Category: Romeo And Juliet

When speaking about English plays, the majority of the general public immediately starts thinking of William Shakespeare. People who like his works and those who know just a little about him are definitely familiar with the story of Romeo and Juliet, and its famous lines “For never was a story of more woe. Than this of Juliet and her Romeo” (Shakespeare 46). The play was rather popular in the 16th century when it was written but a new wave of attention it received in the 20th century due to the creation of filmed versions. Even though the film directed by Baz Luhrmann is considered to be the best innovative adaptation of “Romeo and Juliet”, it implements lots of differences such as those related to the props, settings, music, and language.

Just like Shakespeare, Luhrmann, showed his audience the story of two warring families. Their quarrels turn into fights with the weapon and negative consequences. The characters still have the same names, so that they can be easily differentiated and matched with one another. Those scenes and even dialogues that were written by Shakespeare can be found in the film, even those they are somehow changed to meet the requirements of the form (Lehmann 179).

Preminger et al. claim that poetry is to be educative and pleasurable and both versions of “Romeo and Juliet” meet this criterion regardless of the fact that they had to appeal to the audience of a different time (133). Shakespeare implemented the jokes that were close to his contemporaries, mentioned the hierarchy that was present in society, and even added some allusions to real landmark events that took place in the 16th century. Luhrmann, in his turn, tried not to focus on those outdated ideas and resorted to the pop culture, which revealed the interests of the 20th century. As a result, both the original author and the director of the filmed adaptation pleased and entertained their audience. They attracted their attention with beautiful costumes and appealed to their ears with popular music. In addition to that, they spread those morals that were critical to society and educated the representatives of the general public in this way.

The settings of the play and the film seem to be called in a similar way, but they can be found in different countries: Verona, Italy, and Verona Beach. The seaside area described in the adaptation resembles Miami, which means that the events were taken to another country. Of course, both settings reveal the environment that was peculiar to their time. In this way, people would hardly start thinking of Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” as they see a city that is full of modern cars, multistoried buildings, and even hot dog stands.

Those costumes that the author and the director wanted to see on their characters differ greatly, as they represent the fashion of two centuries. While in the play, people are in suits and dresses, the adaptation shows them in Hawaiian shirts and even leather clothes. The alterations of the traditional Elizabethan fashion also deal with the hairdo, as some of the Montagues have unnaturally colored hair even though they are boys.

The language of the characters also is not the same. Of course, it was not possible to make the readers hear English or Italian accent of some characters when they were reading “Romeo and Juliet,” but such peculiarities were mentioned and revealed on the stage. Still, the filmed adaptation does not represent them. The thing is that the director believed it to be unnecessary. He considered that American English suited the play adaptation and there was no necessity to implement any changes: “When Shakespeare wrote these plays, they were written for an accent that was much more like an American sound, and when you do Shakespeare with an American accent it makes the language very strong, very alive” (Film Education 15).

Music is one more element that makes the filmed adaptation of “Romeo and Juliet” differ from the play and its performances. Luhrmann resorted to hip-hop music mainly. He added some sounds of electric guitar, which did not exist in the 16th century. When describing his decisions, the director claimed that he tried to add all varieties of music so that it could appeal to the diverse audience. In this way, he followed Shakespeare’s intention and gathered the contemporary church, folk, and popular music.

Having a closer look at Act One and the film scene that reveals those events that happen in it, the audience cannot but notice a range of differences. In Scene One, Samson and Gregory argue about their skills of swordplay near the Capulet’s house until Benvolio arrives, and Tybalt triggers the fight. In the film, Benvolio and the Montagues appear first in a car near a gas station where Tybalt and the Capulets arrive soon. In this scene, the fight starts, as one of the boys bites Abraham’s thumb. Here, the audience can see lots of differences in choreography in addition to the appearance of the new props. In the play, the boys are fighting with swords, which was typical for that time, while they have pistols in the film (Luhrmann). What is more, Shakespeare mentions that they are surrounded only by some observers, but Luhrmann makes them use other people’s cars and other extras. It is also interesting that the text of the adaptation does not change, and the characters speak of the weapon they do not actually have.

The scene on the balcony is a well-known part of the play, and the director wanted to be impressive and touching. It reveals the feelings of the main characters and allows the audience to see that Romeo and Juliet’s love is strong enough to deal with all problems so many professionals believe it to be the highlight of the story (Rocklin 56). The director reduced this part so that it became much shorter. He also alters the setting to the swimming pool of the Capulet’s house while originally everything happened in the orchard. The camera focuses on the main characters during their dialogue, which allows the viewers to perceive the importance of their words and feelings.

Thus, it can be concluded that the original play and its filmed adaptation reveal the same story of two young lovers even though they have a lot of differences. The author and the director wanted to make their audience familiar with the lives of Romeo and Juliet, so they did their best to make sure that their works would appeal to their contemporaries. In fact, this seems to be the main reason Luhrmann introduced a range of alterations to the play. His version was rather innovative, and it seemed that the director altered everything except for the love story, but the original play can still be easily recognized in his story.

Works Cited

Film Education. “Teacher’s Notes.” Filmeduction, n.d. Web.

Lehmann, Courtney. Screen Adaptations: Romeo and Juliet. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014.

Luhrmann, Buz. “Romeo + Juliet.” YouTube, uploaded by Yi Tsou, 2016. Web.

Preminger, ‎Alex, Frank Warnke, ‎& O.B. Hardison. Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics, Princeton Legacy Library, 2015.

Rocklin, Edward. Romeo and Juliet. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Shakespeare, William. “Romeo and Juliet.” Learningstorm, 2016. Web.

William Shakespeare wrote the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet between 1591 and 1595. The play reveals the theme of the tragic love between Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet, whose families ate centuries of hostility that led to the death of young people. In the play, Shakespeare criticizes the social foundations of the patriarchal society of medieval Italy, and therefore the play is also considered a social tragedy. Critics highly praised the play, and it was one of the most frequently performed during Shakespeare’s lifetime. The author adhered to the tradition of tragic novels when writing the play and skillfully used the poetic genre to characterize the characters.

Li (164) analyzes the play in terms of the reasons that led to the tragic ending. In the foreword to the article, the author states that he aimed to present arguments regarding four main reasons that precipitated the tragedy. These reasons are “the two households’ resentment and rage, Paris’s love for Juliet, Romeo’s pursuit for idealistic love, Juliet’s insistence on free love, and the old and patriarchal society” (Li 164). The author also concluded that Shakespeare, in the play Romeo and Juliet criticized the patriarchal social order.

Li (164) has duly presented the arguments for his thesis, providing compelling evidence based on the play’s plot. In particular, he explained why the feud between families was such an important factor preventing the two lovers from joining and why Romeo and Juliet were powerless in the face of social norms. Further, the author recalled the importance of minor characters, such as Mercutio and Paris, killed by Romeo, who were also participants in the tragedy. The author convincingly explained why Romeo’s desire for idealistic love and Juliet’s desire for free love precipitated the sad ending.

Li (166) has supported his assumptions with examples from the play’s plot, which makes them convincing. The author could use more direct quotes from the text to make the discussion more descriptive. He also did not mention the role of Lorenzo, who gave Juliet poison, which could also help hasten the tragedy. The author also needed to pay more attention to the pressure that families and circumstances put on young lovers. The author used excellent structure, tone, and organization of the article, so it was easy and enjoyable to read it. All arguments were presented clearly and consistently.

The author did not show any biases and used objective language in the discussion. Hence, the author achieved his goal and proved his thesis about what factors had a decisive influence on the outcome of the events presented in the play. The author paid particular attention to how difficult it was for young lovers to challenge the feudal system. However, the author should have described in more detail the concept of fate in Shakespeare’s understanding. Although the author stated that he would consider the reasons that led to the death of the heroes in the context of Shakespeare’s concept of fate, he did not give a detailed description of Shakespeare’s vision of fate.

Thus, the article “Analysis of Causes of Tragic Fate in Romeo and Juliet Based on Shakespeare’s View of Fate” by Jie Li was discussed. The article is easy to read and makes a compelling case for the reasons that precipitated the tragedy in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. During the play analysis, the author uses the examples from the plot developed and the main characters’ behavior. The arguments presented are compelling, and the author uses objective language for discussion. The disadvantage of the article is the lack of a detailed consideration of the fate concept in Shakespeare’s understanding, although this was declared in the preface. The strong point of the article is a thorough examination of why Romeo and Juliet is a social tragedy and how a patriarchal society tragically affected the fate of the main characters.

Work Cited

Jie, Li. “Analysis of Causes of Tragic Fate in Romeo and Juliet Based on Shakespeare’s View of Fate.” Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences 3.6 (2020).

Love conquers all, an old byword says, and the recent novel adaptation, the famous Twilight Saga is a perfect proof for the fact that true love cannot be defeated. Rendering a number of ideas and topics, the movie offers a plethora of food for thoughts and provides a detailed description of a completely different world – the world of vampires.

Even though the movie balances between a fairytale and a real-life story, there can be no possible doubt that the Twilight Saga offers a modern interpretation of the famous Shakespearean play; however, taking less time, timeless classics proves to be doubtlessly deeper and more complex.

Basing partially on the plot of Romeo and Juliet story and partially on the problems that modern teenagers face, The Twilight Saga offers a number of issues that are quite topical nowadays, such as the hardships of being different, and dwells upon the great Everlasting Love and the famous Happily Ever After, yet is seemingly shallow in dealing with each of the issues.

The movie sends the audience into a typical American setting, where a typical American teenage girl meets a mysterious young man of her age. The latter turns out to be a vampire, yet belonging to the family of “vegetarian” ones, consuming the blood of animals only. Naturally, the young people fall in love, yet the gang of “bad” cannibal vampires arrive to kill Bella and her family. However, the young people save the day, and the movie ends with the couple dancing and one of the enemy vampire girls casts an envious look at Bella.

Telling the story of the touching relationships between a young girl, Bella, and her new acquaintance, mysterious Edward, who further on proves to be an incarnation of Count Dracula, a dreadful vampire, is quite enticing.

However, one must admit that the idea of mixing the incompatible beings into a love story is already dead at the arrival, since the idea of comprising the incompatible presupposes certain element of motion and activity, which the movie lacks, thus, making the plot more narrowed.

Does being a vampire presuppose being a dawdling silent dummy? Edward is suffering, but he does nothing. Bella is suffering, but she does nothing. Edward’s family sees the threat that the main characters are facing – but they do nothing. It seems that the movie will reach its climax as the entire world follows the lead characters and will be sitting twiddling their thumbs.

Despite the numerous flaws in showing the development of the characters, it is impossible to deny the obvious advantages of the movie. One of the major points about the simple and rather sentimental story is the fact that it deals with the detailed descriptions of the daily life of teenagers.

The scene involving the bullies is, sadly enough, quite a widespread situation that any child studying in public educational establishments has to face sooner or later. In addition, the portrayal of Bella’s and Edward’s falling in love for the first time in their life arrests the attention of the teenagers who have faced the same complexities – or, would it be better to say, moments of happiness?

In addition, the movie touches upon the issue that troubles most young people as they are about to cross the threshold between the childhood and the adult life, which is the problem of being different; however, the issues are mentioned far too briefly.

Though the problem could have been told in a more subtle way, depicting the hardships and the ordeals of being a vampire – moreover, a vegetarian vampire! – comes quite close to discussing the problems of being an outcast among the classmates, or any other social group which teenagers are so dependent on.

You are a vampire, and that is what makes you different. You are a vampire, and that makes you guilty. You are a vampire, and you do not deserve to be a part of the society. No matter how hard you will be lurking in the shadow, people will see you. You see, people do not like those who are different from the rest. The movie captures the very essence of the problem and develops it until it becomes grotesquely huge.

With the two topic intertwined, the movie cannot help causing contradictory reactions; however, the romantic relationships between a girl and a vampire, as well as the problem of being different, are never considered close enough.

The story of Romeo and Juliet, sugared with the grotesquely happy ending, is intertwined with the fears of an average teenager, which makes the movie attractive for the latter. This is a seemingly sweet sentimental story with several subplots, simple and strange. Altogether, these features make the movie enticing for the target audience.

The plot of the story is quite complex; however, the charming chant of cheerful angels at the end of each episode of the saga seems somewhat out of place, which makes the story less cohesive.

In addition, the attempt to break the plot of the Shakespearean tragedy seems quite forced, which makes the movie weaker and less credible. Though the meaningful look that one of the vampire girls casts on the leading characters dancing in complete delight does send shivers down the spectators’ spines, there is still a tangible lack of the thrill in the way the movie ends.

Allowing people to feel the atmosphere of the fairytale come true for a change, the movie, thus, obtains an unrealistic hue, which distorts the overall impression. However, it should be marked that there can hardly be anything realistic about a movie that tells the story of a vampire.

Offering a peculiar interpretation of Romeo and Juliet Story and incorporating the elements of the Count Dracula, the movie still follows its own, teenager-friendly topics, which makes it genuine and new, yet makes the movie linger between drama and fantasy. Though Twilight Saga cannot be considered as classic read, read classic Romeo and Juliet, and you will feel that the interpretation is worth taking a look at.

The play is set in the spring of 1946. The city of Verona slowly recovers from the effects the Civil War which engulfed the entire country for nearly two years. Although, the armed violence has been stopped nearly seven months ago, former hostilities have not completely disappeared. The scene opens with a quarrel between Montague and Capulet who are almost mortal enemies.

It should be mentioned that Montague is a former supporter of Italian Social Republic ruled by Benito Mussolini while Capulet was an active member of the Italian Resistance Movement. Both characters cannot stand each other even though in the past they were trade partners.

The fistfight is about to break out between them but it is stopped by the police officer called Escalus. He urges them to end their confrontation; otherwise both of them will be arrested. This is the first scene of the play. It is supposed to give viewers background knowledge of the events.

In the meantime, the viewers can see the conversation between two cousins Benvolio and Romeo, both of them are high-school students. Romeo is seventeen. He admits that he struggles with depression because he cannot win Rosaline’s love. One should bear in mind that Rosaline is also a distant relative of Montague. Benvolio suggests that Romeo should attend a party given at the house of Capulet.

Romeo follows this advice. He meets Juliet who has reached the age of 18. He cannot pluck up his courage to talk to her, but this encounter produces a strong impression on him.

To a great extent, this event makes him forget about Rosaline. After the party, Romeo takes his father’s car and drives to Juliet’s house and hears her confession. Juliet’s soliloquy should not deviate from the original text which. Overall, this is the moment when Romeo and Juliet understand that they are predestined to one another.

Meanwhile, Tybalt, who is a Juliet’s cousin, learns that Romeo visited the house of Capulet. He becomes infuriated with this thought. Tybalt and his sidekicks attack Romeo and Mercuti at school. In the course of the fight, Tybalt is accidentally injured by Romeo. When the ambulance arrives, Tybalt is still unconscious, and Romeo understands that he might have killed his opponent. He is placed under house arrest by the police.

In the mean time, Capulet learns that Juliet has fallen in love with Romeo, and he is infuriated with the behavior of her daughter. He accuses Juliet of betraying him. Moreover, Capulet threatens to send Juliet away from Verona and arrange the marriage with Paris who is also in love with Juliet. This possibility shocks Juliet because she understands that she will never be Paris’ joyful bride.

With the help of servant she arranges a meeting with Romeo, even despite the prohibition of her father. They enter into a marriage in Basilica of San Zeno which is one of the best famous cathedrals in Verona. The lovers intend to leave the city not to be involved in the hostilities between the two families.

This scene has to symbolize the absolute bliss of both characters. They believe that there is nothing that can threaten their happiness and love. This is one of the most important scenes in the play since it has to highlight the relations between the two characters.

However, the lovers are tracked down by Paris who begins to suspect that Juliet may not love another man. It becomes crystal clear to him that Juliet will never be his wife. In a moment of desperation, he shoots Juliet. Romeo attacks him, but Paris commits suicide. In the final scene, Romeo lies near the body of dying Juliet who confesses that Romeo has made her life worth living.

As the curtain begins to fall, the spectators can hear the sound of a gunshot. However, they do not know whether Romeo really committed suicide or not. There will be no scene describing the reconciliation between the two families because it is not essential for the development of the plot.

These are the main events of the plot. Overall, this interpretation can show how Shakespeare’s play can be incorporated into a different social and historical period. This is the main benefit of this approach. This narrative contains some deviations from Shakespeare’s original plot because it was necessary to make some important adaptations in order to make the text more realistic.

For instance, Friar Laurence gives Juliet a drug that can put her into a coma. It is not likely that she can obtain such a drug from any physician in the middle of the twentieth century. Furthermore, it was important to change the age of the main characters.

For instance, Shakespeare’s Juliet is only 13, and this may not be acceptable for the modern audience. Apart from that, the duel between Tybalt and Romeo could not be possible in any European country after World War II. This is why it was necessary to deviate from the original narrative.

Modern Asian adaptations of Shakespeare’s classic plays are characterized by a unique visual and production style. It is rooted in the region’s past and present and uses traditional aesthetics, language, and means of expression to adapt Western plots to the Asian scene. Oh Tae-suk’s Romeo and Juliet, which premiered in the time of the inter-Korean tension, adopts this unique style to speak about the country’s present through the tales of the past. The play uses a combination of Western, traditional Korean, and modern elements to recreate Shakespeare’s masterpiece in the image of pre-modern Korea.

Korean theatrical tradition

Korean theater was originally based more on performance than drama. Traditional plays had no well-defined plot and involved dances, elements of shaman rituals, and circus. Actors usually wore masks, performing a loosely fixed text through dialogues, dance, and song. In the 19^th century, when Korea opened its doors to foreign countries, Western plays, including Shakespeare’s, started to be produced. Initially, there was a clear distinction between the traditional Korean theater and the new wave. Over the years, contemporary Korean theater has been formed that includes a number of forms and genres. In Shakespeare productions, the Western-style realism started to be mixed with traditional dramatic forms in the middle of the 20^th century. Shakespeare is now the most performed Western playwright on the Korean stage, and, moreover, his plays have become a conduit through which Korean theatre can be acknowledged by the international audience (Seong-kwan 2). Modern adaptations of Shakespeare are characterized by a distinctive style that mixes Western and traditional Korean methods and techniques.

Oh Tae-suk’s Romeo and Juliet

Oh Tae-suk is a South-Korean playwright and director, well-known for his masterful portrayal of modern Korean life and the use of the elements of the traditional Korean theater in his plays. On stage, his characters do not carry on static, realistic conversations but rather engage in vibrant song and dance, wearing masks and exaggerated make-up. He directed two adaptations of Shakespeare’s plays: The Tempest and Romeo and Juliet, in which both the setting and the theatrical means are adapted to the Asian audience.

Oh Tae-suk’s adaptation of Romeo and Juliet is set in a Korean town during the rule of the Joseon dynasty, long before the 1948 division of Korea. The plot of Shakespeare’s play — two lovers struggling to be together amidst a family conflict — is seen as an analog of the Korean situation. According to critics, Oh’s adaptation was designed as an apology to Korea’s youth from the older generations for their failure to resolve their country’s troubles (Joublin). Throughout the play, the director uses a number of techniques to recreate the Western plot within Korea’s theatrical traditions and the modern agenda.

Visual style

From the visual perspective, the play is a collision of styles and modes. The set presents a wooden courtyard with paper lanterns; the main characters are dressed in the traditional Korean style, and the props remind of the pre-industrial era. On the other hand, the Montague and Capulet youths are dressed as extras from a pop-culture pan-Asian martial arts movie, and the fight scene is staged in a filmic slo-mo (Walkling). The play also features some other details from the later era: the photographs of the dead and the spraying of disinfectant that drag the viewers into the mid-20^th century.

Oh Tae-suk also uses colors symbolically, which is characteristic of traditional Korean performances. After the deaths of Mercutio and Tybalt, Juliet appears in a blowing, cloudlike white silk sheet that spreads to the edges of the stage. White symbolizes purity and death, as in traditional Korean funerals, mourners wore white hemp robes (Walkling). Performers are dressed in colorful clothes, which is typical for Korean theater. Other symbols are also used, such as a dragon and a serpent, depicted on a canvas screen, which are mythical creatures from Korean folklore that symbolize the harmony between yin and yang (Cruxent et al. 86). Overall, the play’s visual style is distinctively Korean and is not reminiscent of Shakespearean times.

Direction

Oh Tae-suk’s direction is characterized by playfulness, which is typical for traditional Korean performances. In his review of the play, Yoon Min-sik observes that the adaptation “takes on a completely new form; one of the traditional Korean maganggeul (outdoor play and performance) that combines humor and almost musical-like dance performances” (para. 2). The playwright uses a combination of color, light, movement, and traditional music, performed live on traditional instruments, to recreate the pre-modern Korean setting.

Although the setting, music, dances, and costumes are distinctively Korean, the connection to Shakespeare’s original can also be observed. La Rhee argues that Shakespeare himself also used similar methods to engage his audience, including stage techniques, popular tradition, and culture familiar to the Elizabethan viewers (La Rhee). The dialog between Eastern and Western culture is created on the level of direction rather than the similarities in the visual and production styles.

Genre

Another characteristic of the play, which is typical for the Korean theater, is the mix of drama and comedy. The beauty of the scene with Juliet in a white dress mourns the death of her cousin is underscored by the appearance of the nurse, a previously comical character. She is also overwhelmed by grief for the death of her own husband, taking the audience with her to the depths of her despair. However, when the dramatic tension reaches its climax, she pulls out a bottle, downs it in one swig, and announces, “Oh, I need a vodka!” Exaggerated movements and line delivery throughout the play also sometimes produce a comic effect. In the traditional Asian drama, this mode mixing is used because the culture demands that there should be no extremes, and comedy and drama should be balanced (Walkling). Oh Tae-suk uses this technique to create a starker contrast between the comedic elements and the tragic end of the play.

Another characteristic of Oh Tae-Suk’s adaptation is the omission of speech. This technique is intended to make viewers fill in the gaps themselves, based on the “belief that a play should ultimately be created in the minds of the audience,” which is characteristic of Korean indigenous plays (Some More Shakespeare in Korea). It is used to contrast the ‘logocentric’ Western theater and emphasize the play’s adherence to the more stylized and ritualized Eastern theatrical tradition.

Critique

The play received generally positive reviews from both Korean and European critics. It was praised for its unique visual style, the implementation of traditional Korean theater and folklore, and the portrayal of characters. La Rhee notes that On Tae-suk “accurately interprets Shakespearean devices in the source text and employs methodologies drawn from his own culture as well as Elizabethan culture” (La Rhee). Oh Tae-suk’s rendition of the play was even acknowledged as representative of Korean culture on the international stage (Seong-kwan 92). The negative comments were primarily connected with the somewhat inappropriate use of the modern visual elements, such as a slo-mo martial arts scene (Joubin), and the playwright’s explicit reliance on Korean methods (Some More Shakespeare in Korea). Overall, the play was regarded as a success, and Oh Tae-suk’s style received critical acclaim.

Conclusion

In his adaptation, Oh Tae-suk uses many elements of traditional Korean theater and specific Asian performance genres. The play involves a lot of dances and fight scenes that are not typical for Western theater. Korean-style traditional music is used alongside more modern musical pieces. The elements of modern Korean theater include genre-bending and visual humor that is used more often than one expects from a conventional Shakespearean performance (Joublin). The play also incorporates some cinematic elements, such as a slo-mo martial arts scene. Features from traditional Korean theater and folklore are combined with the Western approach to performance. The resemblance between the Western original play and the adaptation can also be observed on the production level. Rather than merely giving Shakespeare ‘straight,’ Oh Tae-suk employs popular tradition, culture, and Korean traditional dramatic forms as a means to draw his audience into the play. Likewise, Shakespeare also affected his audience in similar ways, such as using stage techniques, popular tradition, and cultural elements familiar to the Elizabethan audience. Overall, Oh Tae-suk creates his own language to communicate with his audience and initiate a dialog between the Eastern and Western cultures.

Works Cited

Cruxent, Charlene, et al. “Play Review: Romeo and Juliet.” Cahiers Elisabethains: A Journal of English Renaissance Studies, vol. 100, no. 1, 2019, pp. 86–89.

Joubin, Alexa Alice. Romeo and Juliet. Global Spakespeares, n.d.

Min-sik, Yoon. ‘Romeo and Juliet’ Retold with Wit, Humor and Dance. The Korea Herald,2017.

Seong-kwan, Cho. Shakespeare and the South Korean Stage. 2014. University of Warwick, PhD dissertation.

Some More Shakespeare in Korea. Seoul Stages, 2011.

Walkling, Saffron Vickers. “‘Romeo and Juliet’ Korean Style.”Shakespeare Travels, 2010.

I would like to thank my descendants that my work is not forgotten. This story of eternal love is probably relevant in your days, so there are many film adaptations and versions of ‘Romeo and Juliet’. The new adaptation of my play generally made a controversial impression: the actors look suitable for their roles, but the internal theme of the play seems to be not so profoundly got.

Carlo Carlea’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ (2013) was filmed on medieval sites and villas in various Italian cities with a minimum of historical inaccuracies. The play of some characters is good: Hayley Steinfeld reminds us that Juliet was a child by modern standards, not yet a woman. Some of the scenes have been reworked to understand the story by the younger public better. The details have been changed, and the lines have been cut to maintain the frantic emotional level that modern audiences demand. As soon as the film opens, it becomes obvious that the prologue has been transformed. Romeo does not exude an ounce of passion or romance, although he is slightly more masculine in terms of manner, voice, and fighting than in previous incarnations. I wonder if the director and producers understood the play’s timeless themes.

They made a film that, I think, includes humanity’s greatest weaknesses and strengths when it comes to both love and lust. However, once the characters begin to behave radically differently, with dialogue thoughtlessly thrown in and topics ignored or trampled upon, it ceases to be an adaptation and instead becomes a parody. The adaptation seems to fall short of the problems posed in the original play.

Work Cited

“Romeo Juliet, Shakespeare Play, Romeo Juliet Movie” YouTube, uploaded by E TV, 2020. Web.

For this analysis, a theatrical production of the play “Romeo and Juliet” adapted to the modern cinema style was chosen. The director is Simon Godwin, and the main actors are Josh O’Connor and Jessie Buckley as Romeo and Juliet. The production presents a modern reading of Shakespeare’s play, which, to the audience’s surprise, does not look out of place. “Modernization” often spoils classical works, depriving them of some charm, but not this time. Modern details are most harmoniously woven into the canvas of Shakespeare’s play. They add another plane to the deep and multidimensional creation, breathe into it something that unites distant characters of medieval Italy with their peers in other countries, breaking the shackles of time and space.

Modern costumes and extremely understandable replicas transfer the actors in the audience’s imagination to the streets of familiar modern cities, interfere with them with the crowd, not so much discoloring bright images as paying tribute to their relevance. Without harming the original text of the play, meaning, and emotional state, the literary component of the performance moves aside, opening up the expanses of its choreographic part. The stylization of the film provides many opportunities for the modern viewer to join theatrical productions.

The feeling of being present in the theater does not disappear. In addition, the modern form of expression is more accessible to the inexperienced viewer. The production turned out to be a landmark not only because of the completely unprecedented entourage and conditions of creation. The actors played in the theater without an audience, and the shooting itself took two and a half weeks, but also due to the director’s attempt to combine the action on the theater stage and the techniques characteristic of camerawork in the cinema.

The director managed to turn to the benefit of the cause of the catastrophic situation that theaters worldwide got into because of the global pandemic and masterfully achieved the effect of personal presence with a caring observer. The impression formed due to the actors’ excellent performance in combination with a combination of various techniques at the junction of theater and cinema is very contradictory.

On the one hand, unprecedented impressiveness causes a feeling of euphoria, which is so easily achievable, primarily due to the emotional hunger for collective experiences that have become a consequence of a bizarre lifestyle over the past year and a half. Such unexpected proximity to what is happening causes a feeling of crowding and stuffiness, making it almost unbearable to watch the boiling of passions on the screen.

Godwin managed to look at what is happening somewhat differently – what is happening is repulsive, but without provocation, it is significantly devoid of romantic flair, but it fully preserves humanity. “Did this all really happen?” (Godwin, 2021) these are the words from the play that can describe what is happening on the stage and the uniqueness of the compatibility of cinema and theater. This was achieved, which is especially valuable, without much ingenuity in terms of visual means. If the whole world and life itself continue to be strict with Shakespeare, the theater, then Godwin literally and figuratively showed its underside. What is happening behind the scenes, only occasionally breaking into the foreground. Removing the veil of mystery from life in its extreme manifestations at the culminating moments, he simultaneously exposes it, giving the conflict a genuinely biblical scale and bottomless depth. Moreover, viewers can only see it in a perfect void, the same one that enveloped people for a while on the other side of the stage.

This production shows that the style of cinema and theater can be combined together. In addition, a clear sense of presence is created. This allows theater fans to feel themselves at a performance in a problematic pandemic era. Therefore, I am covered only by positive feelings. This work of art can become the starting point for creating a new kind of art. This will allow people to modernize theatrical productions with the help of the language of cinema.

Reference

Godwin, S. (2021). Romeo and Juliet [Film]. Great Performances.

My experience watching the theatre show about ‘Romeo and Juliet’ was wonderful judging from the relevancy of the show with the original written script. Generally, the play was interesting with a performance of above average rating. Furthermore, it exhibited the most important aspects of a true Romeo and Juliet narrative.

Apart from the entire production, I was impressed with the script since it presented all the major themes in a typical Romeo and Juliet volume. Some of the vital themes from the author’s narrative include the theme of fate. A perfect example of fate from the play was when lord Capulet’s servant tried to find an intellectual who possibly will read the guest list to him. In that exact moment, Benvolio and Romeo enter the room, and Romeo declared his reading ability. This unplanned meeting highlights the weight of destiny in the show.

Another interesting scene of the production that makes it real understanding of the authors work is the casting of the romantic love between Romeo and Juliet, the physical love of the nurse and the contractual love by Paris.

Lastly, the film displayed the actual meaning of gender and social disparity. A perfect example from the film (that communicated the real meaning of the author’s narrative) is Mercutio who proposed dissimilarity among people depending on ranking or social class.

The direction of the film was excellent, for the fact that the director casting choice was perfect. This aspect added taste to the entire play and made it appear real as narrated in the novel.

The setting of the show was perfect, with a fitting decoration of traditional English background. The set was up to my expectation, and it accommodated the various locations required for the story. Also the set added the traditional English value to the production.

Could I see everything? Perfectly well, the use of black and white lighting heightened the whole experience because they added visual interest, suggested relevant atmosphere and above all distinguished between foreground and background of the stage. I could tell from the varying shapes of light on the stage that gobos lighting was employed. This gave the production a high standard ancient-like production.

The costumes were appropriate for the characters and the period which the original event took place in ancient England. From the show, it was observed that various colors symbolized different status in ancient England. Another observation about the costume of the characters is the use of shield or guard. The dressing code in the film helped me to identify the different social classes that I would not have identified.

The props suited the occasion because old traditional furniture occupied the stage and this enhanced relevancy and similarity with the original ancient setting. This enabled me to connect with the story in a realistic way.

The sound was quite disruptive at some point due to a technical hitch; this rather diverted my attention from the flow of the play for a while. Generally, the sound was audible and it produced a fair performance apart from the technical hitch.

Generally, the film was an excellent production, all the characters were represented in the play and this made the play consistent. Besides, Romeo and Juliet performance enhanced the play and improved the production with original feature. In summary, the whole performance of the play was interesting and enhanced better knowledge of Romeo and Juliet actual narrative.

The Renaissance period occurred from the 15^th century until the 17^th century. This was the time when Romeo and Juliet had just married during their late teen years. Romeo and Juliet were actors and are commonly known for the shake spear play which they acted. During the Renaissance period, majority of the people were farmers who grew crops as well as maintained livestock. They produced for subsistence and the surplus was sold. Men and women performed different roles in the household; the man was responsible for farming while the woman took care of the poultry and dairy. She was also responsible for preserving food that would be consumed during winter. It was the work of the woman to look over the general health of the whole household, including the servants.

In the society, there were two categories of people, the upper class people and the common people. The upper class people got married at their early teens while the common class people often got married at their twenties. In the upper-class, marriages were arranged and the parents chose spouses for the children. The church was not comfortable with the idea of forced marriages but could do very little about them. Money was the determining factor and if you had it, then you had the power to decide what to do. The common people were allowed to choose their spouses (Lacroix and Naunton, p. 80).

Children from upper classes were more often than not educated by tutors at their parents’ home. Those from the common class would be sent away to the noble households where they would be raised up and if they were lucky, they would also get education. They would be taught how to write, sing, ride, hawk, and play some games such as chess. Boys were also taught how to use weapons while girls would be shown how to sew and look after a household.

In the urban centers, schools were set up which provided elementary education to both genders and there was grammar schools for boys only. At the grammar school, boys learnt Latin grammar and Greek which became popular in the 16^th century. Some would also learn music and mathematics, although very rarely. After completing their grammar schools, successful candidates would proceed to universities which were absolutely male establishments (Lacroix and Naunton, p. 81). However, in Italy, girls too were allowed to go to the universities.

Most families had large households and the women had many tasks to perform. A woman was expected to respect and obey her husband at all times. She was expected to look after the family’s estate incase her husband was not available. The man was expected to lead the family and care for the wellbeing of his wife and children. Women got pregnant quite often and they would be assisted by midwifes during childbirth. This was merely a female occasion and rarely would the man be present during childbirth. Child mortality as well as the mothers’ was very high as a result of the unskilled midwifes who assisted during delivery (Shakespeare, p. 2). Children were brought up in a strict manner and were expected to respect and obey their parents.

In Italy (during the time of Romeo and Juliet), some boys would chose to become monks while girls became nuns. The monasteries in England were destroyed during the 1530s reformation. Some Monks and nuns were major scholars in these monasteries. Children also learnt music and dancing during the Renaissance period. In Italy, Commedia Del arte plays were performed by male and female actors although in English theatres, boys always performed women’s parts (Shakespeare, p. 2).

Works Cited

1. Lacroix, Paul and Naunton, Robert. Manners, Custom and Dress during The Middle Ages And During The Renaissance Period. Kessinger Publishing, 2004.
2. Shakespeare, William. X-Kit Literature Series: FET Romeo & Juliet. Pearson South Africa, 1995.

The Renaissance period occurred from the 15^th century until the 17^th century. This was the time when Romeo and Juliet had just married during their late teen years. Romeo and Juliet were actors and are commonly known for the shake spear play which they acted. During the Renaissance period, majority of the people were farmers who grew crops as well as maintained livestock. They produced for subsistence and the surplus was sold. Men and women performed different roles in the household; the man was responsible for farming while the woman took care of the poultry and dairy. She was also responsible for preserving food that would be consumed during winter. It was the work of the woman to look over the general health of the whole household, including the servants.

In the society, there were two categories of people, the upper class people and the common people. The upper class people got married at their early teens while the common class people often got married at their twenties. In the upper-class, marriages were arranged and the parents chose spouses for the children. The church was not comfortable with the idea of forced marriages but could do very little about them. Money was the determining factor and if you had it, then you had the power to decide what to do. The common people were allowed to choose their spouses (Lacroix and Naunton, p. 80).

Children from upper classes were more often than not educated by tutors at their parents’ home. Those from the common class would be sent away to the noble households where they would be raised up and if they were lucky, they would also get education. They would be taught how to write, sing, ride, hawk, and play some games such as chess. Boys were also taught how to use weapons while girls would be shown how to sew and look after a household.

In the urban centers, schools were set up which provided elementary education to both genders and there was grammar schools for boys only. At the grammar school, boys learnt Latin grammar and Greek which became popular in the 16^th century. Some would also learn music and mathematics, although very rarely. After completing their grammar schools, successful candidates would proceed to universities which were absolutely male establishments (Lacroix and Naunton, p. 81). However, in Italy, girls too were allowed to go to the universities.

Most families had large households and the women had many tasks to perform. A woman was expected to respect and obey her husband at all times. She was expected to look after the family’s estate incase her husband was not available. The man was expected to lead the family and care for the wellbeing of his wife and children. Women got pregnant quite often and they would be assisted by midwifes during childbirth. This was merely a female occasion and rarely would the man be present during childbirth. Child mortality as well as the mothers’ was very high as a result of the unskilled midwifes who assisted during delivery (Shakespeare, p. 2). Children were brought up in a strict manner and were expected to respect and obey their parents.

In Italy (during the time of Romeo and Juliet), some boys would chose to become monks while girls became nuns. The monasteries in England were destroyed during the 1530s reformation. Some Monks and nuns were major scholars in these monasteries. Children also learnt music and dancing during the Renaissance period. In Italy, Commedia Del arte plays were performed by male and female actors although in English theatres, boys always performed women’s parts (Shakespeare, p. 2).

Works Cited

1. Lacroix, Paul and Naunton, Robert. Manners, Custom and Dress during The Middle Ages And During The Renaissance Period. Kessinger Publishing, 2004.
2. Shakespeare, William. X-Kit Literature Series: FET Romeo & Juliet. Pearson South Africa, 1995.