Comparing Romeo And Juliet By Zefferelli's Version

Many could observe that he is brave and carefree from those scenes. Whereas in the older film, the director does not show much of Mercutio before his death. There is a short scene of him and Benvolio talking, but it does not show some of his characteristics. Not only do I prefer the casting, but the visuals add to my reasoning for preferring the 1996 interpretation. Instead of fighting with actual swords, the battle between the Capulets and Montagues were fought using guns that had the word ‘sword’ and ‘dagger’ on them. This is a creative difference that modernized the movie a bit. Furthermore, it might have confused some of the audience at first, but in the end it adds a little bit of humor too. The actors would say, “Put down your sword” yet the viewers only saw gun until they took a closer look. The costumes in both movies are immensely different from one another. In Zeffirelli’s version, the actors are wearing more modern and renaissance-like clothes. Dissimilar to the casual beach wear that the actors in Luhrmann’s portrayal are wearing. Romeo in an unbuttoned hawaiian shirt compared to Romeo in a tight leotard shows the time

Comparison Between Act 3 Scene 1 in Franco Zeferelli's Romeo and Juliet and in Baz Luhrman's Romeo and Juliet

Luhrman has based his version at Verona Beach; America and instead of basing it in the 16th century like Zeffirelli, he had his film based in the 20th century, with mansions, shiny cars and bright lights. While Zeffirelli paced his film in an Iambic pentameter – a traditional Shakespeare pace; Luhrman never kept his film at a solid pace. “By modernizing these aspects of the play, and reconstructing the prologue, Luhrmann creates a movie that is more interesting to the modern viewers.” ("Franco Zeffirelli and Baz Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet." 123HelpMe.com). As Zeffirelli may have believed famous actors would steal his show he instead hired fresh new faces to give the movie a more fresh, innocence value, But Luhrman used well known actors to play the lead roles. This worked because more people were attracted to the film by the actors.

This director’s choice shows that both directors cherished and respected Shakespeare's written text. In Zeffirelli’s film, the dialogue fits in with the other aspects of the film, such as the costumes and set. since everything is traditional, but what is interesting is that the actors manage to sound very natural and comfortable with the dialogue. They managed to convey strong emotion with help of the text and entirely transformed into the characters. Since, Zefferelli's version both includes the traditional sets, costumes, and language it makes it easy for the audience to understand the original play, the film is straightforward and does not contradict the original play, making the film a credible resort for those who want to have a better understanding of the story. Unlike Zeffirelli’s version, Luhrmann’s costumes and set do not suit the dialogue, making the Shakespearean dialogue in his version both strange to watch and hear, another odd aspect is that at times the characters did not precisely mean what they were saying, for instance, when a character was talking about their sword, they were actually talking about their guns named sword, consequently, this made the dialogue confusing to follow at times. Nevertheless, the actors in both films managed to execute an admirable performance and did Shakespeare's text

Romeo and Juliet is a very well known book that is loved by many. There numerous movies done on Romeo and Juliet like Baz Luhrmann’s 1996 version and Gnomeo and Juliet. There are many apparent differences like using guns instead of swords and using gnomes instead of people. Although there are many similarities, the differences between Luhrmann’s movie and Gnomeo and Juliet compared to the play Romeo and Juliet are evident. The similarities between the movie and the play only go down to the plot and language.

Another significant scene that was portrayed differently in the two versions was the suicide scene. Zeferelli’s version is once again almost exact to what we read in the book. Romeo sees what he perceives to be a dead Juliet lying in her family’s tomb, and distraught by the sight he drinks poison. When Juliet awakens from her sleep she finds Romeo dead, and stabs herself with his knife. In Luhrmanns version Romeo goes to the church where Juliet is laid out for her funeral. He also sees what he perceives to be a dead Juliet and drinks poison. When Juliet awakens from her sleep she finds out Romeo has swallowed poison and is dying. The main difference lies in the fact that we are led to believe that maybe he will see her awake

Of the two cinematic portrayals of the climax, in Act II, scene i, of Romeo & Juliet, the Luhrmann version from 1996 is superior to the Zeffirelli version. When comparing the two one can notice that there are many differences, and similarities. While these two films are telling the same story, it is the differences between the two that lead to Luhrmann’s 1996 version being superior. Due to its more dramatic settings, and character interactions and actor

Comparing the Openings of the Film Versions of Romeo and Juliet by Franco Zeffirelli and Baz Luhrmann

Another reason I believe Luhrmann's interpretation was better is how he portrayed the nurse. The nurse in the play is a very comical and important character. Her strong bond with Juliet is shown in Luhrmann’s movie but in Zeffirelli's movie the bond seems weaker. Luhrmann I believe does a better job showing that the nurse cares for Juliet. However Luhrmann does cut out nurses more lengthy speech, but I believe it's for the best as the speech in my opinion was more confusing than helpful. The nurse in Zeffirelli's movie cares for Juliet but it didn't seem as sincere, they didn't have the same friendship shown in Luhrmann's. The nurse in the more modern movie I believe showed the relationship better while still keeping the comedy needed. I think

In Zeffirelli's film and Luhrmann's film, there are many similar elements as well as many different elements. Both the settings are based out side, make up is similar, cinematography has the same characters, and the acting is serious as well as dramatic in both films. Some things that were different are the costumes, props, and sounds.

Zeffirelli’s film depiction of the balcony scene is superior to Luhrmann’s film because it is truer to Shakespeare's play and has a better interpretation of the play to film. The films are similar in that it's night and Juliet looks out her balcony as Romeo leaves her house. Although the Luhrmann film depiction during the balcony scene was in a lavish house which would have never been seen during the time frame of when the play was written. There may have been lavish houses during the time the play was written, but they don’t come close to the setting in the Zeffirelli film. This plays a key role in the film seeing that the accuracy of the events of the scene help to give the viewers an enhanced feel to the original atmosphere. Another significant

Even though the Zeffirelli version was more poetic and Shakespearian, Carlei’s version, however did a much better job at delivering the message of Romeo and Juliet, the star-crossed lovers.

Just as described in the play, the movie version pictures Juliet arriving at Friar Lawrence’s cell as Paris talks to the Friar about the wedding. However, in the play version, Juliet has a polite conversation with Paris, and almost seems as if she is happy to marry Paris. In contrast, the movie shows Juliet hiding behind the Friar and begs Paris to leave. Other discrepancies in act four include the movie not describing the wedding day getting pushed up, Juliet takes the potion she receives from the Friar in her night clothes, and Romeo does not visit the apothecary to purchase the deadly poison. The story line of the movie encompasses the same details as the play version, but variations do make the movie noticingly different from the

Do you think most original versions of something is better than the newer version of it? Well I think so. There is an original version of “Romeo and Juliet” and there is a modern version of it. The plot in the original version was so different from the modern one. The modern version had way less characters than the original. There is a lot of differences between the two versions. The two versions had differences that consist of the plot, characters, and the ending.

Out of the two renditions of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, the 1996 version directed by Baz Luhrmann is better for a plethora of reasons. From the film’s production design to the costumes, the 1996 version outperformed Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet due to Luhrmann taking a more entertaining and modern approach to the famous play.