Review of Romeo and Juliet (1968) by Brontë Y — 24 May 2011

We have been studying Romeo and Juliet in my English class, so I have visited several film adaptations of Shakespeare's classic story. This has concluded the package of films and this appears to be the only famous adaptation that had nothing changed. It kept the Veronese setting and language and this remains the iconic straight-up adaptation. I do agree that West Side Story is the better adaptation, but this is definitely the best adaptation where nothing has changed. It does have its silly moments, but it was made in the sixties, so that can be expected, so those are only milder issues.

I would be surprised if you don't know the story of Romeo and Juliet, but I suppose I will explain anyway. Romeo and Juliet is the story of the Capulets and the Montagues, rivalling families in Verona. The titular characters are two teenagers from the opposite families that fall in love and are needlessly sacrificed to their families' feud, choosing to die together rather than live apart. Those of you who are diehard or even fair-weather fans of the story will be pleased to know that, while having some minor differences in details, the film remains very faithful to the beauty of the original story.

In the 1996 Romeo and Juliet, the dialogue was either shouted unintelligibly by actors who can't handle the dialogue or whispered unintelligibly by actors who can't handle the dialogue. In this adaptation, the dialogue is handled beautifully by the actors and is spoken at a proper volume. The dialogue itself is beautiful, but it's Shakespeare, so that is pretty much spoken for. I suppose we can move on to the performances, but all in all, the dialogue was wonderful and aptly handled by the actors.

While we were watching the movie in English class, before I knew who it was, I was just thinking that Juliet looks ten and Romeo looks like Zac Efron. Well, Olivia Hussey was only fifteen when she did the role and Leonard Whiting was only seventeen, so it can be explained. However, despite their age, they are both tremendously talented leads and had great chemistry as a pair of young lovers. Neither of them really did anything outside this film, and it was a shame, as they are two tremendously talented people. There were other great people in the cast, like Pat Heywood as Juliet's Nurse and Michael York as Tybalt. The film also had lots of pretty boys in tights, and I didn't mind that.

There were strong performances all around, and they were accompanied by brilliant dialogue. However, there is one more element to the greatness of the film. The film has some very striking visuals, and great art direction and costume design. However, there isn't really much to say about that, so I'm going to move onto where the film hits some snags. The film is kind of silly, on a whole, but the silliness kind of adds to the greatness of the movie. Why all men in Verona dressed like court jesters I don't know, but I really don't care. There is a lot of other silly things as well, but that just adds to the experience.

Romeo and Juliet is definitely not a perfect movie, but it is probably the best straight-up adaptation of the movie, and I'm glad that nothing has been changed. Strong performances, great visuals, naturally fantastic dialogue, and even the silliness makes for a simply great watching experience. If you are a fan of the story I would definitely recommend it, but if you aren't, I would encourage you to avoid it. If you are a newcomer to Shakespeare or if you have nothing better to do, this makes for a good rental. All in all, check it out at your own discretion.