Jennifer L. Martin’s article “Tights vs. Tattoos” accurately points out significant differences between Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet and Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet by justifying its claims with evidence from both movies.
Martin’s article “Tights vs. Tattoos” correctly identifies contrast in the tomb scene between both movies because it states that Zeffirelli’s portrayal reveals Romeo dying before Juliet awakes, whereas Luhrmann’s adaptation has Juliet gaze at Romeo for a second before the poison takes effect on him. The first good piece of evidence is that Jennifer L. Martin asserted in her article “Tights vs. Tattoos” stating, “Perhaps the major difference between the two films is that in Luhrmann’s version Juliet awakens to see Romeo take …show more content…
Romeo and Juliet has Romeo stumble upon Juliet’s “dead” body and drink the poison after seeing her. Juliet, after that, wakes up seeing that Romeo killed himself so she stabs herself with a dagger. Romeo + Juliet has Romeo raise the poison to his lips as Juliet’s eyes flutter open and she tries to stop him but in vain. Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet is closer to portraying Shakespeare’s actual words as in the text. To add even more fuel to this fire, William Shakespeare makes a declaration in his tragedy Romeo and Juliet saying, “What’s here? A cup, closed in my truelove’s hand? Poison, I see, hath been his timeless end. O churl! Drunk all, and left no friendly drop to help me after? I will kiss thy lips” (Shakespeare 161-164). So what Shakespeare is trying to say is that Juliet, after seeing Romeo dead, kisses his lips to draw some poison. This is closer to Zeffirelli’s version since Juliet does not …show more content…
Tattoos” flawlessly recognizes another major difference between both films saying that Romeo and Juliet shows the resolution of the two families unlike Romeo + Juliet where it is not even revealed. It is important to note that Jennifer L. Martin made an explanation in her article “Tights vs. Tattoos” confirming, “Luhrmann’s version ends with a television newscaster reading the Prince’s last six line, followed by the static of a TV screen. We do not see the overt resolution of the two families, as is made clear in Zeffirelli’s version” (Martin 6). The getting together of the families is very important because it shows that the deaths of Romeo and Juliet did not go to vain. If both families got nothing out of it, then what was the use of having the play take place? There has to be some kind of moral or message from the play. This is why Zeffirelli’s flick was more thoughtful and touching because his motion picture had a purpose. Another great example that helps support this is when Shakespeare makes a description in his play Romeo and Juliet suggesting, “O brother Montague, give me thy hand. This is my daughter’s jointure, for no more can I demand” (Shakespeare 296-297). Here Lord Capulet is asking Lord Montague to join him and make peace with him. That is Capulet’s wedding gift to Lord Montague. In Romeo + Juliet it has a kind of abrupt ending because there is no visual of the families together. This is the major difference between both motion pictures
Martin’s article “Tights vs. Tattoos” correctly identifies contrast in the tomb scene between both movies because it states that Zeffirelli’s portrayal reveals Romeo dying before Juliet awakes, whereas Luhrmann’s adaptation has Juliet gaze at Romeo for a second before the poison takes effect on him. The first good piece of evidence is that Jennifer L. Martin asserted in her article “Tights vs. Tattoos” stating, “Perhaps the major difference between the two films is that in Luhrmann’s version Juliet awakens to see Romeo take …show more content…
Romeo and Juliet has Romeo stumble upon Juliet’s “dead” body and drink the poison after seeing her. Juliet, after that, wakes up seeing that Romeo killed himself so she stabs herself with a dagger. Romeo + Juliet has Romeo raise the poison to his lips as Juliet’s eyes flutter open and she tries to stop him but in vain. Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet is closer to portraying Shakespeare’s actual words as in the text. To add even more fuel to this fire, William Shakespeare makes a declaration in his tragedy Romeo and Juliet saying, “What’s here? A cup, closed in my truelove’s hand? Poison, I see, hath been his timeless end. O churl! Drunk all, and left no friendly drop to help me after? I will kiss thy lips” (Shakespeare 161-164). So what Shakespeare is trying to say is that Juliet, after seeing Romeo dead, kisses his lips to draw some poison. This is closer to Zeffirelli’s version since Juliet does not …show more content…
Tattoos” flawlessly recognizes another major difference between both films saying that Romeo and Juliet shows the resolution of the two families unlike Romeo + Juliet where it is not even revealed. It is important to note that Jennifer L. Martin made an explanation in her article “Tights vs. Tattoos” confirming, “Luhrmann’s version ends with a television newscaster reading the Prince’s last six line, followed by the static of a TV screen. We do not see the overt resolution of the two families, as is made clear in Zeffirelli’s version” (Martin 6). The getting together of the families is very important because it shows that the deaths of Romeo and Juliet did not go to vain. If both families got nothing out of it, then what was the use of having the play take place? There has to be some kind of moral or message from the play. This is why Zeffirelli’s flick was more thoughtful and touching because his motion picture had a purpose. Another great example that helps support this is when Shakespeare makes a description in his play Romeo and Juliet suggesting, “O brother Montague, give me thy hand. This is my daughter’s jointure, for no more can I demand” (Shakespeare 296-297). Here Lord Capulet is asking Lord Montague to join him and make peace with him. That is Capulet’s wedding gift to Lord Montague. In Romeo + Juliet it has a kind of abrupt ending because there is no visual of the families together. This is the major difference between both motion pictures