120 min
6.8
1996
Australia
In director Baz Luhrmann's contemporary take on William Shakespeare's classic tragedy, the Montagues and Capulets have moved their ongoing feud to the sweltering suburb of Verona Beach, where Romeo and Juliet fall in love and secretly wed. Though the film is visually modern, the bard's dialogue remains.
Overview
Reviews
r96sk wrote:Part 2 of Baz Luhrmann's Red Curtain Trilogy: 'Romeo + Juliet'.
I remember watching a little bit of this years and years back at high school and I seem to recall enjoying it a lot. I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I might've on this viewing, but it is still a film I'd recommend for sure - it's very good.
I'm yet to see a bad - heck, even a just mildly good - film from Leonardo DiCaprio, which remains the case after this. It's probably the weakest performance I've seen from DiCaprio so far, though that's just through process of elimination as he's still impressive here as Romeo. Claire Danes (Juliet) merits props, also.
John Leguizamo (Tybalt) is the pick of the rest of the cast, which also includes the likes of Paul Sorvino, Miriam Margolyes and Paul Rudd. Speaking of the casting, apparently 14-year-old Natalie Portman was originally cast to star alongside DiCaprio (then 21... dodgy!).
I love the modern day set up and how they bring this famous tale to life in it, though I do think the choice to use Shakespearean dialogue was perhaps the wrong call. It's not like I didn't appreciate it, but it does feel a bit forced and unnatural at times - still cool that they did it, mind.
GenerationofSwine wrote:Shakespeare is still getting work in Hollywood, and probably always will...
... but I like updated modern Shakespeare when it comes in the form of West Side Story, She's all That, Overboard (all the other million or so Rom-Coms based off of The Taming of the Shrew) and not when the film is modern day with Shakespearean English and... yeah.
Too much of a Juxtaposition for me.
The kind of WWII update of Richard III wasn't bad, but it wasn't really taking Richard II, putting it in a different time, and keeping almost everything else intact.
I guess what I am saying is that it didn't mesh well for me.
CinemaSerf wrote:Baz Luhrmann has relocated this classic to modern day Verona Beach and introduced a contemporary sound track to complement much of the original dialogue from the bard's story of true love, revenge and, quite possibly, the greatest tragedy ever written in the English language. The families "Montague" and "Capulet" have been feuding since God was a boy. The uneasy truce between them is to be severely tested when "Romeo" (Leonardo DiCaprio) and "Juliet" (Clare Danes) fall in love. Being from each of these warring tribes, they must keep their love clandestine in order to avoid conflict. As their affection grows, that secret proves harder and harder to keep - especially as "Juliet" has been betrothed and her father is determined that she shall be in the church on Tuesday next! I'm sure you all know the story of the "star-crossed lovers" and I rather enjoyed this adaptation. Unlike "Carmen Jones" (1954) which I did not think worked well being relocated, this does. The eclectic contrast between the motor cars, the revolvers and the original old English text is quite effective. The effort from DiCaprio gets better as the film progresses and by the denouement neither he nor Danes are half bad. Harold Perrineau is also competent as the brave "Mercutio" and the conniving "Tybalt" is well covered by John Leguizamo. Purists may well not admire the abridging of this lengthy story though. It is quite heavily condensed and at times that does rob the film of much of the original nuance - not that Luhrmann ever really concentrates on nuance anyway - but I'd rather look on this as an evolution of the story for modern times rather than a straight retelling. For me it worked, and is watchable still.
