A great film, despite lack of fights and an understanding of Shakespeare SPOILERS --- But if you don't know the story of MACBETH yet - what's your problem?
In its own right THRONE OF BLOOD is a great film drenched in a palatable atmosphere, filled with terrific performances and unforgettable scenes. However, claims that is it is a faithful adaptation (in some cases the most faithful[!]) of MACBETH, despite its resetting to Japan, are so misguided you'd wonder if the philistines commenting on this film had ever read the play. For starters, any adaptation of MACBETH that doesn't begin with the big M kicking ass and taking names inherently loses points in my book, as the great tragedy of Macbeth is that he was a great warrior who was corrupted and destroyed by this own ambition. The opening battle of MACBETH is the only chance we get to see the great man in all his glory. The lack of this diminishes the following tragedy because rather than being the great warrior corrupted by his towering ambition Mifune's Washizu comes off as a bit of a weenie who is pushed around by his wife. Kurosawa's decision to remove most of the tragedies and predictions (Lady Macbeth's death, "For none of woman borne", the entire character of Macduff) that befall Macbeth and leaving in just the moving forest makes light of Macbeth's character and plight. By the pen of The Baird, Macbeth slowly loses his grip as events conspiring against him build up. And despite this, he continues to fight as the great warrior he is. In THRONE OF BLOOD, he sees trees moving and loses the plot completely before being shot by his own army. What the hell? How do any of these changes improve the story or character of Macbeth?
Stories must be adapted to bring them to the screen and if the changes improve a film (ie, FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING) those changes can be welcomed with open arms. But in the case of THRONE OF BLOOD someone should have asked Kurosawa "Dude, what makes you think you can improve upon Shakespeare?"