SAMPLE STUDENT ESSAY #2
This is an above average essay comparing two Romeo & Juliet videos. The writer presents a well-written account of some of the major differences between the two films. Unlike Sample Student Essay #1 there is not as much effort made to explain why the filmmakers made the choices they did. The visual used here on the title page is a nice touch.
|
English 154-9170
September
11, 2000
In the 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Franco Zeffirelli, we enjoy an innocent and naïve look at young love. Leonard Whiting plays wide-eyed Romeo, Olivia Hussey is Juliet, Pat Heywood plays the motherly-like Nurse, John McEnery is Romeo’s best friend Mercutio, and Michael York plays the angry Tybalt.
The 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Baz Luhrmann, intrigues us with a combination of “old-school” language with modern music and scenery. Titanic star Leonardo di Caprio plays the romantic Romeo and his former real-life girlfriend, Clare Danes, plays the aggressive Juliet. Miriam Margolyes plays the Nurse, Harold Perrineau, Jr. plays Mercutio, and John Leguizamo literally adds a lot of color to his character, Tybalt, although mainly on his face.
A major difference between the text and the 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet worth noting is the difference in the depth of the character of the Nurse. In the text the Nurse is portrayed as a “surrogate mother” figure to Juliet and the first ally whom Romeo and Juliet confide in.
Act one, scene five, line 130 is a one-line example of how Juliet regards her Nurse. She did not choose to tell her mother first that she had just met a cute boy, but rather her Nurse.
“Come hither, Nurse. What is yond gentleman?”
In both versions of the movie, Juliet asked this and pointed the “gentleman” out as if she were speaking to a girlfriend of hers.
The text also shows the returned devotion when the Nurse tells Romeo in a very direct way that there is someone else in town who can win Juliet’s heart (Paris) and he is very worthy. (Act two, scene four, line 205)
My mistress is the sweetest lady. O there is a nobleman in town, one Paris, that would fain lay knife aboard; but she, good soul, has as lieve see a toad … as see him. I anger her sometimes and tell her that Paris is the properer man.
With the relationship between Juliet and the Nurse established in the book, the lack of this testimonial in the 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet leaves doubt about the Nurse’s motives and does not establish the same bond between the two females.
Leonard Whiting as Romeo and Olivia Hussey as Juliet in Zeffirelli’s version appear younger and much more naïve than Leonardo di Caprio and Clare Danes do in Luhrmann’s version.
In the beginning of the movie Olivia Hussey portrays Juliet as an impressionable teen, who takes her role in the society somewhat seriously. The way in which she entered the dance floor before dancing a traditional dance with other guests and her mother was with her head held high and with much confidence. She exuded authority.
It wasn’t until Olivia and Leonard caught each other’s eyes that they appear “side-tracked” by what had just occurred. There was an electricity in the air after they locked eyes and went for a second glance before they proceeded to play a cat and mouse game with each other around the dance floor, hiding behind other guests as if they were squeamish children playing hide and go seek.
Luhrmann, on the other hand, had his actors appear more independent of each other. The manner in which Luhrmann introduced Lady Capulet in his movie (screaming for Juliet off of her balcony half dressed in her costume for the event that evening) appeared comical and gave us the first impression to not take this character seriously. She does not hold the same grace that Lady Capulet did in the 1968 version. Thus, when it came to the mother and daughter talk with Juliet about love and marriage, Juliet appeared amused by her mother’s appearance and rolled her eyes at her mother who gave this talk while putting her wig on and adding more make-up to her already colored face. This did not add to her credibility.
Romeo (Leonardo) and Juliet (Clare) also appeared much more conscious of the consequences of getting caught when they had their first “conversation” by the pool versus Leonard and Olivia outside of her balcony. Leonard foolishly risked his safety by hanging by branches and skipping and singing in the middle of the night, while Leonardo chose to stay under water and hide behind a wall in fear of being caught.
Luhrmann also chose different scenery for his characters, which helped us to determine the age and wisdom of the characters. For example, he chose to use two different locations for the scene in which Romeo expressed his feelings and sadness with love to his cousin Benvolio. The first location was the “carnival” where Benvolio first found his cousin wallowing and they then moved to a pool hall where Romeo continued on. A pool hall is not a place where you would find many youngsters/pre-teens.
As previously noted, the relationship between Juliet and the Nurse is an important one; however each movie chose to put their own “spin” on it. Zeffirelli’s version was serious and Juliet listened to what the Nurse had to say, even if she did not happen to agree with her. She confided in her and counted on her to deliver her most private and important messages.
Luhrmann chose to exaggerate the Nurse’s weight and thus played the Nurse in a more comical way, which in turn downplayed the seriousness and high regard of the relationship. As an example, upon returning from delivering Juliet’s message to Romeo (confirming the details for the wedding) the director chose to have the Nurse’s head poked in the refrigerator and the camera focused on her rear. Juliet then proceeded to jump all over her while massaging her back, which was a very relaxed way to portray a classy family.
Luhrmann’s version plays the characters along with the text; their lines are alike; however the way it is portrayed in the film and the silliness surrounding the scene leave a different impression.
Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet exuded passion and romance. The first time that Romeo sees Juliet in her red gown dancing in such an elegant and sophisticated way built the tension and emotion up for the viewer, who hopes for a kiss or some sort of communication between our “star crossed lovers.” With every turn that
Juliet made on the dance floor we followed her eyes - which brought us right back to Romeo’s. The crowd, which gathered on the dance floor, left us searching for her as if she were lost to him forever. But no, she was peeking from behind someone studying the “gentleman” who had caught her eye.
Although both the 1968 and 1996 version chose to have a solo singer in the background of the first romantic scene for both main characters, they handled the scene in a much different manner. Viewing Romeo in a bathroom, in Luhrmann’s version, appears cold and impersonal. This did not engage the viewer enough to build up to the scene when Romeo and Juliet saw each other for the first time through the fish tank.
The two wedding ceremonies were very different, too. Zeffirelli’s version was very private and personal with only Romeo and Juliet and the Friar in the scene. They appeared young, scared, and timid, probably somewhat unsure of what they were about to get into, but carried away by their emotions.
Luhrmann chose to decorate a church in a very colorful way and made the ceremony much more traditional with today’s times – minus the gaudy décor, though. Juliet even walked down an aisle where her Romeo waited for her. Luhrmann’s version also allowed witnesses as the Nurse watched teary-eyed from the back of the church.
Both films brought a different appreciation to the Shakespearean play. The color they both brought to each scene helped the audience understand the emotions of each character. Much like in real life, there is a different way to interpret situations and articulate them to each other.
By being a film, the director had almost no limits on how he/she would like to articulate a story. For example, directors can use as many actors in one scene as they would like and are not limited to the number that can fit on a stage.
Their locations can change, too, and as often as they would like them to. They are not restricted by only the sets that can be built to fit on a stage.
Luhrmann chose a very simplistic way of introducing his main characters in the beginning by providing background on each of the characters and the families overall. He not only introduced each main character by name, but also their role in the story. Luhrmann also used props from today’s era but helped identify them by labeling them with what they were originally called (for example, a gun labeled a “sword”). This helps a great deal for someone who is not as familiar with the story and brings them right up to speed.
Luhrmann also chose to use a water theme for his movie. The first shot we have of Juliet is with her face in a sink while her mother screams for her from her balcony. The next water scene has Romeo’s face in a sink in the bathroom at the party. The next water scene is when Romeo and Juliet first see each other through the fish tank and the water is their only obstacle as they study each other’s features through the glass. And finally, Romeo and Juliet fall together into the pool of her home and profess their love to each other.
I preferred Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet for its old fashioned romance. I surprised myself by enjoying an “older” movie versus a more modern movie; however I do believe that it is hard to mess with the real thing, and that real thing is the original piece. Because Zeffirelli’s version was before Luhrmann’s, Zeffirelli’s movie was original and unique. Although Luhrmann succeeded at making a modern film in modern times but with “old school” language, it was apparent that some of his ideas came from Zeffirelli’s work. Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet brought innocence back into young love and reminds us about the desire between two youths and the struggle between those emotions and what we are told by the parents who sometimes control us.