|
Post by Harry on May 7, 2002 22:00:00 GMT -5
Iago, I liked the Zeferelli version, too. Of course, I saw it a few years ago, rather than a few months. I don't think I'll admit how many years are a "few." Did you see the version from the '90s with Leonardo DiCaprio? That was supposed to be for young people. If you've seen them both, which did you like better?
|
|
|
Post by inhiding on May 8, 2002 18:26:53 GMT -5
Iago, I liked the Zeferelli version, too. Of course, I saw it a few years ago, rather than a few months. I don't think I'll admit how many years are a "few." Did you see the version from the '90s with Leonardo DiCaprio? That was supposed to be for young people. If you've seen them both, which did you like better? I was supposed to watch the new one in school, but never got to it. I heard about it though. I have seen both movie versions of Hamlet, and the old on was definitly better. R&J was best though when I saw it at the Shakespeare Tavern
|
|
|
Post by Harry on May 8, 2002 23:35:07 GMT -5
Live theater is usually better, though I once saw a Romeo and Juliet where both were overweight and middle-aged! That didn't work too well.
|
|
Juliet
Denizen
There's many a man hath more hair than wit.
Posts: 53
|
Post by Juliet on Jun 25, 2002 1:48:10 GMT -5
Jumping back to the start of this all....
I'd have to agree with Iago that in many ways, Romeo and Juliet are ditzy duds (Just insulted myself. Sigh) But I don't think it's at all an age thing...when I was 13, I adored R&J. When I was 6, I adored R&J...but that's just me. Perspectives will change as you age, but in a pragmatic point of view, R&J are just plain stupid!
Yet this play is widely loved, just as you said, Ganymede, even by people who don't know the actual play at all! It's become an integral part of our culture because even though their romance is totally unrealistic, it strikes a chord in us. That's how we want love to be, sudden and powerful and pure unto death. It's very unlikeliness is what makes us love it. So, in reality, it is ~stupid~, but if you really think about it, love itself is ~stupid~, too: you care about this person so much, but other people don't see them as fabulous, and they're really not, it's impractical and faintly ridiculous...call me cynical but, hey. Yet we keep striving towards the dream of perfect love through things like R&J. So I guess your view of R&J somewhat depends upon your degree of cynicism towards love in general, or how well you suspend your disbelief...If you think about it, it's almost lucky that Romeo and Juliet died. If they hadn't, Romeo, who changed his affections so quickly from Rosaline to Juliet, would grow tired of Juliet and go off with some new chick. Juliet, pregnant, tired, and ugly, would yell at Romeo. They'd fight. They'd hate each other. It would be miserable. More of a tragedy, in ways, but not something you'd necessarily like to see in a romantic play...
|
|
Juliet
Denizen
There's many a man hath more hair than wit.
Posts: 53
|
Post by Juliet on Jun 25, 2002 1:51:03 GMT -5
Alas, poor Eurich. I knew him well."
*cringe*
|
|
|
Post by Ganymede on Jun 27, 2002 11:48:43 GMT -5
I think R&J portrays immature love, not necessarily love in general. Throughout the play, they exist in the first stage of love, which is somewhat obsessive and impractical, yet passionate and exciting. But they never get beyond that. One could only wonder if they ever would have if they had lived. But perhaps that is the point. Symbolically, immature love must fall away for the higher levels of love to come into being, just as Romeo and Juliet must die in order to unite their families and end the feud.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Jun 27, 2002 12:50:15 GMT -5
Yes, R&J is definately a play that consciously explores the immaturity of new love, but I think it also does that in showing the couple (or at least Juliet) attempting to move on to a more mature stage of love. When the fit hits the shan, they need to learn to love realistically in a realistic world. Sort of like newlyweds discovering they have to pay bills and get a mortgage; that love is wonderful, but cannot always conquer all. Yet, they are not ready for this. They divide, Romeo makes some hasty decisions without consulting Juliet, and refuses to look at the situation maturely. What really undoes the couples is not simply a twist of fate or the stubbornness of their families (though both set the stage for a tragedy), but rather their love's inability to grow up and advance to a second stage. This is a couple that will never be able to decide which parent needs to take the kids to the karate game and which one needs to be home when the repairman comes. Instead, Juliet would make the necessary phone callsm hoping Romeo gets it right, while he sits in the car and cries; possibly even slays the repairman after he attempts to overcharge the couple for repairing the air conditioner.
Romeo is a human, semi-well-rounded character, but he is also the walking embodiement of raw passion without the aid of reason. There are two Shakespeare characters with flaws that I recognize within myself who I strive never to become: Romeo and Polonius. There's a certain power in that. Shakespeare holds up a mirror to ourselves and says "look" oftentimes. For me, R&J is definately one of those instances.
|
|
Lord3
Money Lender
'Tis a lucky day, boy, and we'll do good deeds on't
Posts: 40
|
Post by Lord3 on Aug 4, 2002 22:07:04 GMT -5
I have a love hate thing with R and J. I love the words. The language of love in the balcony scene is really astounding. If you try to hear, "But soft, what light through yonder window breaks?/ It is the east, and Juliet is the sun./ Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon...", if you try to hear those words for the first time ... well, I'm blown away. Having said that I'm not sure I would care if I never saw the play again. When I'm in the audience my heart sinks when I hear Two households... knowing that I have 3 hours of listening to, perforce, young actors unable to rise to the text. Talk about cynical . A recent production at Stratford (Canada) has an over 40 year old playing Mercutio. At first I thought, good grief. But it really is kind of perfect that Mercutio is a delayed adoloscent hanging out with the kids. Fonz.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Aug 5, 2002 19:47:31 GMT -5
Some years ago I saw a show on PBS in which Henry Winkler tried to introduce Shakespeare to a younger audience. "Shakespeare" and his company showed up and did a couple of scenes. One was the scene where Falstaff and Hal meet in the tavern after the Gads Hill robbery. Another was the fight scene where Mercutio gets killed. Winkler said that he had always wanted to play Romeo and "Shakespeare" shot back, "You're too old."
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Aug 8, 2002 12:48:13 GMT -5
I'm not sure whether to laugh or cringe at that thought. Somehow though, the thought of "The Fonz" in doublets and hose almost makes sense to me
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Aug 8, 2002 21:25:09 GMT -5
As I recall, and it has been many years, Winkler appeared more as straight Winkler than campy Fonz.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Sept 12, 2002 17:05:41 GMT -5
Still, it's impossible for me to refrain from making the association. When a child in public school, I was once forced to watch a video on "good touch, bad touch" in which he starred. I was scarred for life
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Sept 12, 2002 22:01:49 GMT -5
He demonstrated "bad touch," right. I was too old to have gone through that. I suppose "bad touch" was a reality more than an instructional video theme, but I never had to deal with it as a serious situation. Then again, there were always the "duck and cover" drills.
|
|
|
Post by shaxper on Sept 12, 2002 23:40:37 GMT -5
I guess the prospect of a nuclear air strike might be construed as a sort of "bad touch" though Somehow, the prospect of sleazy grownups in dirty raincoats doesn't quite compare.
|
|
|
Post by inhiding on Dec 2, 2002 17:59:20 GMT -5
Live theater is usually better, though I once saw a Romeo and Juliet where both were overweight and middle-aged! That didn't work too well. This Tavern is about the greatest thing on the face of the Earth, they keep the sets simple and do everything they can to make the enviornment similar to what you would expect.
|
|