Shakespeare On Film Essay, Research Paper

email: [email protected]: shakespeare on filmWilliam Shakespeare s has developed there are fewpeople who choose to expose themselves to the works ofShakespeare because they are intimidated by his works inthe written form in addition to being separated from anyvenues which might produce his plays. Fortunately, inHollywood as of late, we are witnessing a resurgence ofinterest in the plays of Shakespeare and therefore seemto be almost inundated with film productions of hisgreatest plays. As a result, more and more people areventuring to explore what it is that makes WilliamShakespeare great and by doing so are exposingthemselves to his works. Two recent film adaptations ofhis plays that have received much attention are the 1996futuristic adaptation of Romeo and Juliet and the 1990version of Hamlet. Both of these films are quitesuccessful in their interpretation of the meaning of theplays, however they do have their limitations. In the 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet, the viewersees a completely different version, stylistically, thatwhat William Shakespeare could have ever imagined.Instead of being set in Elizabethan times withcharacters dressed in costumes contemporary to thatperiod, this modern version is set in the present withthe characters clothed in costumes contemporary to the1990 s. Instead of dueling with swords and daggers, theMontague and Capulet boys are participating in gunfightsand car chases. Rather than first seeing Romeo acrossthe room at a party in her father s house, Juliet firstspies Romeo through an aquarium separating twolavatories in her house — something that we wouldhardly expect to see in a typical production of thisplay. Although there are many differences between theauthor s written word and what is displayed in the filmversion of Romeo and Juliet, it can be argued that themost recent film version is successful in interpretingthe true meaning of the play. Leonardo DiCaprio gives avery convincing and stimulation performance of Romeo.He is passionate and daring, everything we expect Romeoto be. In her portrayal of Juliet, Claire Danes isyoung and untouched. She is lovely and naive, as wellas loyal and emotional. Together, the two actorsexemplify everything that this tragic couple wasintended to be. They are very convincing in their rolesand they work well together. The film itself, although set in an entirelydifferent time as what the author ever intended is quitesuccessful in delivering the message of the play. Thetext has not been altered, and the emotions are aspertinent in this present setting as they were in thesixteenth century setting originally intended by WilliamShakespeare. The film tells the tragic story of thesetwo star-cross d lovers who met, were married, wereseparated from each other and who died ultimatelybecause of their names. It is a story of great passionand emotion as well as one of misunderstanding and thehatred that results from that. The film version of thisplay successfully interprets the relationships and thenuances that make them so compelling. The main feature of this production that makes it sodifferent from past productions is obviously itssetting. This version has a hard edge to it unlikeother typical ones. It is set in a late twentiethcentury Verona that is suffering due to the constantviolent meetings of the Montague and Capulet families.The film depicts Verona as a city that once had beenbeautiful but now has many dirty, worn out slums. Itresembles a typical North American metropolis comparableto that of today s New York or Los Angeles. Thissetting is completely unlike other productions whereVerona is seen as beautiful and stately, which is theVerona Shakespeare described. In addition to this themovie is enhanced with contemporary hard rock music thatonly serves to exemplify the conditions of the city asit is shown in the present setting. However differentit seems, the producers of the film have delivered astrong movie which is a good, albeit atypical,representation of the written play. Many people believe that drastically altering thesetting is fundamentally wrong as it completely goes

against and does not reflect Shakespeare s intentionsfor the play. It can certainly be argued that Romeo andJuliet is a period piece that finds it s beauty amongthe streets of sixteenth century Verona. The actions ofthe characters in this play are typically Elizabethan.Both Romeo and Juliet are immediately affected by eachother and separation from one another causes greatphysical and emotional anguish. Certainly in moderntimes love is not usually depicted in such a way and bysetting the play in the present this element ofElizabethan drama will be forgotten. Moreover, bydepicting these Elizabethan characteristics in a modernsetting it can be argued that the actions and reactionswill be misinterpreted or misunderstood because in thissetting we do not expect twentieth century teenagers toact as Elizabethan ones. The great strength of this film is that iteffectively demonstrates the universal and timelessthemes of passionate love and feuds between families.Romeo and Juliet is a play that deals with universalthemes such as those, and because these themes are asrelevant today as they were when William Shakespearewrote the piece. Because of this it is fair to say thatthe play does not need to be shown in the fixed time andplace that the author intended. By placing thecharacters in this new setting, the producers of thefilm effectively demonstrate that Romeo and Juliet isnot a play about two lovers in sixteenth century Verona;instead it is about two lovers, from two opposingfamilies, struggling to find a way to be together.Romeo and Juliet s truth and meaning is found in itsplot and altering the setting effectively shows howthese struggles still occur today. Another one of William Shakespeare s plays that hasrecently been produced on film is Hamlet. In fact, thisplay has been produced for film on two separateoccasions in the 1990 s. This essay will deal with the1990 version of Hamlet that features Mel Gibson. Thisversion is intended more to entertain the viewingaudience more so than the Kenneth Brannagh one. The1990 version is indeed more suited to standard theaterviewing as it is much shorter in length than itscounterpart. Because of this,it is entirely possiblethat more people who went to see a film version of thisplay chose the 1990 one because of its more acceptablelength. This version of Hamlet is indeed captivating andenthralling. It holds the viewer s attention and isvery well put together. The actors in this filmproduction are indeed terrific. Mel Gibson iswonderfully convincing in the title role, he capturesHamlet s antic disposition perfectly and is quiteendearing. However it is Helena Bonham-Carter srepresentation of Ophelia that really stands out. Sheis wonderful in the role of the girl who is driven tomadness after her father s death. The entire ensembleof actors in this production furnishes the viewer withcompelling performances that help to make this film agood one. This production endeavors to tell the tragic story ofyoung Hamlet who tries to expose his father s murderer,who happens to be his uncle and new stepfather. Iteffectively demonstrates all of the most significantevents in the play that pertain to young Hamlet. We seehim meet the ghost of his father and devise his schemeto pretend to have gone mad in order to be able to stayin the castle and keep a watchful eye on his father skiller as well as a protective one on his mother. Themovie, like the play culminates with the duel betweenHamlet and Laertes and the deaths of both thesecharacters as well as Gertrude and Claudius. As a meansby which to tell the immediate story of the play, thismovie does fairly well. However, the movie does fail inthat it eliminates one of the important secondarystories. In an attempt to keep the film at a reasonablelength, the story of Fortinbras is omitted. It isimportant in the development of the characters in theplay as Fortinbras father was killed by the late KingHamlet, who is Hamlet s father. This is an importantissue because it shows the audience that regardless ofthe esteem placed upon him by his son, King Hamlet wasindeed not perfect and certainly not the completelyadmirable man Hamlet thought him to be. note to self… order of events??? backwardsboth plays….new group of viewers whonever would have been exposed to willy. good only if not only exposure.