The consecutive scene is composed as prose rather than verse. In the time of Shakespeare’s writing, prose represented the lesser form as poetry was a superior style or scripture. And so it would have implied the aura of lesser characters: sexual innuendo and crude violence then infiltrates to demonstrate these traits. Sampson and Gregory, the initial speakers are striding through the heart of Verona, a busy, noisy centerpiece to the placid town. Initially appearing to be talking about battle and conflict between them and the Montague’s, Sampson and Gregory’s conversation quickly alters to take on the sense of sexism, vulgarity and inappropriate references to sex. They refer to Capulet maids in the manner of rape and taking their ‘Maidenheads’, having them ‘thrust against the wall’, which could be taken as being polite. In the times this play was set, refuse and waste was deposited into the streets out of windows, and therefore the safest place to walk would be closest to the walls due to the architecture of the buildings. However, due to the previous innuendo and crudity it would be uncommon to think otherwise. For example, the two remark upon their sexual status. Sampson states ‘I am a pretty piece of flesh’ and Gregory declares that he ‘Draw thy tool’. Such language, if used today, would be considered improper and unacceptable, yet Shakespeare deliberately used it to captivate an audience of his time which would have been humoured by this and cause them to concentrate on the storyline set to unfold.
Sampson and Gregory are depicted as aggressors towards two Capulet members, Abram and Balthazar, by biting their thumbs at the two which was great insult at the time of the play’s publishing. They provoke them and anger rises quickly. Here, Benvolio steps in a bringer of peace, pleading with the two houses to be civil and to cease arguments for fear of a battle erupting. Tybalt is a pretty straightforward, unpleasant character who seems to have an intense focus on fighting. As soon as he arrives, swordfight starts almost immediately and it is Tybalt who instigates this.
Zeffirelli’s adaptation of the first scene sees many lines missed out, swapped around and changed. Almost two pages of text are completely ignored, mostly being the sexual conversation between Sampson and Gregory. This is not required as the audience of Zeffirelli’s time would not have understood, nor been impressed by the tasteless exchange between them. Zeffirelli’s emphasises the differentially between the houses by dressing them in uniformed colours, Montagues in dark green and blue and the Capulets in bright yellow and red. This aids the audience in distinguishing the two houses‘ segregation. Within seconds of the opening scene, a Capulet member has stolen fruit from a stall and kicked a dog which initiates the presence of a childish, male attitude. In contrast, Abram and Benvolio seem very passive, and they try and walk away from the pair when they spit at them. Spitting is used here instead of the biting of the thumb as this would probably not have been recognised by the audience as being offensive. Spitting clearly identifies an offensive gesture, which the Montagues try to walk away from to avoid a scene. They are older, reserved and the more intelligent of the men, and are very sly in the way that they try and wind up the Capulets; they do it simply by being calm and refusing to be intimidated or offended by them. This quickly turns them to draw their swords, at which point Tybalt enters the scene defying the uniform set in both houses. He is dressed in dark colours, and is seemingly a symbol of darkness and death through the story. Subsequently, his first speech in the entire play is based upon the element of death.
The prince in Zeffirelli’s version is a classical authority figure of this period, wearing expensive robes and set upon horseback, with a fanfare upon his arrival and warnings from frantic citizens. His presence immediately clears up the scene of chaos, whereupon he informs the household that any more brawling in the streets will result in the execution of the person who begun it.
The characters in Luhrmann are named differently, and their names given to them set against screenshots of the characters such as you would find in a crime scene investigation programme. In a similar fashion, the families’ possess two tower blocks with the family names in gigantic letters above them, set upon opposite street corners with a large statue of Jesus Christ between them. In this film they are set as rival businesses. Luhrmann’s version continues its modern cinematic adaptation and sets the first scene upon the Montague boys, here portrayed as rowdy, yelling, juvenile punks. They are riding in an open top car, dressed in bright, Hawaiian prints with vibrantly dyed hair with shaved crosses on their heads, again showing the dominance of religion. This fast action scene captivates the modern day audience, who requires and thrives on action, special effects and haste in movies.
The Capulets are dressed entirely different to the Montagues; they are stylish, slick and very dark compared to them. This is also shown in the vehicle they are driving, a sleek black convertible. Religion is dominant in this scene, with Tybalt shown with a biblical image upon his vest and various other idols. The guns which both houses yield are named ‘swords’, thus making the speech relevant still to the setting. Again, the sexual wordplay in the original text is dropped in order to concentrate on the violence and hatred between the families which the present audience craves. Both families meet up at a Gas Station instead of a Market Place where they are both filling up their cars, again a modernisation of the script. The immaturity of the boys is more simplistic, and one liners which have potential to be understood are slotted in. The similarities between the two households are highlighted the whole time, even the license plates of their cars, ‘MON 005’ and ‘CAP 005’ stress them being parallel. They are so alike that it can never work, which is exactly what happens between Romeo and Juliet.
The Montague boys are seen taunting Nuns whom are getting into a car, singing ‘I am a pretty piece of flesh’, thus stimulating the sexual banter as written in the play. The way it is performed is clearer to the audience the way in which it is offensive in a sexual nature, as the innocent Nuns flee the scene in horror at the boys when one of the Capulet boys licks his own nipple, directing the gesture at the Nuns. This relates the scene to modern day providing the audience with an action that they could recognise as being vulgar and distasteful, and particularly sexual.
The lines in this scene are shouted and screamed between the family members, much different to Zeffirelli’s performance. This again instigates the quick pace and tension in the play, and sets the mood for the violence which to follow. The Montague boys are panicking, exchanging nervous glances and rushing around to escape the Capulets. In their car, however, they are shown to still be vulnerable as they don’t’ even have windows to protect them. As they drive away, the station is set alight due to their fighting and then blows up, providing the audience very quickly with a substantial amount of cinematic action and violence.
The following scene introduces our Romeo, and tells us of his mad love for a girl names Rosaline, and how his heart is broken as she does not return his feelings. He is besotted with her, and is determined that he should not feel for any other woman. It is this that spurs Romeo’s friend to take action, thus they decide to go to the Capulet party that is to be held in order to take his mind off things. We also learn of Juliet, who is to be married to the County Paris, arranged by her Father.
The next studied scene is 1:5 whereupon Romeo and Juliet finally meet. The beginning of the scene plays host to servant by the name of Potpan, included to add humour to the play. This helps to ease the audience into a vital scene, and Shakespeare uses this short stab of humour in order to help with prop changes, costume changes and character placement on stage. Once the servants have left, the scene goes on to place the Head of the Capulet family talking about time in the sense that it goes by very quickly. The aspect of haste is essential in the play and from hereon the play proceeds very rapidly.
As Tybalt notices the Montague boys at the Capulet party he instantly becomes enraged and insists that they be thrown out. The head of the family denies him this- saying that they are doing no harm and should be let as they are. Tybalt claims that ‘such a villain is a guest’, implying it would be a crime itself to let them stay.
The fact that Romeo declares his love for Juliet the instant he sees her spawns disbelief and a fantasy aspect of love at first sight. Clearly fate is demonstrated here, their meeting instantly causes Romeo to forget about Rosaline, who has appeared to have caused him so much pain. His feelings are transferred along with his heart to the beautiful Juliet whom he now claims to love. The two are unknowingly falling into a situation that can only end in disaster. They are both innocent in their emotions; they do not know that they are from rival houses and clearly have feelings for each other. Their innocence is developed further when religion becomes the first topic of conversation, conversing about pilgrims, saints and holy shrines. Romeo uses the aspect of Religion to gain himself a kiss from the lips of Juliet, but not before playfully touching hands with her and using religious metaphors to permit this. The couplet mirror body language which implies a sense of one being, and also humour in the way they talk to each other. Juliet challenges Romeo, and giggles at some of the serious things that he says.
Zeffirelli deploys this scene in a very innocent and childlike manner, where Luhrmann has created her to be older, more mature and streetwise. However, the sense of innocence remains in her angelic appearance and her religious speaking, she still uses phrases such as ‘you kiss by the book’ which implies a spout of inexperience for her. She is still mimicking his body language therefore sustaining a sense of comfort and security which children often create.
Luhrmann’s version of this scene is far more extravagant and lustrous in costume design and is a modern version of a banquet scene - a house party, complete with drug use, alcohol and scantily clad beauties. This is simply Luhrmann’s translation of the story into modern day, and it works extremely well giving the audience a scene they can relate to. Even in such a tawdry scene the couple fined a pure love, which gives strength to it and dawns their purity.
After this scene the event of the play are hastily unfurled, as within two meetings between the lovers they are set to be married and appear to be in an undeniable bond that is seemingly perfect, and undoubtedly fateful in their minds. There rapid progression into marriage and the instantaneous captivation of the love between them is very unlikely, but Shakespeare manages to convince us with his literature techniques and language. Friar Lawrence is indeed a friend of Romeo’s and promises to marry the pair in hope that it will bring about a union between the rival households and inevitably a peace upon the city. His agreement to marry them only further worsens the situation, as we already know; the duo will never be seen to live out their love. The death of Tybalt at the hand of Romeo is caused by Tybalt’s slaying of Romeo’s best friend, and this in turn results in Romeo being banished from the Verona walls instead of the promised death penalty. This is due to Tybalt having slain Mercutio previously; he has already paid with his life. The Prince sees sympathy with Romeo’s situation and that he was right in being angered at Tybalt. It was, evidentially, Tybalt that originally started the battle.
Romeo’s banishment causes utter despair to the recently wed couple. So soon into the promised fairytale and they are ripped apart so suddenly, destined to be kept apart and unable to see each other, each one totally useless to the other. This event totally devastates them, Juliet both at the loss of her husband and her cousin is then faced with the fact that she still has to marry Paris at her father’s orders or else be thrown from the family. It is at this point the Friar creates a plan to potentially save the children from the ill fates, but we know this delivers them to an even worse ending. Thus the plan of the sleeping potion is born; Juliet will drink a potion the night of her wedding to County Paris and will develop all the signs of a peaceful death. He aims this to bide them time for Romeo to return and they intend to leave together and be undisturbed din their love. This is the only way Juliet can get out of marrying Paris, as suicide was considered mortal sin.
The play concludes with the disastrous death of both Romeo and Juliet in the chapel of rest. Romeo does not hear of the Friar’s letter, the speed of his best friend because his to hear the wrong news and speed to the scene with the knowledge that Juliet is in fact dead. Here we see directly haste is the cause of their demise, as it has been over the course of the tale. Romeo beholds the sight of his beautiful young wife, lay apparently on her deathbed and immediately believes his life to be as good as ended, and take his last breath with a drop of poison. Seconds after, Juliet awakes from her slumber and finds him, killing herself with his dagger at the thought of living without her love. The wedding bed and death bed are continually twinned throughout the play, with both characters relating them at various stages. Evidentially we see that their vows of marriage are their sale into death.
The Luhrmann version of this scene I think portrays so much more successfully the desperation and need between the couple than Zeffirelli’s. The emotion from Romeo is processed on a much larger scale and the occurrences scene to happen distinctly faster. It seems only seconds before Romeo is looking down on his apparently dead wife before he his holding the poison to his lips, at which instant Juliet’s eyes open and she is so happy to see him, not knowing that she has just witnessed him commit suicide. The instant between them both realising what has happened, that there is no turning back creates such a highly unbearable sorrow which an audience would be stunned by.
The ending is rather bleak and stark to such an emotional build up; Romeo and Juliet’s haste almost certifies this travesty. I feel that if they had not been so quick to promise themselves to each other things would have turned out differently, even if it did take a fair time to work out. Nonetheless, their love proved too much to handle and they both believed that a concrete step was needed to rectify their love in the eyes of the rival families, but this did not turn out to be the case. Their love, seemingly so pure, could not withstand the hatred between the households and brought about their deaths which is everything but what they had intended, amidst a desperate air and travesty. Both film versions adapted, modified and enhanced the original texts in order to convey Shakespeare’s intentions and suit it to audience wants, producing two different versions both portraying the timeless tale of love destroyed by hate.
