Compare and contrast the two versions of Romeo and Juliet. How is film language used to convey meaning in each case?
Compare and contrast the two versions of Romeo and Juliet. How is film language used to convey meaning in each case?
There have been various different adaptations of Romeo and Juliet made but in this essay I will be comparing two film versions, made with nearly thirty years in between them. The first was made was made in 1968 by Franco Zeffirelli and was set in a traditional, Shakespearean town named Verona, this place though is entirely fictional.
Baz Luhrmann directed the second of the two movies in 1997. This version was again set in the fictional town of Verona but, instead, is placed in a very "American" and modern location, somewhat like Miami or Los Angeles.
Zeffirelli's version stars Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting, two unknown actors whom any audience, let alone a teenage one would have had any prior connection with. The Luhrmann version, however, starred Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes, both of which are already fairly well known to the teenage audience because of roles they have played in previous films or television programmes. For instance, Claire Danes, became well known to the teenage audience because of her role in "My So Called Life", a teen drama focusing on adolescence and the dysfunctional aspects of it.
In the opening sequence of both films the lines "Two households..." are read to us, the audience, to give us an insight as to what is to happen over the course of the film, as it read at the beginning of the play performed on stage. The two beginnings, however, could not be more different. Zeffirelli's version opens with an aerial shot of the marketplace (the setting of the first scene.) The lines are read by a man who we never actually see. His voice is deep, serious, and, for lack of a better word, theatrical, as if what we are about to see is simply a recorded version of the play on screen.
Luhrmann's version has most definitely been created for the nineties, and this is made blatantly clear in the opening sequence. The shot opens on a television set airing a news reporter, reading the opening lines of the film as if she were on a news bulletin. These lines are then read again by a man who we, again never actually see, his voice is deep and serious, like the voice in the first film, but unlike the first film, the tone is similar to that often used in film advertisements. These lines are read over a sequence of very fast shots taken from the film, in particular the action scenes. Each of the main characters are then introduced to us individually in a freeze frame, with their name in a caption underneath again showing that this is a film produced for an audience with little or no prior knowledge of Shakespeare.
Since the 1970s films have progressively become more violent and aggressive, and as a result, as each teenage generation has come and gone they have become progressively more desensitised to what we see on our television screens. If Luhrmann were to film Romeo and Juliet in the same way Zeffirelli did, his film would not have nearly been as successful as it has been. The modern, average teenager's attention span is short and numb to the somewhat docile action compared to the action that is produced in the film that Luhrmann actually did make.
In Zeffirelli's adaptation, the setting is a stereotypical Mediterranean scene. The colours are those you would instantly associate with Italy; reds, yellows, oranges, and golds. The atmosphere is dry and dusty, and for the most part is very busy and filled with the hustle and bustle of everyday life. This is probably the only thing concerning the setting that both films have in common.
In Luhrmann's version the setting is very different. The surroundings have been brought up to coincide with modern day cities. The landscape is filled with skyscrapers, all of which are surrounded by ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
In Zeffirelli's adaptation, the setting is a stereotypical Mediterranean scene. The colours are those you would instantly associate with Italy; reds, yellows, oranges, and golds. The atmosphere is dry and dusty, and for the most part is very busy and filled with the hustle and bustle of everyday life. This is probably the only thing concerning the setting that both films have in common.
In Luhrmann's version the setting is very different. The surroundings have been brought up to coincide with modern day cities. The landscape is filled with skyscrapers, all of which are surrounded by busy streets packed with people and cars. Although this is all very normal, minor details like the prostitute on the corner, decadent parties and the use of narcotics give us the impression of it actually all being rather seedy.
The largest difference between the two films is the era in which they are set, this is also the main factor as to why they are aimed at different audiences. Teenagers generally have little or no knowledge of the 16th Century, except what they will have learnt in history lessons. It is because of this that the exact same film based four hundred years later, in their own generation, is more appealing to the younger audience as they are far more likely to have an understanding of what is happening. Despite the large difference in eras a lot of the details that build up the location in the first film also feature quite largely in the second film. For example the large number of people in public places and the hot weather, but even these similarities are used to make the films different. The weather in the first of the films is hot but pleasant, like summer. The second of the two films, however, this is not the case. We see businessmen with their top buttons undone and their ties tied loosely around their necks, this gives us the impression that the weather is so hot it is somewhat unbearable, adding to the overall image of it being quite seedy.
We meet the Montague and Capulet boys first of all in the Luhrmann film. They are portrayed as rival gangs not to dissimilar to those in "A West Side Story", a musical adaptation of the play. We see them both driving around in large, expensive sports cars; both look to be the results of a wealthy and spoilt upbringing yet both are portrayed completely differently. The Montague boys are loud and quite unpleasant, this is a fairly obvious fact for the majority of the film, but is confirmed in they way they react to a group of nuns at the petrol station they then proceed to blow up. They are all clothed in what can only be described as beachwear, loose Hawaiian shirts, jeans and trainers, whereas the Capulet boys are dressed in sharp suits which are black and leather boots with spurs. The Capulet boys are loud and definitely unpleasant, probably more so than the Montagues, but we do not get such a strong image of this as we do with the others. The Montague boys are loud and unpleasant but their heart is in the right place. The Capulet boys, however, are calm and cool but they have a dark, somewhat sinister side that is so deep-rooted it becomes almost indistinguishable from the loud and unpleasant of the Montague boys.
We then go on to meet the parents (and leaders) of the opposing families, who come across as being almost complete opposites of their younger relatives. Montague and Lady Montague come across as calm and sophisticated with good hearts, whereas Capulet and Lady Capulet come across as loud, maybe even under stress, but with a definite sinister side to them. The first time we meet them properly, Capulet is describing his daughter to Paris as if he were trying to sell her to him.
Eventually we meet the main characters in the film, Romeo and Juliet. Both characters are very similar and share no credible qualities with their families. Romeo is gentile and has no particular interest in the feud between his family and that of Juliet's, as Juliet has no particular interest in the feud also. We do not learn much about these characters despite the fact they are the namesakes for the play, other than they are romantics and until they meet could be classed as no less than pacifists.
Luhrmann brought all of these characters into the 20th Century by using subjects that affect the world today, gang warfare, drug use, the characters all carry guns rather than swords, and possibly even race is an issue. The Montagues are all white Americans, whereas the Capulets are all tanned, quite dark skinned by comparison, and have Latin American accents. Although there is never any mention of racism in the film, the underlying impression that it is there is given to us by the difference in race as it is with "A West Side Story".
The Zeffirelli movie had quite a slow start in contrast to fast and furious opening of Luhrmann's version. Zeffirelli's film opens in a busy market square. There is not a lot of film language used in this movie in comparison to the second movie. The location and setting and characters are very true to the description given in the original play script which leaves very little room for film language to be incorporated into it. The Capulets and the Montagues are at the market on the same morning, when they meet the first thing noticeable about them is their clothing, the style of clothing that everyone is wearing is more or less the same but the colours that everyone are wearing aren't. The Montagues are dressed petrol greens, blues and purples, whereas the Capulets are dressed in vibrant reds and yellows, and both continue to dress in these colours throughout the entire film. This is the first piece of film language used in the movie. There are several fight scenes in the movie and the contrasting colours in the clothes are used to depict who is who in each one, because as the fights are fairly erratic it would be confusing to watch if we could not tell one from the other. Film language is also used to show a sinister side to Tybalt. The hat he is wearing in the first scene has a rim, whereas no one else's does. There is a small gap in the rim at the front of the hat so we can see the edge of the rim, at the sides of the hat. The rim stands on end making it look like horns, which are automatically associated with the devil.
When the fight eventually breaks out the Prince arrives to stop it. The Prince is mounted on a horse at this point, whereas everyone else is standing, this is another use of film language to show to the audience the Prince is a very wealthy and powerful man, more so than anyone else there.
In the Luhrmann film there is much more film language than in the Zeffirelli film. This could possibly be put down to how much later Luhrmann's was produced. Over the thirty years in between the two films there have been hundreds of directors experimenting with different styles of film language, some successful, some not, giving a strong foundation of which to use.
The opening scene of Luhrmann's version is used as an opportunity to focus the attention of the teenage audience onto film, particularly that of the male audience as some of them may feel uncomfortable watching a love story. The scene opens on a television set, this alone shows the film is set in the twentieth century. The set is a colour television which shows the film to be set somewhere in the mid to late twentieth century. The newsreader on the television is black, showing the film is set in the late twentieth century, as news networks in America did not allow black citizens to read the news until this late time due to racial discrimination. The newsreader reads the prologue to the audience as if it were a news bulletin, which in some respects I suppose it could be seen as.
The scene then changes to show what can only be described as a film trailer, this is to show the audience this is most definitely a film, not just the play on screen. For the duration of the "trailer" we are introduced to the main characters and shown very short clips of actions scenes from the film. The film language here is intended to catch the attention of the largely teenage audience and give them an insight as to who everyone is, and a little knowledge prior to the film starting. As this sequence finishes, the first scene of the film starts. The story line in this first scene is the same as in the Zeffirelli film and the play, only the location is different. The Montague and Capulet boys meet in a petrol station whereas before they meet in a market. This change may seem insignificant but it alone can convey to the audience the contemporary setting of this film, as cars did not exist in Shakespearean times, let alone petrol stations.
Film language is then used to liken this opening scene to a "spaghetti Western". There is a sign advertising fuel that creaks as it swings in the breeze, Tybalt is smoking a cigarillo and has spurs on his boots, the characters have guns with their family name embossed on the base of the handle, and the music is very typical of a traditional "spaghetti Western", in fact all these traits are typical of a traditional "spaghetti Western".
Film language also plays a large part later on in the ball scene. The costumes worn in the Luhrmann film are very representative of the characters wearing them. Capulet wears a toga like that of a Roman Emperor. Although we never actually learn much of Capulet, we are given the impression he is the head of a large estate and has extensive power at home and at his business, somewhat like that of Roman Emperor overseeing his empire. Lady Capulet is dressed as Cleopatra, the Egyptian queen. Cleopatra led an extremely decadent life, and we are to think Lady Capulet does also. Cleopatra also had an affair with Mark Anthony, a Roman leader, which makes Capulet's costume quite appropriate, as he is dressed as a Roman leader, possibly even as Mark Anthony himself.
Tybalt is wearing a Satan costume. This emphasises his sinister and possibly even evil personality.
Romeo is wearing a suit of armour, this likens him, somewhat, to a "knight in shining armour", and shows he is the hero of the film.
Juliet is dressed as an angel. This costume depicts her good, kind nature, and her innocence and purity. Juliet dresses completely in white in every scene of the film, this emphasises these characteristics and separates her from the rest of her family.
The ball scene is the first time Romeo and Juliet actually meet. In both films they do not meet face to face when they first speak, but are separated by a stone pillar. Romeo does, however, hold Juliet's hand when he speaks to her. This could be an indication to a point saying all love is blind, because they were able to decide that they love each other without having seen each others face.
Of the two films, I personally believe Luhrmann's adaptation to be the more effective, not necessarily because it is the better film but because achieves the most. Luhrmann's film is aimed at a specific audience, which it caters for superbly. The special effects, cast, props, costumes, and locations give back to the film what this particularly weak story line fails to provide for an adolescent audience in the twentieth century.
