Movies "Romeo and Juliet"

The following example essay on “Movies Romeo and Juliet” compares film versions of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet to be compared are directed by Baz Lurhmann and the other by Franco Zefferelli.

The classic world-renowned Shakespeare play Romeo and Juliet has been adapted for the big screen and television on several occasions. Each director who has attempted to bring this film to life has added his own interpretation of the plot and choice of characters to represent the star crossed lovers.

The two film versions to be compared are directed by Baz Lurhmann and the other by Franco Zefferelli. Baz Lurhmann’s edition of Romeo and Juliet is undeniably the modern version of the two and was directed in 1997 with an unmistakable present day setting. Shakespeare’s famous play is updated to the hip modern suburb of Verona still retaining its original dialogue.

This idea of bringing Shakespeare into the twentieth century was a clear directorial success as it allowed young people to associate with Shakespeare, probably for the first time.

In contrast Franco Zeffirelli’s adaptation of the play was directed in 1968 and is seen as ‘traditional’. It is set in the 16th century during the time that Shakespeare wrote the original play. Zeffirelli has appeared to minimise his director’s poetic licence and the film is seen as a direct portrayal of the play, in order to show a sense of how Shakespeare would have imagined it to be. Both versions still share many similarities – which are to be expected, but there are also some striking differences.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified

Proficient in: Romeo And Juliet

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The many similarities between the two films are first seen during the establishing shots. At the start of Zefferelli’s edition it is set in a busy market place and a lively atmosphere is created which draws the audience into the film. A pleasant mood is set amongst the audience as the opening scene consists of a lot of noise and movement. In comparison, Lurhmann’s establishing shot is also concentrated on setting a happy aura for the audience as the characters in the film are noticed laughing and joking with each other. It is set in a petrol station which involves just the main character unlike Zefferelli’s where there are people in the background.

Despite the lively opening to the films things soon turn ugly as the two feuding families first encounter each other on screen. The connection between the two establishing shots is that they are set in public surroundings, Baz Lurhmann’s is set in a petrol station and Zefferelli’s is set in a market place. Although the two shots are different they are evidently similar as they both share the same happy mood. The meaning of the initial happy establishing shots is to emphasise the hate the two families have for each other when they come across one another and begin an epic battle for family honour.

Another feature of the two different films is the clothes worn by the feuding families. During both films each family, either the Capulet’s or the Montague’s wore their different styles as they were set in different times but they are alike as they share similar attributes. The Montagues in both films wear brightly coloured clothes which stand-out and draw the eyes’ of the audience. Whereas the Capulets from both films wore dull colours, such as greys and blacks.

The colours worn by each family arguably match the impressions they portray to the audience. It may sound bizarre but with a little consideration and thought, it could be an idea you may consider. With the Montagues being considered as the ‘good guys’ in the story they wear bright colours that are regarded to be pleasant colours. On the contrary, the Capulets who are thought to be the ‘bad guys’ the two families wear dark colours which are usually in relation to evil characters in many movies.

Even though there is a huge time difference in which the films were set they still use the same dialogue. With Zefferelli’s 16th century dubbed version it is expected to use the language in which Shakespeare used. However with Lurhmann’s more modern day version, you would expect modern day language to be used, which surprisingly isn’t, and is a major similarity between the two films. The Shakespearian language is used in the modern version so the two films didn’t seem so different, and as it is a film based on a William Shakespeare play it is better to use his language as it has more meaning and a bigger impact than to use modern present day language.

When the differences are contrasted between the two films it is more to do with the director’s interpretation rather than the storyline to be followed. The types of shots and sound effects used are very different between the two versions. The plot and screenplay and dialogue are a similarity rather than a contrast which in itself is a rarity when different directors use a play as a basis for a film adaptation. The biggest emphasis that is duly noted between the two versions is that Baz Luhrmann’s edition slightly exaggerates the actions of his actors. As this is the modern day version it would be more to engage the audience than to distance the film from the original play.

Even though the two films are similar in terms of their context, the two films vary in many ways. The main difference is the time element. They are set in completely different times. Therefore the surroundings and costumes worn by the characters in each film are completely opposed. In Luhrmann’s version, the characters, even though speaking Shakespearean language, they are dressed in modern day clothes. Zeffirelli attires his characters in dress of the given time of Shakespeare. Nevertheless Luhrmann decided to take his work to a further level and used a variety of camera techniques which distinguishes his version from Zefferelli’s.

One of the most effective techniques used in Zefferelli’s edition is his eye-line shot. By using this he enables the audience to see what the character himself is witnessing. An example of an eye-line shot during Zefferelli’s making can be noticed whilst the camera-man is running during the brawl between the two families. This is a ‘new’ technique that enables the audience to experience what the characters themselves are going through.

Secondly, a series of what is called cross-cutting is another technique that is used by Lurhmann; a sense of western music is introduced when Tybalt appears which leads to the scene turning tense meeting as the Capulet’s meet the Montagues. As the families are fighting Lurhmann adds a variety of different camera shots and he emphasises the characters movements and enhances them with flair, in addition a lot of sound effects are used such as gun shots and screaming.

An example of this is when Tybalt grasps his guns during the clash, he goes down on both knees and the camera zooms in on him making it look as if a war is about to start. These types of shots make the scene theatrical and can turn an outlook tense; furthermore he is making the scene more exciting and dramatic causing the audience to become more engaged by the film.

Another feature is that each family reveals a different image during each establishing shot. Featuring in Zefferelli’s version is the Montagues who are the family that start the fight as one of them bites their thumb at a member of the Capulet household; this is the original path that the play takes. However, during Baz Lurhmann’s version it is the Capulets who appear to start the trouble. They arrive at the petrol station in a car listening to rap music, a classic modern day genre of music interpreted by Luhrmann to engage the younger audience. Rap music is a genre of music unfortunately associated with ‘gang culture’. When they encounter the Montague’s it is the Capulet’s who approach them with murderous intent.

As each adaptation had the same play as its theme both versions saw a different side of the play and both engaged the audience in a different way. The film directed by Baz Lurhmann is the edition that I prefer. In my opinion I believe that it is more entertaining. The camera shots and sound effects had a bigger impact on my decision as they engaged me.

The fact that it is set in modern times is also a reason why I chose Lurhmann’s edition as I could associate with the characters instead of the Zefirelli version that seemed a little distant. Luhrmann also used two well known actors for the main characters this again helped the audience in appreciating the film as there was already a sense of ‘knowing’ them. Even though the dialogue could seem a little confusing these actors carried the plot and ensured the audience knew what was to happen.

On the other hand Zefferelli’s version was too deep-rooted for my liking as it featured costumes and weapons from the past. The lack of sound effects and action would fail to entertain me. It appeared as a true reflection of the play but failed to engage me in the same way as Luhrmann’s. It was minor affairs that made me believe that Lurhmann’s film made Zefferelli’s look inferior to his.

For example, when Tybalt crushed his cigarette under his foot, you could hear it crumple and this adds the desired edge. Minor incidents like this made a scene tense or create a certain atmosphere which I think Zeffirelli failed to do, that is why I favour Baz Lurhmann’s edition of Romeo and Juliet rather than Franco Zeffirelli’s.