Baz Lehrmann’s interpretation of “Romeo and Juliet” is different to the play because the setting is slightly different. In the film, it is near a beach which is one of the main settings of the film whereas in the play the setting is in Italy but it is not near the coast or beach. I think Baz used the beach as a setting because people in America (who might’ve watched the film) might be more interested in it because it is set in a typical American beach scene. Furthermore, he makes the film more modern by using guns instead of swords which is also another way he can hook in younger audiences (E.G. Teenagers). Baz also shows his interpretation by making the characters wear different clothes. The Montagues wear slightly more casual clothes whereas the Capulets wear suits. However in the play, they wear more medieval-like clothes. Baz used these ideas to make a more modern version of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet but he also used these ideas to make an alternative to the play. However, the alternatives still have the same meanings as it does in the play. An example is the servants being replaced by TV reporters/presenters.
October 15, 2012 at 8:28 pm
Sky, this is a very good summary of aspects of the film that are different to the play. In most cases these are modernisations of the play – which I’m sure help people to access some of the more difficult parts – but what is needed now is for you to explore how Baz Luhrmann has interpreted the ideas of the play.
I described what I meant by ‘interpretation’ to my year 9 students the other day and they filmed me doing it. Feel free to watch this as it might help clarify what you need to do next.
The link for that is:
http://waugh9.www.edutronic.net/romeo-and-juliet-explanation-of-the-idea-of-interpretation/
CW
October 17, 2012 at 8:18 pm
I can see where your thinking is going here, where you consider the marketing benefits of making those changes – and I’m sure you’re right about that, too.
I’m still keen to get you to re-think how the choices Luhrmann made were strong because they still carried forward the MEANING of the original text, even though they were changed for the modern setting.
A good example of this is the TV replacing the servant giving Romeo the list of guests for the Capulet party. This is clever not just because it’s modern, but also because it still contains an element of co-incidence or chance – which is a key idea in the play.
Do you know what I mean by this?
CW
October 18, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Thank you sir.
October 18, 2012 at 7:04 pm
No trouble, Sky. The changes you’ve made reflect that you’ve understood the point I was making – excellent stuff.
Mr Waugh