William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet
As Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 reimagining of Shakespeare’s classic tragedy began to unfold for the first time in years for me, I found myself unsure if whether I’d be able to review it. It’s so brash; so audacious; and so visceral, that I wondered if my appreciation of it when I was younger had dissipated.
When Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes hit the screen, however, that feeling the film stirred in me back in 1997 (when I first saw it at the Georgia State University theatre) came back. Whatever flaws and excesses the film has, DiCaprio and Danes are the perfect center that drives the movie. They did not yet have the technique and skill that has made them even more popular now (see the $50 million-plus opening of DiCaprio and Luhrmann’s “The Great Gatsby,” and Danes’s Emmy-winning “Homeland”), but their youthful energy more than makes up for it.
The story, of course, is well-known, as is the language, which is all Shakespeare’s. The setting of Luhrmann’s adaptation, however, is new. Instead of Italy, the story takes place on the streets and beaches of California. The Capulets, headed by Paul Sorvino, and the Montagues, headed by Brian Dennehy, are rival gangs who have been at war for generations. Will the love, and secret marriage, of Romeo and Juliet allow for peace in this new age? I think we all know the answer to that…
Luhrmann’s wasn’t the first person to modernize the tale; of course, there was “West Side Story” back in the ’50s. What Luhrmann’s does, however, is set the stage, and the standard, for future modern adaptations of The Bard’s text. (It also makes for an intriguing companion to 1998’s Oscar-winner, “Shakespeare in Love.”) It was also a natural film for Luhrmann to make, as it fits in with his obsession, of sorts, with tragic love, as is evident with not just this film but “Moulin Rouge,” “Australia,” and “Gatsby,” as well. It’s also his best of the films I’ve seen (I’ve yet to watch “Strictly Ballroom,” his first film, and “Gatsby”), and the one, I think, will linger longest in movie history.
That is because of the performances. There is DiCaprio and Danes, of course, but so many others make lasting impressions. Like Pete Postlethwaite as Father Laurence, who secretly marries the star-crossed lovers; John Leguizamo, before he was best known as Syd in the “Ice Age” films, as Juliet’s cousin, Tybalt; and Harold Perrineau as Mercutio, Romeo’s best friend, and he who calls for a plague on both houses when he dies at Tybalt’s hand. Many other actors, relatively known to the masses, occupy roles here, such as Paul Rudd, Jamie Kennedy, Vondie Curtis-Hall, and M. Emmet Walsh, but it’s those five that hold the most away over us as we watch. No more so, though, than the two young stars, whose raw talent was already known, and delivers the emotional heft this film requires. Who knew they would only get better with the passing of the years? I mean, besides anyone watching this film closely?
