"What 's Montague? It is nor hand, nor foot, nor arm, nor face. O, be some other name belonging to a man.” This quote from Romeo and Juliet captures the entire story of Romeo and Juliet. Juliet asks what it means to be a Montague. It’s not an essential part of who Romeo is; for being a Montague doesn’t define who Romeo is. It is just the name of the archenemy of her family, and she just yearns for it to be something else so that they can be together. Whether one watched the Elizabethan play by William Shakespeare, the 1968 film adaptation by Franco Zeffirelli or the 1996 film adaptation by Baz Luhrmann, there is absolutely no doubt that the tragic story of Romeo and Juliet has been the source of heartache for billions throughout the centuries.
…show more content…
In Shakespeare’s play, Verona is represented using props, and the rest of the setting was left for his audience to figure out themselves - his audience had to imagine Verona. But Franco Zeffirelli brings Verona to life in his film adaptation by filming it in locations that reflected 14th century Renaissance Italy. By recreating Verona, Zeffirelli gives the audience a better understanding of what Verona was like and makes the audience feel like they are there to experience the story. Franco Zeffirelli brings the audience to the place. Meanwhile, Baz Luhrmann presents the story in a modern setting: fictional Verona Beach in Mexico City. He brings the story to a setting that is familiar to the audience. This allows the modern audience to relate more to the story and also makes it stand out from all the other countless adaptations. This brings change to tradition and is an exciting change but while Baz Luhrmann’s version creates a new point of interest, it does not stay true to the original script by Shakespeare. Conversely, Franco Zeffirelli’s version does as the setting is exactly like how it was described in Shakespeare’s script.
In Franco Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet, the characters are dressed in clothing that is suitable attire for the era of the original setting of the story and the props are too. They wear clothing that is reflective of historical Italy, fight with swords and ride horses. This …show more content…
What the characters say is heavily relied on to convey meaning in Zeffirelli’s version, just like Shakespeare’s play. What the characters say is straightforward and expected to be understood by the audience. In both versions, Shakespeare’s script is followed almost word for word and characters talk as though they are in the era of Romeo and Juliet. However, to suit the modern audience, Baz Luhrmann heavily relies on symbolic codes, character exaggeration and cleaver filmic techniques to convey meaning. For example, during the Queen Mab scene, everything slows down and we witness Mercurio’s outspoken personality and theatrical hand movements. This slowing down, this change of pace, grabs the audience’s attention and signifies that this scene is important. In Baz Luhrmann’s version, what the characters say is not as important. The meaning of what they say is expressed through the way the character acts, which is easier for a modern audience to understand but does not present the story the way that is described in Shakespeare’s
In Shakespeare’s play, Verona is represented using props, and the rest of the setting was left for his audience to figure out themselves - his audience had to imagine Verona. But Franco Zeffirelli brings Verona to life in his film adaptation by filming it in locations that reflected 14th century Renaissance Italy. By recreating Verona, Zeffirelli gives the audience a better understanding of what Verona was like and makes the audience feel like they are there to experience the story. Franco Zeffirelli brings the audience to the place. Meanwhile, Baz Luhrmann presents the story in a modern setting: fictional Verona Beach in Mexico City. He brings the story to a setting that is familiar to the audience. This allows the modern audience to relate more to the story and also makes it stand out from all the other countless adaptations. This brings change to tradition and is an exciting change but while Baz Luhrmann’s version creates a new point of interest, it does not stay true to the original script by Shakespeare. Conversely, Franco Zeffirelli’s version does as the setting is exactly like how it was described in Shakespeare’s script.
In Franco Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet, the characters are dressed in clothing that is suitable attire for the era of the original setting of the story and the props are too. They wear clothing that is reflective of historical Italy, fight with swords and ride horses. This …show more content…
What the characters say is heavily relied on to convey meaning in Zeffirelli’s version, just like Shakespeare’s play. What the characters say is straightforward and expected to be understood by the audience. In both versions, Shakespeare’s script is followed almost word for word and characters talk as though they are in the era of Romeo and Juliet. However, to suit the modern audience, Baz Luhrmann heavily relies on symbolic codes, character exaggeration and cleaver filmic techniques to convey meaning. For example, during the Queen Mab scene, everything slows down and we witness Mercurio’s outspoken personality and theatrical hand movements. This slowing down, this change of pace, grabs the audience’s attention and signifies that this scene is important. In Baz Luhrmann’s version, what the characters say is not as important. The meaning of what they say is expressed through the way the character acts, which is easier for a modern audience to understand but does not present the story the way that is described in Shakespeare’s