"Romeo and Juliet (1968)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

And still live among us two equal nobility and honor Shakespeare - one in London did well, while the other is inspired by the blight of the world. It is time to expose the rogue, which was, alas, deceived Zeffirelli! Heed Well, dear friends, that swallows secretly in Verona I sang ...
So, it is believed that Franco Zeffirelli built bridges between the past and the present, returning the modern spectator this optimistic tragedy of beauty, triumphant over death, of the sublime love, able to tame the most ferocious hatred of the flow of feelings that can wash away in its path all earthly barriers. "Romeo" and "Juliet" has long become a household name for the perfect Valentine's willing to make any sacrifices on the altar of his love, and burn it and themselves if necessary. And how many people have found the sweetest dedication in the sacrament in a commercial cinema, watching the Italian magician wave of letters with the camera turned the yellowed pages of the First Folio in living an illusion: a moving, shimmering, and make sounds magnificent copy of Shakespeare's text. Everyone who is at least somewhat familiar strong feelings Veronese lovers, who are close to their warm hearts, became available a truly heavenly delight
Director donated a number of authentic Shakespearean scenes, but carefully preserved the atmosphere of the on-screen theater stages, inseparable from the original source, and passed the point. - feelings of the main characters, the "formless chaos beautiful forms," ​​"lead down and icy flame." However, do these phrases among many other Mannerist images flew from the lips of the characters, for some reason when it disappeared. Moreover, it seems that in those places where the film they still retained, it is done only in order to emphasize the unreality, artificiality, caricature of everything that lived outside the hearts of unhappy Romeo and Juliet, and did not serve the cause of their love. For example, Shakespeare, as usual, filled piece battle scenes, but even where they end the death of Mercutio and Tybalt, Zeffirelli does not deviate from his ironic manner - all the reasons for the dispute are ridiculous and empty, all people live, is not real, only love is genuine, real and eternal. And only he who suppresses it in himself, who is deaf to her voice, able to be angry and do bad things, like a furious Tybalt. Sometimes it seems that the first Zeffirelli filmed farce based on the popular story, and only in the last few minutes, the scene in the crypt, where his Romeo and Juliet die happily switched to tragic pathos. Crowned as setting the scene on the streets of Verona, where the old Capulet and Montague hastily shake hands and establish everlasting peace, bought at the cost of the death of two beautiful lovers and austere Duke of publicly reading the morality of the "scourge of heaven ', which punished all of the" anger and hatred ". Surely as long as people in this world will continue to share the prejudices, hatred and war, the story of Romeo and Juliet will be relevant, and love, of course, continue to win, but in our time of such love is not found - so say those who adores this masterpiece.
But wait. At about the same time as "Romeo and Juliet," Shakespeare wrote his harsh chronicle, where, for example, sang the noble zeal and valor of Prince Harry Hotspur, which is also exactly like the noble Tybalt, he was hated by the world and the word "peace" that together with relatives and friends plunged into the maelstrom of the fratricidal civil war is not one any city, but the whole of England. But there seems to be an excuse for hatred was even more ludicrous than the inveterate hatred of the southern labor with strong traditions of vendetta. It turns out Hotspur - positive character, and he is, but in the Italian suit named Tybalt - is negative? In one of Shakespeare's plays romanticized heroes internecine carnage, and respectfully refers to causing her prejudice, while the other condemns both, ending the drama cloying moralizing?
And let a suspicious look closely to those scenes that Zeffirelli ruthlessly kicked out of the script. Here, for example, a meeting with Romeo and Paris at the tomb of the Capulets, after which the would-be husband was killed. She was not in previous treatments of the plot, it has introduced is an English writer. While the ending of the reconciliation Capulets and the Montagues and the morality of the Duke - it is only legacy inherited from its predecessors Shakespeare with the nature of the main characters, no more than a formality, which belongs rather to the world of form than to the content. Yes, impulsive Mercutio and Tybalt have been victims of mutual hatred warring houses, but for which he died a noble Paris? And if Zeffirelli drove him from the tomb because clear that this brutal deadliness of blind fate does not fit into its primitive concept? And this poetry passions, to describe which is the best suited fanciful images! Why did Zeffirelli strikes them so carefully?
Maybe Shakespeare did not write about the tragedy of ideal lovers? After all, this status it has received already in the 18th century, when Richardson and Rousseau composed their leaf sentimental novels, entrenched is this glory in the period of Romanticism flourishing. If we proceed from the poetics of Shakespeare's drama, the key to understanding the play is not contained in the long-standing family feud, and excessive force feelings of the main characters, which this enmity pacified. It is no coincidence brother Lorenzo says Romeo in the church that "these passions end is terrible, and death awaits them in the midst of the celebration," but because love should be moderate - "and will last your love." An interesting parallel here can serve as a way of Othello, who "loved unwisely, but excessive." Let me, at the beginning of the play Shakespeare shows in all its glory its romantic mood of the hero, who for the sake of Rosalind would have done everything the same as that done for Juliet, but she was not ready for this. Is this perfect image of love, love, where love first of all ourselves and nurture their sense, and do not care to whom, violent love, did not pass the test, and a few days of living together? For some, it is possible for Shakespeare's definitely not. It looks even stupider idea to show the on-screen lovers children. In a world in question, growing boys not stretched to 30 years, and Romeo in his 15-16 was physically fit man, who in turn overpowered in fights two adults opponents. And Juliet was ripe for love. Ah, Zeffirelli-deceiver, you have shown people the mirror, and they believed that they had seen him Shakespeare.
about the anger of love! About hate tenderness! Nothing born vastness! On the burden of lightness and a sense of emptiness! Good girls ridiculous dreams! About snobs and fools, because there is no truth in the blind trust in authority. You am I, Franco, the old rogue, exposed, Shakespeare is instructed me personally.
3 of 10

How to cite this essay: