There are two kind of tragedies that are told in story form - personal tragedy and tragedy of circumstance. Some of the most famous tragedies come from the pen of, you guessed it, Shakespeare. He has written both personal tragedies and tragedies of circumstance, Hamlet being an example of the first and Romeo & Juliet the latter. We have decided to take this doomed tale of teenagers to compare different versions of it and see which ones have gotten the gist of it more right than wrong. Reading the original play it is quite obvious to see that Romeo & Juliet has not one decent adult in the entire story and in the end this adult abandonment leads to the kids' demise. That is the aspect that we will pay special attention to when comparing these films.
Romeo and Juliet (1954)
Characters
Romeo: The sleaziest Romeo by far. Romeo is supposed to be boyish and charming but this guy plays him like he's over 30 (even though the actor was just 26 at the time). Like all actors in this movie, he is quite stiff and we can't help but think that it is partly because of the theatrical setting of the film rather than the actors themselves.
Juliet: Far too meek and spiritless. She is probably the least wooden of the performances, but Juliet's rebelliousness in falling in love with Romeo and then continuing the love affair despite knowing he's the enemy is just..not there. Basically, all the passion is sucked out of her.
Mercutio & Tybalt: Barely in the movie, when Mercutio is supposed to be Romeo's best friend and Tybalt is supposed to be the culmination of all the Capulet's hatred towards Montagues. Tybalt is meant to be a rather tragic character but there's none of that here. He is just another wooden plank. Mercutio is even worse, he has none of the joviality and prankster in him nor the unsettling mood swings he gets in the original story.
The Adults: As forgettable as the rest of the cast. The performances just exist and there is absolutely nothing memorable about their scenes. Though in this one Friar Laurence is even more despicable than any other version, since he just watches Juliet kill herself and moves not a muscle to prevent it. Paris is not much present either. The parents are also there and say all the right things but it feels like nothing since there is zero emotion behind the delivery.
Story
It all feels very staged. Watching this film felt like eating highly processed food - the taste is bland and boring. This is probably storywise the most accurate version of Romeo & Juliet (minus Romeo suddenly hitting Paris with a rock when it was supposed to be a duel between them) but it is such an utterly lifeless version of the play that as a film it would fail to capture either moviegoers or theater folk. We have never been more bored while watching this story (and it is our favourite drama from Shakespeare's repertoire). There is not a hint of the passion that Romeo & Juliet harbour for each other and a lot of that comes down to the movie's directing. Romeo & Juliet are barely allowed to be in the same room together or really even touch each other except briefly. Yeah, try to find the passion in that when they have to get married in separate rooms.
Misc./Technical aspects
The direction in this film does not work AT ALL. It's like the director didn't know that he was supposed to be making a film. This movie is directed like a stage play and dear god how dull and lifeless it makes this story that is supposed to be a film. Stage play is a completely different animal from visual media and you cannot possibly expect that a movie works the same way that theater does. Plus, the outfits (especially the "penis pants" as we call them) are horrendous and the colours are way too distracting probably thanks to the theatrical settings. The camera also does not move, like at all, during scenes and there are no close-ups.
Romeo & Juliet (2013)
Characters
Romeo: He's much more of a naive sweet talker than someone with cheeky boyish charm. At the very least though he knows half of what he's saying unlike our heroine.
Juliet: "Juliet, did you learn your lines?" is the apt saying in this character's case. Unfortunately, it seems that Hailee Steinfeld did not, in fact, learn her lines. Her Juliet is more lifeless and wooden than the 1954 one. She has no clue what she's saying and the director clearly hasn't instructed her in anyway. The worst Juliet by far.
Mercutio & Tybalt: Again, barely in the movie. In Tybalt's case he does at the very least reflect the hatred of Capulets but poor Mercutio gets shafted again.
The Adults: Damien Lewis is far too good for this trash. He actually manages to turn out a pretty magnificent performance as Lord Capulet which this movie does not deserve. Friar Laurence is way too kind to play the priest who ultimately only thinks of himself. There's too little of Juliet's nurse as well, though she is fine for the part. Paris is puzzling - he is supposedly so obsessed with Juliet that he challenges Romeo to a duel at the end, yet we've never seen Paris and Juliet interact or even meet each other once.
Story
Combining Benvolio and Balthasar is the only change here we accept, since it works on film. Changing Shakespeare's dialogue and inventing new dialogue we do not. It was ridiculously awkward when the dialogue changed into the more modern delivery and you could immediately hear how bad the change sounded. It did not flow at all and if Shakespeare got one thing down, it's flow of words. It's awful and we hate it.
Misc./Technical
A medieval tragedy has no business to look like a romanticized 1800's period drama. It sucks out all the melancholy and depression out of the story and makes it look like a generic romance film.
Romeo + Juliet (1996)
Characters
Romeo: Ok, this Romeo definitely has the melancholy down. Luhrmann clearly wanted to emphasize Romeo's more rebellious and wilder side than his boyish cheekiness. It actually works surprisingly well for his character, which we did not expect at all.
Juliet: Another meek version of Juliet. But Juliet does show deep desperation towards the end of the film, so we guess that's something. We're just not very fond of versions of Juliet where she is presented only as virginal and pure.
Mercutio & Tybalt: Mercutio is hands down the best thing in this entire movie. He is breathtakingly awesome and delivers Shakespeare's lines like a total pro. We have a soft spot for Leguizamo's Tybalt and he does emit the hatred quite convincingly. Side note on Benvolio - he is disastrous and the movie would have survived without him.
The Adults: Juliet's dad is a full on domestic abuser, which fits well for the story. Juliet's mom is attached to Tybalt and is bent on vengeance after he dies and cares not a whit of her own daughter. Though we must say that we were not thrilled of the change of making Juliet's mom a victim instead of an enabler. Friar Laurence and The Nurse get far too little screen time and that unfortunately affects the story negatively. Movie, you had Pete Postlethwaithe and Miriam Margolyes to ham it up - why didn't you use them more? Friar Laurence is also a little too sympathetic here. But the biggest miscast of all time (aside from Kevin Costner as Robin Hood) goes to Paul Rudd as Paris. Firstly, he's way too young (because the guy doesn't age) and the reason we are left with why Juliet isn't interested in him is because he's dorky. But it's Paul Rudd - of course he's dorky and everybody loves him for it. It just does not work.
Story
Whatever other faults this version has (and there are many) it got two things right - the relationship between Romeo & Juliet and the friendship between Romeo & Mercutio. This is basically our guilty pleasure from Baz Luhrmann. Since they got these two important aspects right, the film works better than most other versions. Unfortunately the whole adult abandonment doesn't really show in the movie as much, since Friar Laurence isn't a selfish bastard who comes up with the idea to marry the youngsters to bury the feud between the two houses. The friar isn't actually thinking about the kids in the original play and instead of sending Juliet to Romeo he just comes up with a ludicrous and complex plan of poisoning Juliet and sending a letter to Romeo. This is another minus for the movie, since it happens in modern times, one starts to wonder why couldn't the kids just elope together or the priest just call Romeo up. The scenes with Mercutio & Romeo are sublime and Juliet's father is good foil for the kids but since Paris is so likable it is hard to feel that Juliet's desperation at the film's end is as warranted. Our biggest beef, however, would have to be the ending, where Luhrmann for some mysterious reason makes Juliet witness Romeo's death (2013 version committed the same sin). The whole point of the tragedy is that Romeo is already dead when Juliet awakens - that IS the tragedy. That the society and the adults surrounding the children have driven them to this final desperate action. Not some smug judgmental moral of "oh look, these stupid teenagers thinking with their hormones doing shit they'll regret". In the original story, Romeo & Juliet did not have choices or they were severely limited in them - that is why it is a tragedy of circumstance.
Misc./Technical
We absolutely loved the theme of water that showed up to express the idea of youth and young love. The first meeting of Romeo & Juliet is super memorable and works as a visual representation of them seeing each other on the opposite sides. The melancholy 90's emo music brings the depressive mood to the film (especially Radiohead). Romeo's introduction is particularly striking. We love the sets but too bad that Luhrmann's less than 5 seconds editing rule gets in the way of enjoying these beautiful set pieces.
Romeo and Juliet (1968)
Characters
Romeo: The boyish cheeky charmer with puppy dog eyes that Romeo is supposed to be. He's a dreamer but also an eager boy experiencing his first love. This and the Luhrmann version are the only ones that present his one-sided crush on Rosaline as fleeting and not serious instead of making Romeo talk hours on end how much he wants to stalk Rosaline or how deep his love for her is. Thus, this Romeo is spared of the sleaziness the 1954 Romeo exhibits.
Juliet: THE quintessential Juliet. There has never been, and we doubt will ever be, a better one. She was born to play this role (much like Emma Thompson was to play Beatrice). She's got spirit and passion and her desperation really shines through at the end of the film. There is no meekness on sight in this Juliet and we love it.
Mercutio & Tybalt: Another Mercutio that got it right - he is a playful prankster who has strange and sudden mood swings and Romeo is really the only one who understands him. Tybalt is proud, arrogant and rash. His anger and hate isn't maybe as visible as in other versions but his unrepentant attitude after murdering Mercutio makes his hate feel more chilling.
The Adults: Here it is, the one version where the utter disregard the adults in this story have for the kids is on full display. Juliet's parents could not care less for their daughter's opinions or feelings and Romeo is clearly a disappointment for his clan, since he doesn't like fighting. Friar Laurence seems at first to care for the children but in the end, comes up with a ridiculous plan of poisoning Juliet and then sending a letter of the plan to Romeo through snail mail. Neither does he stay to keep watch over Juliet near the catacombs but instead retreats to his church and finally, after Romeo is dead, flees and abandons Juliet to her fate. The Nurse is also a backstabbing adult - first she's all in for Juliet getting married to Romeo and encourages her but then after Romeo is banished turns coat and pressures her to marry Paris. This is an important betrayal, since The Nurse is more of a mother to Juliet than Juliet's mother ever was. And talking of Paris, he is way older and feels a little predatory. Juliet also has zero interest in him.
Story
The feast at the Capulet house, where our star-crossed lovers meet the first time is expertly directed and acted. All the actors know what they are saying and trust us, that makes ALL the difference. We actually believe that these two kids are in love. Also, this is the one version where they managed to get actual teenagers for both main roles. As we mentioned in the character section, this is the only version that shows how callous and uncaring the adults are about the children, their opinions or their well-being. And how the kids get caught in the meaningless feud of the parents that lead to their double suicide. Ultimately, even the prince is useless as a ruler since he just bellows his judgement up high but does nothing to quell the hatred between the houses. The medieval setting also works to make the kids' lives more oppressive, as they really have no say in their own fate and Juliet especially feels boxed in as not just a child but a girl, whose only purpose is to marry someone her parents chose.
Misc./Technical
As said, the lovers first meeting looks amazing and all the set designs are as authentic looking as possible and create a mood of 1500s Italy. The costumes are accurate for the era without looking gaudy or ill-fitting on the actors. The direction is competent and the use of close ups is very smooth. You cannot talk about this film though, without taking into account the music. This is absolutely some of Nino Rota's best work ever and the melancholy yet youthful tone of the score highlights the scenes and characters beautifully, creating a perfect union between visuals, story and sound.
