants to remain the same person… only king. This is not possible - hence the tragedy. The first person Walter kills is a drug dealer who he has imprisoned in his basement. The guy doesn’t think Walter will do it. He mocks him. It’s just not who he is. It’s the first sign of reversal between Walter and Jesse. Jesse thought himself a gangster, before; but he doesn’t have the stomach for it. It’s Walter who steps up, and does the bloody deed.

That guy was not a good guy, and once free, he would have killed them. But a first step is a first step. This is what Macbeth, and Walter, learn. Once you make that first step, everything else follows. Both accept it, accept what they become. Later Walter will kill lots of people who don’t deserve it. Not directly, but in effect. Sweet Jane. And finally, a child, who just happened to see something he oughtn’t.

Macbeth had a super-power, he thought. He could not be killed by one of woman born. For Walter, it’s his terminal cancer - not that he CAN’T be killed but that he has nothing to lose thereby. He has a charmed life. He just keeps coming out on top.

He becomes, like Macbeth, a monster. One time, the cancer goes into remission. He has enough cash. It’s a gift. He’s out clean… Why not stop? HE CAN’T. It’s even more true of Walter than Macbeth. Being the usurper, the monster.. it turns out, it’s his calling. It’s an addiction.

PS. Some people are saying Frank Underwood from House of Cards is a Macbeth figure. That’s wrong. Underwood is Richard III, quite explicitly. To smile and smile and be a villain. All that breaking the 4th wall. He was always a villain. Macbeth/Walter were good men - that’s why it’s called Breaking Bad.

Like most of Shakespeare’s plays, Macbeth is full of phrases that have entered the language. The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations has five pages of notable quotes. A few that are very recognizable:

Fair is foul, and foul is fair.

So foul and fair a day I have not seen.

What! Can the devil speak true?

Nothing in this life became him like the leaving of it.

If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well it were done quickly.

But screw your courage to the sticking-place…

There’s daggers in men’s smiles.

Night’s black agents

Eye of new, and toe of frog, Wool of bat, and tongue of dog….

Be bloody, bold, and resolute.

By the pricking of my thumbs, something wicked this way comes.

What! will the line stretch out to the crack of doom!

Out, damned spot!

All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand.

Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased….

Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him?

Throne of Blood (The Castle of Spider's Web') is a 1957 Japanese film co-written, produced, edited, and directed by Akira Kurosawa, with special effects by Eiji Tsuburaya. The film transposes the plot of William Shakespeare's play Macbeth from Medieval Scotland to feudal Japan, with stylistic elements drawn from Noh drama. The film stars Toshiro Mifune and Isuzu Yamada in the lead roles, modelled on the characters Macbeth and Lady Macbeth.

‘As with the play, the film tells the story of a warrior who assassinates his sovereign at the urging of his ambitious wife. Kurosawa was a fan of the play and intended to make his own adaptation for several years, delaying it after learning of Orson Welles' Macbeth (1948). Among his changes was the ending, which required archers to fire arrows around Mifune. The film was shot around Mount Fuji and Izu Peninsula.’

There are indeed fictional characters who share similarities with Macbeth, each grappling with their own demons and facing the consequences of their actions. Here are a few:

1. Walter White from "Breaking Bad": Like Macbeth, Walter White is a character consumed by ambition and a desire for power. As he descends into the world of drugs and crime, he becomes increasingly ruthless and morally compromised, ultimately facing the repercussions of his choices.
2. Jay Gatsby from "The Great Gatsby": Gatsby, like Macbeth, is driven by an insatiable ambition and a longing to rise above his humble origins. Both characters become entangled in a web of deception and manipulation, leading to their tragic downfalls.
3. Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader from "Star Wars": Anakin's journey from a promising Jedi Knight to the Sith Lord Darth Vader echoes the tragic arc of Macbeth. Both characters are driven by their inner demons and succumb to the temptations of power, leading to their own self-destruction.
4. Frank Underwood from "House of Cards": Frank Underwood shares Macbeth's thirst for power and his willingness to manipulate and betray others to achieve his goals. Both characters navigate a treacherous political landscape, leaving a trail of destruction in their wake.
5. Michael Corleone from "The Godfather": Michael's transformation from a reluctant participant to a ruthless mob leader mirrors Macbeth's descent into darkness. Both characters grapple with the consequences of their actions and the corrupting influence of power.

These characters share shades of Macbeth's ambition, moral ambiguity, and tragic flaws, each navigating their own treacherous paths. While they may vary in their circumstances and settings, their thematic resonance with Macbeth creates a compelling exploration of human nature and the consequences of unchecked ambition.

In Shakespeare, the fictionalised Richard III has the most similarities with Macbeth. He takes over the kingdom, becomes a tyrant, and alienates his own supporters, losing his final battle which ushers in a new dynasty.

Outside of Shakespeare, there are few writers capable of bringing a Macbeth figure to life. We have no comparable characters to King Lear, Othello or Macbeth. Lots of people have tried to do a Hamlet character, but, compared to Shakespeare’s version, it just become a Hamlet caricature.

Romeo and Juliet is arguably a much weaker play, and is much more frequently imitated. This is partly because the characters are more appealing, partly because it’s romance, and partly because Shakespeare did not create the final, definitive star-crossed lovers.

His weakest plays were arguably the Taming of the Shrew, the Comedy of Errors and Henry VIII. I’ve never seen a Henry VIII imitation, but the Comedy of Errors is a template for all kinds of farce, and the Taming of the Shrew is remade very often, for example in Ten Things I Hate About You and She’s All That.

Obviously, everyone is able (or unable) to relate to characters in different ways and at different levels. If you are driven, ambitious, and willing to push loved ones to commit terrible acts, you can easily relate to Lady Macbeth on a deep personal level. However, let her guilt and demise be a warning to you.

Since most people cannot relate to her on that personal of a level (or are unwilling to admit it), one should look at other aspects of Lady Macbeth's character. Have you ever felt so guilty about an action that you have taken that you feel distraught? Have you ever manipulated someone to get what you want? Did you feel guilt? Have you ever felt constrained by traditional gender roles?

I could go on, but the best advice I can give you is to look at Lady Macbeth as a human, not a monster, as you read the play. Try to understand her motivations and her emotions. Try to empathise with the character, and try to think of how you would feel in her situation.

I don’t know about daily lives; hopefully most people’s daily lives does not include murderous plots and evil power plays. But for one thing we get most of our ideas about what witches are like from the weird sisters in this play. Harry Potter for example has borrowed especially the idea of potion brewing from the three witches in Macbeth with “eye of newt” and “Double double toil and trouble fire burn and cauldron bubble!”.

There’s also in Macbeth, although it is not Macbeth that utters it, a very good piece of advice to help us in our everyday lives: “There’s no art in which to tell the mind’s construction in the face.” In other words you can tell who is evil and who is good by their appearance - you can’t tell what people are thinking by looking at them. In this case the king should’ve taken his own advise and maybe Macbeth couldn’t have killed him and taken his throne.

Probably the greatest example in American history was the treachery of Benedict Arnold. At first he was considered to be the great villain of American history, but then historians got hold of the letters of his wife, Margaret (Peggy) Shippen, a beautiful young woman and a member of the Tory Shippen family. When Benedict Arnold became the military governor of Philadelphia, her beauty caught his eye, and he began courting her. After they were married, she revealed that she had British sympathies, and she played upon Arnold’s conflicts with Congress. She filled him with ideas that he could get better rank and more money if he switched sides to the British. Peggy had a link to British intelligence officer Major John Andre, and she used him as a go-between to arrange a deal with the British command in New York City. They promised Arnold 20,000 pounds and the rank of Major General if he could deliver West Point to them. Arnold used his influence with George Washington to get the command of West Point. Peggy Arnold made contact with a local Tory tradesman, and he became the go-between for Arnold and Andre. However, their meeting did not go as planned, and Andre got captured. Arnold’s plot was exposed and he had to flee to New York City. Peggy Arnold stayed at West Point and feigned hysteria to fool George Washington into thinking she had nothing to do with the plot. She was allowed to return to her family in Philadelphia, but she later went to New York City to be with Arnold. They found a cold reception with the British. Arnold had been a competent American general, and had killed many British soldiers. The British gave Arnold less money than expected, and only the rank of Brigadier General. When the Arnolds went to England, Benedict Arnold sailed on a ship of the line to keep from being captured, while Peggy had to take a mere merchant ship. The Arnolds were rewarded with land grants in Canada, but their business there was not very profitable. While Benedict Arnold was in New Brunswick, he did perform one last act of betrayal. He fathered an illegitimate son, and Peggy did not find out about it until Arnold’s will was read. At first Peggy had been thought of as a silly girl, going along with Arnold’s treachery. Now it is believed she was the mastermind behind his treason, and she controlled Arnold the way Lady Macbeth did to her husband.

No. I’m assuming you mean the characters in the play ‘Macbeth’ written by William Shakespeare rather than their historical counterparts, who are nothing like them?

He is an ambitious man who is constrained by his sense of honour, as Duncan is his king.

She is also ambitious and ambitious for her husband to become king, and in order to fulfill her ambition she has to overcome Macbeth’s qualms and persuade him to carry out and seize the opportunity for them both that Fate, in the form of the three witches, has presented them.

In fact the three witches could be interpreted as the Norns from the Norse mythos.

Lady Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's most notorious female characters. Cunning and ambitious, Lady Macbeth is the main star of the play, encouraging and helping Macbeth carry out his bloody quest to become king. Without Lady Macbeth, her husband may never have ventured down the murderous path that leads to his ultimate downfall.

In many ways, Lady Macbeth is ambitious and hungrier than her husband.

Along with Shakespeare's bloody regeneration, "Macbeth" is the one with the most malignant female characters. There are three witches who predict that Macbeth will be king.

And then there is Lady Macbeth herself. In Shakespeare's day, it was unusual for a female character to be so boldly ambitious and manipulative. She has to convince her husband to go along with her wicked plan because she is unable to take action, perhaps due to the social constraints of the time.

Masculinity is defined in the play by ambition and power, two qualities that Lady Macbeth possesses in abundance. By constructing the character in this way, Shakespeare challenges our prescient view of masculinity and femininity. But what did Shakespeare suggest?

On the one hand, it was the fundamental idea of presenting a dominant female character; on the other hand, she is presented negatively and kills herself after experiencing a crisis of conscience.

I'm an obscure American. I am content with my millions. I chance to meet 3 women. They are called ivana, marla and stormy.

They tell me that I can get power by appearing on tv and having a hit show. Then it occurs to me that I could be president.

I m not really too interested about this. But my wife, who noone takes seriously, makes up for this by her ambition. We're emotionally distant from each other but having seen TV footage of my meeting with the three women, she takes it as a sign that my time has come.

So she stiffens my backbone. Good king Barack comes to stay but I know he's not really suited for his job since he wasn't born in America so I make false claims about him which everybody believes. Soon he's in ruins. His children, hillary and Joe escape.

I then jaunt round the world spreading lies and threaten to lock up anyone who opposes me. But this doesn't secure me. All my retainers spread lies and stories about me so I have no choice but to sack them. Only my beliefs count and i ignore their advice.

I try to jail hillary but she escapes. Joe is in temporary exile. Then my wife falls ill. I don't care too much but my doctor cdc, tells me that if I don't t follow his advice she'll be beyond help. I don't care

I se the 3 women again. They tell me that I'll be safe until Biden Wood comes to Harris hill

To see what happens tune in Tuesday week to find out!

No. There is no resemblance at all between Mr. Barr and Shakespeare’s tragic figure Macbeth. I suppose you could say that they are alike in their desire for power, but other than that, there’s no comparison. Macbeth struggled with his situation and had a conscience; Mr. Barr apparently has none.

They are different in age and social status. Macbeth was a nobleman who, by corrupt means, became king and was eventually overcome by his enemies. Barr is just a corrupt toady to the man currently in power, and he will never be anything else. There is nothing tragic about Barr. He is just pathetic and despicable.

This is a very strange question. I wonder if it was a prompt for a school essay.

At the beginning of the play, Macbeth is portrayed as a brave, respected soldier, but by the end, he has transformed into a tyrannical, paranoid ruler consumed by guilt and driven by his unchecked ambition, leading to his downfall and loss of all respect and dignity; essentially, he goes from a loyal warrior to a murderous tyrant due to his actions fueled by the witches' prophecies.

Initially, Macbeth is ambitious but still has moral qualms, whereas later he becomes ruthlessly driven to maintain power, committing increasingly violent acts without hesitation. At the start, Macbeth shows internal conflict and struggles with guilt after murdering Duncan, but later he becomes increasingly detached from his actions and descends into paranoia. Early on, Macbeth is presented as someone who contemplates his actions and seeks advice, but towards the end, he makes rash, desperate decisions to secure his position. Macbeth begins as a respected figure in the court, but by the end, he is viewed as a cruel and tyrannical leader, despised by his people.

The idea of a main character is definitely a complicated one. We can certainly say that Macbeth and Lady Macbeth are main characters, as the play is about them and (mostly towards the beginning) their relationship.

We can definitely say that all the miscellaneous lords and servants like those at the banquet scene aren’t main characters, as their characterization largely doesn’t exist and entirely doesn’t matter. I’d say the same of Donalbain, Fleance, Macduff’s son, and the doctors. While their actions drive the play at various times, they’re just bodies onstage.

We have a decent number of characters in the middle— Malcolm, Lady Macduff, Macduff, Banquo, Duncan, and the witches.

Malcolm is kind of a weird character. He really only has presence and personality in one scene, 4.2. His presence is definitely important, but his personality really isn’t. We needed a king’s heir to drive Macbeth to drive Macbeth to murder and to give legitimacy to the war, and 4.2 to give us a sense that he’ll be a decent king. While it’s important to the plot to have someone in that role, he doesn’t have a clear presence. We didn’t need Malcolm specifically, just a generally okay prince. I’d argue that he’s important, but not really a main character.

Lady Macduff is in one scene. She has under 50 lines before she’s brutally murdered. However, her scene gives us a crystal clear sense of her personality and of the nature of the play. This scene is massively important, and her characterization is crucial to it working. While she adds a lot to the play, I don’t think we can consider her a properly main character, just because she has so little stage time.

Macduff is obviously important in that he kills Macbeth and ends the play, if nothing else. He has a fair amount of stage time and a pretty high number of lines. We can clearly point to moments where his characterization pushes the plot forwards. He doesn’t just kill Macbeth because he was born of a c-section, but because he blames himself for leaving his family to be murdered. He challenges Malcolm not because he’s a random lord, but because he values his country over himself. I think we can safely call him a main character.

Banquo is just in the first 2 acts of the play, but he’s clearly a foil to Macbeth. They have the same information, the same promises of glory. We could be generous and say that he took a better path by not acting on the prophecies, or we can remember that he was killed before he made up his. Either reading gives us a clearer understanding of the play. While he isn’t in the later scenes (except as a ghost or hallucination), I’d call him a main character because different understandings of his characters give us very different readings of the play.

Duncan is pretty much just a generic king. It’s important that he seems pretty kind and harmless because it makes the murder worse, and it’s important that he’s a king because that makes the murder important. We just needed a king for the play, not specifically Duncan. I wouldn’t call him a main character.

Finally, we come to the witches. I think they’re main characters in some interpretations of the play, and not in others. We can call them supernatural or not, true seers or not, drivers of the play or lucky old women who spoke some coincidence. They lie at the heart of some readings, and are entirely removable from others.

In summary, the Macbeths are the only really clear main characters. I think Banquo and Macduff are also pretty central, and I think the witches can be central.

It’s important to add that pretty much any character could be a main character. There are countless valid readings of the play, and each emphasizes different scenes and characters. I think my list of main characters fits many readings, but certainly not all.

I was always fond of the Weird Sisters, and more generally this idea in fiction of oracles who play an active role in determining people’s fates. That simply being exposed to what they have to say is enough to create the worst possible situation. It’s an ancient convention that is as old as performative arts.

Macbeth would have never dreamed of betraying and murdering his King until the moment Witches told him he would do so. Had he not met them, Macbeth would have attended a feast like any other. And whilst The Witches can’t take responsibility for the murder, they knew they were acting as the catalyst to make it happen.

The presentation of the Witches is a great opportunity for productions to dream up something really weird and fun. Adaptations are all about coming up with creative new ways to shake up the plays we’ve all seen and heard a thousand times over, and so you can expect some extravagant witches.

Macbeth, the protagonist of William Shakespeare's play "Macbeth," is a multifaceted character who undergoes a complex transformation throughout the play. Here are some of the ways in which Macbeth is a multifaceted character:

1. Ambition: Macbeth is initially portrayed as a brave and loyal soldier, but his ambition for power leads him down a dark path. He is consumed by his desire to become king, which causes him to commit murder and become increasingly paranoid and unstable.
2. Guilt: Macbeth is haunted by his guilt over the crimes he has committed. He is tormented by visions and hallucinations, and struggles to reconcile his actions with his conscience.
3. Relationship with Lady Macbeth: Macbeth's relationship with his wife, Lady Macbeth, is also multifaceted. They are initially presented as a united front, but their relationship becomes strained as Macbeth becomes more erratic and paranoid. Lady Macbeth is driven mad by her guilt over the murder of Duncan, while Macbeth becomes increasingly distant from her.
4. Honor: Macbeth's sense of honor and loyalty to his king and country is also a facet of his character. He is conflicted about the idea of killing Duncan, and is ultimately swayed by his ambition rather than his loyalty.
5. Tragic hero: Macbeth can also be seen as a tragic hero, as his downfall is brought about by his own tragic flaw - his ambition. He is a complex character with both noble and base qualities, and his downfall is both a result of his own actions and the actions of those around him.

Overall, Macbeth is a multifaceted character who undergoes a complex transformation throughout the play. He is driven by ambition, haunted by guilt, and struggling with his own sense of honor and loyalty.

Machiavellianism refers to a personality where the individual is so focused on their own interests they will manipulate, deceive, and exploit others to achieve their goals. In this sense, yes, Lady Macbeth is a Machiavellian character since she appears to embrace “the end justifies the means” behavior. Through the act of murder, Macbeth becomes king and Lady Macbeth achieves her goal of becoming queen. But the definition of Machiavellianism also implies that the individual lacks an emotional attachment or does not possess a sense of morality or moral code, either of which would serve as restricting factors to achieving the individual’s goals. Lady Macbeth apparently possesses both factors, as she exhibits both an emotional attachment and a sense of morality. First, she is unable to kill Duncan herself because the sleeping Duncan resembled her father, an emotional attachment. Later, the guilt of the crime torments her, causing her to sleepwalk and revisit the murder; this torment points to her sense of morality, the recognition that the act by which she achieved her success was wrong. This emotional attachment and guilt ultimately drive her to commit suicide, something out of character for true Machiavellianism.