ROMEO + JULIET (1996) ***1/2 It's probably evidence that Alvin Toffler's premise in "Futureshock" was right: I can't figure out if this has futuristic implications, or if it's just Venice Beach buffed out a little bit. Maybe it's evidence that Toffler was wrong. Whichever the case, it is very ambitious, effective, and portentous. Baz Luhrmann leaves Shakespeare's language almost entirely intact (in what, in itself must be seen as an obscene gesture to pretenders like, for example, West Side Story) but, in an extraordinary feat, claims it as the language of a post-hip California culture. He then has the actors throw their lightning bolts across spectacular sets yielding nothing to ancient Verona: car chases, gun fights, pool halls, churches across the street from gas stations, helicopters, music videos (best ever cinematic use of "When Doves Cry"), Baz has room for all in his subjective Shakespearean vision. It's as if he is saying that the only things of relevance left from Shakespeare's world are religion and gang warfare. And it's religious symbolism that fascinates him most: t-shirts of the Virgin adorn the chests of killers, a statue of Jesus is all that separates the competing skyscrapers of the Montagues and Capulets...Juliet's death bed of candles and electric crucifixes is abruptly brilliant cinematography, even everything that has gone before cannot prepare you for this. It's an old story, of course: Romeo (on drugs) wanders around a party and starts making out with Juliet in an elevator... Nearly all of Baz' garish touches work beautifully, complementing and negating each other in a representative imbalance of his perception of a snapshot of society. The only problems are (1) all of this spectacularly original adaptation distracts from the language of the play, and (2) almost none of the actors can handle their lines. Problem (1) is insurmountable, only a freak can fawn over words while explosions are going on, but there are exceptions to problem (2). Harold Perrineau is phenomenal as Mercutio. I mean, the man spends most of his time onscreen vamping around in the worst drag costume since Tim Curry's Frank N. Furter suit, then, suddenly as the script demands, he metamophosizes into the baddest mutherfucker on the beach. He launches entirely on his own, but Baz knows fire when he sees it, and shoots Perrineau's scenes with the sort of fury typically associated with hurricanes and nuclear testing. Paul Sorvino is the definitive old man Capulet, answerable to none but swaying inconsistently to the demands of his conflicting interior winds. I would never consider Dash Mihok for Benvolio in any other circumstance, but he fits the role here beautifully-illuminating the limited machinations of the character by successfully defining them against action that has nothing to do with the original play. Benvolio, perhaps more than anything else, perfectly realizes what Baz was trying to do with the film-make it say entirely new things, not things that even complement the old so much as have eclipsed them. So, a big problem with the film is the leads. Leonardo DiCaprio would seem a great choice as Romeo, but he only occasionally rises within eye-shot of the brilliance of his lines. He emotes well, but what kind of performance is it when his most moving moment comes when he is drowning in the swimming pool (though he did a much better job with the same scene in Titanic)? While Leonardo is only "ok," Clare Danes is much worse. I can't imagine walking into any drama class of more than 15 students in the world, and not finding at least two better Juliets. She's just terrible, the only time that she's moving at all is when she sounds like a schoolgirl from Ventura reading her part to get it over with, so that they can leave school and go shopping. She only moves you then because you want her to go shopping, too. It's the only Romeo and Juliet I've ever seen where I would have voted against the romance even if it wasn't star-crossed. When you do a successful Romeo and Juliet, despite almost the entire cast, you're to be congratulated. Baz brings the play to life, he makes it speak to us where we live, he makes it say new things (Racism has unquestionably been on the move in America since Reagan, but is a race war between honkeys and Hispanics brewing in Southern California? Would the blacks suffer most, after siding with honkeys? Is gun culture the defining aspect of our era? Can the cops ever make the streets safe again?), watching this film is not a passive activity-it makes you think about Shakespeare and your neighborhood in entirely new ways. The biggest problem is that, for all of the new things said, none are as important, aesthetic, or prophetic as those put to paper by Shakespeare those hundreds of years ago. It's impossible to imagine a greater film with worse leads, or a more audacious directorial project than to make the original script hip and modern.
back to Brilliant Observations on 1776 Films home
go back home, or send me email
no more reviews! I want to buy your novel!