Romeo and Juliet
discussion
Which Romeo and Juliet movie is the most accurate?
date
newest »
newest »
message 101:
by
James
(new)
Oct 18, 2013 08:59PM
1968 version of Romeo and Juliet is the most accuracy one related to the play.
reply
|
flag
It is the Zeffirelli version BY FAR!!!
I am a high school English teacher, and I find Luhrmann's treatment insulting. It is visually FAR from the way the play was intended to be seen. Shakespeare's vision was created for performance in the Globe's open air atmosphere with few effects, little "flash," and a bawdy appeal to the common-folk. The actors were, indeed, frenetic in their performance, and the pace was such, for many plays (late tragedies being an exception), that the humorous scenes came off like slapstick. The props that were available for Elizabethan-era productions were limited to what the company could afford to supply. There weren't many, but many props they did have were swords. SWORDS NOT GUNS CALLED SWORDS. Generations of students are watching a crappy music video called Romeo + Juliet, thinking that it represents Shakespeare. It does not. It represents bloated, Hollywood-ized Shakespeare. Don't misunderstand, there was some very good acting in the Luhrmann fiasco (not from DiCaprio or Danes), but the overall effect was that of a standard 1990's era MTV music video. The Zeffirelli version, though lacking some of the common-folk appeal of the Globe productions from the 1600s, actually IS better aligned to Shakespeare's reality than the look-at-all-the-pretty-colors-and-modernity version from '96. From an academic point of view, I eschew the Luhrmann film because of its blatant lack of concern for Shakespeare's intent. Just because it uses the language from the original, does not mean that it is good. If one wishes to see an AMAZING modernization of Shakespeare, just watch the BBC's Othello with Christopher Eccleston as Iago. THAT is some quality modernization. The problem with Romeo + Juliet was the nagging disconnect between the language and guns, gas stations, and television sets. I could have appreciated the flash and color MUCH more if the language was modernized as well. It was like a puzzle with pieces that ALMOST fit together, but just couldn't. Staunch defenders of the Luhrmann film were hypnotized by all the pretty colors and fail to see past them into the true nature of the play.
1968 version is the best. the actor were the correct age. I think it reveals the true essence of what Shakespeare was trying to write
Defintely not the 90s one.
A new Romeo and Juliet movie just came out in 2013, directed by Carlo Carlei. It is similar to the Zeffirelli version, with period clothing and the like, but they added in a jousting tournament and some other things not from the play.
I've only seen the one with DiCaprio. I was curious to see if the original dialogue would work in a modern setting. Sadly, it had such a jarring effect that the dialogue and the setting distracted me from each other. I'd love to see one with the original dialogue in an at least somewhat accurate historical setting.
Caroline wrote: " I'd love to see one with the original dialogue in an at least somewhat accurate historical setting. ..."I highly recommend the 1968 Zefferelli version! Original dialogue, accurate historical setting and costumes, it is an altogether beautiful film.
the old one in the 70s was a little bit more accurate.
Personally, I think the 2013 one is truest to the "feel" of the play (it's also my favorite adaption), but the 1996 one (although set in a fictional beach in America) has the closest dialogue. Plus also it has great music.
For Renaissance Italy and youthful passion, one cannot really go past Castellani's 1954 masterpiece. Here is the promo on youtube which cannot do it justice really https://youtu.be/tdtDsndAwng
which Romeo and Juliet films are the longest and which ones do not use Shakespeare and which Romeo and Juliet film is the most accurate
Most of them are about 2 hours long.There are probably SCORES of adaptations that do not directly use Shakespeare. West Side Story comes to mind first.
I think Zefferelli was the most accurate, although it is hard to say. I recently saw the 2013 version by Carlo Carlei, which was actually filmed in Verona. That movie has been criticized for various reasons, but much of it seems at least aesthetically accurate.
Currently, the most accurate Romeo and Juliet adaptation, in my opinion, is the version released in 2013. (It is on netflix as well) It has most of the original dialogue, has the historically accurate costumes and set, and the acting is superb. It really shows the characters' personalities and motives. I had seen it before reading the play in school, and found it easy to follow along and understand what was happening throughout the story.
Pasta-Enthusiast wrote: "I had seen it before reading the play in school, and found it easy to follow along and understand what was happening throughout the story..."Yes -- Julian Fellowes rewrote the script, he specifically wanted to make it understandable to students new to the play. I think he took out a lot of things that are initially confusing to kids.
The 1968 Zeffirelli version remains the Gold Standard because of its pure authenticity. There's nothing stylized about it. It's not set in another time of place but rather shot in Verona itself with actors in Renaissance dress. But his real stroke of genius was casting adolescents to play a adolescents! Milo O'Shea was a perfect choice for friar Laurence as was Michael York for Tybalt! Add to them whoever it was who played Mercutio.I think Len Whiting left acting to become a banker. In the film he looked like he could be an attendant standing around a Botticelli Madonna and Child
Bruce Robinson's (Benvolio) screenplay for Withnail & I was based partly on his experience dodging Zeffirelli's advances on the set.
Zeffirelli's Taming of the Shrew is one of my favorite Shakespeare movies and probably the best thing Burton & Taylor ever did together, better even that Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf
Daniel wrote: "Neither Zeffirelli's 1967 version nor Luhrman's 1996 version...Zeffirelli's would be the one I'd pick if I had to choose, it's slow and rather dull, but has some good acting and costuming and som..."
Shakespeare's women are almost always in the driver's seat! Rosalind, Viola. Cleopatra makes Antony look like a complete wimp! Young boys and girls are equals of men indeed!
If anyone says West Side Story I'll effing scream! If not the most accurate, Clueless is the most entertaining telling of Emma!
Abby wrote: "Personally, I think the 2013 one is truest to the "feel" of the play (it's also my favorite adaption), but the 1996 one (although set in a fictional beach in America) has the closest dialogue. Plus..."The '68 Zeffirelli version has a soundtrack by Nino Roto, who did soundtracks for Fellini and went on to do the soundtrack for Il Padrone (The Godfather).
I think the intro theme for Curb Your Enthusiasm is from one of Roto's Fellini movies.
Christine wrote: "Caroline wrote: " I'd love to see one with the original dialogue in an at least somewhat accurate historical setting. ..."I highly recommend the 1968 Zefferelli version! Original dialogue, accura..."
Also his 1967 version of Taming of the Shrew with Burton truly in his element!
Diane wrote: "The Zeffirelli version came out when I was 12. Nothing can compare. Especially the very loud tendencies of Baz Luhrmann."As he probably never was in Italy, for Shakespeare it's an Italy of the mind, a realm of pure imagination and endless possibility. Italy in the 14th-16th centuries was where everything great and innovative was happening. In addition to art, it's where modern science was invented. The Starry Messenger was published in Shakespeare's lifetime.
Gadflyonthewall wrote: "Christine wrote: "Caroline wrote: " I'd love to see one with the original dialogue in an at least somewhat accurate historical setting. ..."I highly recommend the 1968 Zefferelli version! Origina..."
I love Zeffirelli films! He had a real talent for combining the right actors, timing, cinematography, everything!
I would say the 1968 adaptation by Franco Zeffirelli
The 2013 version is visually stunning, but is by no means accurate. The language is butchered, cut short, scenes are added, vital scenes are changed, etc. The 1968 Zeffirelli version is the most true to the original as it was written.
Couldn’t agree more, the 1968 version by Franco Zefferelli with Olivia Hussey, and Leonard Whiting is a masterpiece. The filming, the music the location it’s actors gold old cinemas I want to preserve its perfection in my mind and for me it’s the closest to the story.
I agree that Zeffirelli's version (1967) was the most accurate, straight-forward adaptation. The 90s version was enjoyable for me, as well--I was that age when it came out--and I liked the cinematography (had a lot of color and verve) and soundtrack.
Probably nobody is still reading this thread, but just in case:(1) The movie SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE is set during rehearsals and performances of the very first production of ROMEO & JULIET. The movie is fiction, but the scenes of R&J are faithful to the text and they look really good.
(2) The new movie of WEST SIDE STORY is wonderful (in my opinion) and that's a version of R&J.
Marian wrote: "Probably nobody is still reading this thread, but just in case:(1) The movie SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE is set during rehearsals and performances of the very first production of ROMEO & JULIET. The movie..."
I still look in on this thread from time to time! I love 'Shakespeare in Love', one of my favorites. Despite the Weinstein scandal, but art, not the artist, right? It does stay true to the text of R and J, plus Judi Dench as the queen, that was superb.
OoOO the one made in 2020 was by far the best ever version. Romeo is Josh O'Connell and Juliet is Jessie Buckley...they used the OG script, and the set was all on a stage...you have to watch it to understand.
Franco Zefferelli's all the way for me. It sticks pretty faithfully to the play.
I still check on this thread too when I get a notification re: an update. I'm interested in people's perspective re: this because R&J remains for most the most accessible and popular Shakespeare so I'm curious about what interpretation works and why it does.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
