Zeffirelli uses crowded market scenes but the dialogue of the characters appears loud and clear. This is in contrast to Luhrmann’s approach where the atmosphere appears quiet and not as loud as the Luhrmann version. Zeffirelli uses natural light from the sun, as most of the scenes were shot outdoors.
As Zeffirelli did not employ cutting or zooming techniques, as in the case of the Luhrmann’s version. It was presented in a natural sense by focusing on the locals which were film extras. This comes across effectively and creates a good impact.
Luhrmann on the other hand depended largely on zooming and cutting throughout the film. Although this presented a disjointed viewing, it nevertheless was quite remarkable in its presentation.
The two directors have diverse views on presentation of characters. Zeffirelli having set his film in olden times appears staid and, at times lacking in humour. Luhrmann has modernized his film with the use of comedy characters throughout. For example, a nun at the back of a van peering at the camera man through her sunglasses. This brought laughs from the audience. Again Benvolio’s friend was struck by a lady in a car using her handbag. He retaliated by pointing his gun at her and the characterisation was immensely funny.
The two supporting characters are different in every way and are presented accordingly. They are Tybalt and Benvolio who belong to the opposing fuding houses in the film. Let us look at each of these characters and discuss there presentation.
Tybalt is a Capulet and is Juliet’s cousin. He is vain, fashionable and has a cruel, cunning streak. He loathes the Montagues and his sword, once drawn is something to be feared.
The directors show Tybalt in contrasting styles. Luhrmann presents him in a western-style using dark, black colours. He appears smart in appearance with an inner open red T-Shirt. It has a picture of Jesus showing his catholic affiliation. This is in contrast to the Montagues who were not Catholics. Zeffirelli on the other hand shows Tybalt in uniform with a thick, bright yellow and black coat. He has a white shirt inside which is open at the top giving him a sense of style. Tybalt’s brown hair is neat and is covered by a unique hat, which shows us his rank. Although flamboyantly dressed Luhrmann depicts Tybalt as a serious character with a stylish way of movement.
Zeffirelli presents Tybalt as a less serious character, always laughing and boasting whenever he appeared in the market place. Zeffirelli shows Tybalt as very upper-class, strong and upright, the very personification of a leader.
In the clip from the film, Tybalt shows his true character of being strong and powerful. He points his sword toward Benvolio and appears in total control.
Benvolio is a Montague, and is Romeo’s cousin. He is a thoughtful friend, his name well-wisher. It demonstrates his role in the play and comes through as a loyal friend and peacemaker.
In appearance and behaviour Benvolio appears a different type of character, as presented by each of the directors. Zeffirelli shows Benvolio as a quiet person whilst Luhrmann depicts him as a loud braggart. In appearance Luhrmann shows Benvolio as a surfer-dude style, colourful clothing and sunglasses. His hair is ginger and low cut. It appears that he is from a good family and is decent person. His face is clean and he has no beard. Around his neck he wears two silver chains, one of which shows strength and wealth. He has a silver ring on his finger showing his status.
Benvolio’s appearance in Zeffirelli is a more orthodox style. He appears in uniform but is no comparison to Tybalt. His uniform is of a grey colour, very thin, giving him
an ugly and low class look. His hat is nothing special which applies to the other
members of his group. Compared to Tybalt, Benvolio does not present himself as a gentleman of breeding and some distinction. Although he appears clean, his hair appears uncombed giving him an untidy appearance. In the picture above, Benvolio is looking down, with Tybalt controlling him. Tybalt shows that he is of much better rank; by the way he is standing up tall and pointing his sword at Benvolio.
In both productions the directors employ the technique of narrator. In the case of Luhrmann, a woman gives a vivid account of what is happening and what to expect in the plot, yet to unfold. She is a middle aged woman of West-Indian/African origin and has the ability to present her narrative in a clear diction. She has the talent of carrying her audience with her. A great deal is dependent on this type of presentation - the technique is not widely used but nevertheless, it is very effective.
Zeffirelli employs a similar technique but, in his presentation the narrator is a man who does not appear in person. He too comes across as a middle aged person addressing an older audience and, to exercise a choice, I would prefer the woman narrator as she appeals to younger viewers.
The plot created by Shakespeare describes a multitude of events that make the play so passionate and powerful. We examine the sequences in a chronological context and hope that the plot would eventually lead to reconciliation between the Houses of Montague and Capulet. The problems in the plot appear beyond control and there is a continuous conflict whenever Tybalt and Benvolio confront each other.
The flashback technique adopted by Luhrmann is, at times, confusing and initially I had to ensure that I had not digressed from the main theme. Zeffirelli on the other hand presents a conservative approach making the film easier to follow. This is because of the wider audience he is attempting to capture and has kept the film simple and easier to follow.
As the plot unfolds we attempt to have an insight into events that will take place. It may not turn out to be how we would anticipate the play to progress. Tybalt is an arch villain and was slain by Romeo, much to the relief of the audience. One would have expected Benvolio to undertake this task in reprisal for the slaying of Mercutio.
The play arouses are deepest feelings as we witness a loving couple battling against all odds. We automatically create our heroes and heroines and hope that good will conquer evil and, as in traditional fairy tales, they all lived happily ever after. These things do not happen in the world we live in which unfortunately, is one of a ruthless existence. Everything in life goes into the unknown and, our creations and aspirations disappear into nothing. Our happiness is arbitrary and we go through life in a passing phase.
The purity of love conquers everything and has the strength and resilience to survive against all odds. It has a beauty unique to itself and has truthfulness beyond comparison.
Both directors depict the love theme, giving us tears and happiness at the same time.