Luhrmann’s Tybalt has western style clothing. He wears a long dark trench coat, an underneath it he is wearing a bright red waistcoat with a large image of Jesus depicted on it, which suggests religious connections. Around his waist there is a black belt with a large silver buckle on it, which is an image of wealth. He is standing up tall, which shows that he is confident, and he is centred in the shot, which shows that Luhrmann wanted him to be the prominent part of it. The cigarette in his hand at a petrol station shows us that he is either rebellious or stupid. The way that he dramatically throws his coat down and draws his guns adds to the confidence he already has. Tybalt’s general appearance shows that he is quite vain, as he does not have a hair out of place. Another part of him that shows that he is confident is the way that Luhrmann decided to have him enter the scene. He arrives in a black car, and when he gets out all we can see of him are his silver-heeled cowboy boots, which is very dramatic, and this atmosphere is added to by the “ching, ching, ching” sound that his shoes make as he walks slowly up the steps to the shop. The Tybalt in Luhrmann’s version is similar to Zeffirelli’s Tybalt as they both have the same very confident appearance. He is also shown to be confident in the way that he is always centred in the shot.
Luhrmann has used very exiting camerawork and special effects as it is suitable for the style of the film. Zeffirelli’s version hasn’t included any of this styling as it wouldn’t be appropriate for the style, for example it would ruin the sleepy atmosphere of the film if the prologue contained several cuts and zooms and wipes. The prologue in Zeffirelli’s version is framed by a patterned orange border, which draws the viewer’s attention to the image in the middle. The text which introduces the film is in a medieval style font, which is in keeping with the rest of the film.
There are several different ways in the two films of representing a divide between the two families. In the Luhrmann version the divide is symbolised by two huge buildings which have “Montague” and “Capulet” in large lettering on top of them, separated by a main road, which is a very obvious way of symbolising the rivalry. In the Zeffirelli version there is a slow pan across a medieval city, which has a large river separating it into two halves, which is not quite as obvious as the Road.
The Luhrmann version includes several different prologues. The first is the news report style magical floating television, The second is newspaper headlines, the third is commentary as a helicopter zooms around the city with lots of cuts and zooms in the camerawork, and the forth a rapid series of flashing sentences. I think that this is put in as the film is aimed at a teenage audience. The repetition of the prologue helps people remember it. Zeffirelli’s prologue is much more relaxed, with a slow pan across a sleepy city at dawn and peaceful music in the background, and a well spoken man reading the prologue.
In the Zeffirelli version, the extra characters are usually a part of the scene, and they are used to give an onlookers impression of the story. Their reactions are filmed for the fight scene. There is one shot where the civilians are standing above a wall and the fight is going on beneath it. The focus of this scene is the wall, which represents a division between the feud going on between the two families and the outside world. In Luhrmann’s version the extras are more used for comedy, for example the section just before the fight when one of the Montague boys licks his nipple in front of some convent schoolgirls and two nuns, who then drive off unrealistically quickly in a minibus.
The framing of the shots in the Zeffirelli version is often unclear and focuses on people other that the main characters. For example in the market there are often shots of the main characters talking where there are stalls in front of them. This is different to Luhrmann as in his film everything is clearly shot with the main characters centred, which adds to the simplicity of the film.
Both of the films are aimed at a teenage audience. Luhrmann makes his film attractive to a younger audience by updating the play to a modern setting, and making the characters very easy to identify, for example the Montagues are the surfer gang, and the Capulets are the sort of western gangster type. During the prologue, we also see that whenever an important character is seen for the first time, their name and relationship to Romeo and Juliet flashes up on the screen while the picture freezes for a split second. Zeffirelli makes his film appeal to a teenage audience by casting the main parts as actors who are roughly the same age as the projected audience. However the difference between the two versions is that the Zeffirelli version is the kind of film that could be enjoyed by all age groups, whereas the Luhrmann version is more specifically aimed at a younger audience.
In Zeffirelli’s version the scene is set by the somewhat sleepy slow pan across a small town at dawn then a slow zoom into the hazy sunrise and the inhabitants starting to set up a market, which gives the viewer the impression that the film is going to be very peaceful and nothing out of the ordinary. In Luhrmann’s version the viewer can tell from the prologue that the film is going to very exiting and modern, and full of guns and gang warfare, so from this we can tell that the prologue is a very important factor in setting the standard for the rest of the film. The fact that it is repeated cushions the viewer into the unfamiliar language used in the film. The first few minutes of each film are focused on the fight scene. In the Zeffirelli version, the fight seems to be over much more quickly, and the alarm bell is ringing from the clock tower. In Luhrmann’s version, the old fashioned language clashes with the modern setting which articulates with a modern audience. There is no alarm to alert the relevant authority that there is a huge fight taking place, and when the fight is dispersed, it is in a much more exiting fashion, with Captain prince bellowing “throw down your mistempered weapons” over a loudspeaker from a helicopter, followed by a dramatic low shot where we can see Benvolio and Tybalt both drop their guns simultaneously. This also gives the viewer a good picture of the rest of the film. In Zeffirelli there is a large bell being rung from the tower, and the end of the fight is much less striking, as it is just a group of men with heavy cavalry and the prince shouts “throw down your mistempered weapons” without any extra details.
The way fact that themes are portrayed is not as noticeably different as the other features of the story between the two films. Although the screenplay is very obviously different due to the setting and characterisation, it is quite easy to tell from both versions that themes such as “fighting causes innocent people to get hurt, so it is a bad to use violence” and “true love will always win” are present in the films. We can also see from the Luhrmann version especially that religion plays a large part in the film as there are constant pictures of Jesus. We know that religion will centre quite highly in the film as Romeo and Juliet are married in secret by a Christian priest later in the film, so it seems as if the early section in the film is setting the scene for this to happen. This gives me the feeling that another theme for the film is to always trust God and believe in him so that He will make you happy, as we know that in the end of the film Romeo and Juliet will end up together so they must be happy. In Zeffirelli, the religious influence is not so obvious, but the fact that there are quite a few shots of the church gives us the idea.
The main difference in the film is the fact that Baz Luhrmann’s version is set in the late 20th century, whereas Zeffirelli has decided to stick to the more traditional scenery. The Luhrmann version has kept more of the original dialogue but it is not as noticeable as the repeated prologues acclimatise the viewer to the Shakespearian tongue.
One of the similarities is the target audience, as both of the films are aimed at a teenage audience. The way that the films appeal to their target audiences is very different. Luhrmann has used well know characters and repetition to make the film appealing to young people however Zeffirelli has cast completely unknown actors in the main roles, but they are of the same age as the target audience. Zeffirelli’s version is also very simplified and misses out a lot more of the original lines and the filming is easy to comprehend. I think that Luhrmann has been more successful in appealing to a young audience, but maybe young people when Zeffirelli made his film were different to todays.
I think that the opening of the more modern version appeals to me more, as I find it very interesting to see the clashing of setting and language working so effectively. The repetition of the prologue was also very good, as it made the opening much more memorable than Zeffirelli’s version, something which is key for a good film.
