Moonrise Kingdom compared to Romeo and Juliet

Rating: 9/10 (20 May 2014)

Moonrise Kingdom and Romeo & Juliet both concern very young lovers insisting on their love for each other in defiance of their elders. Moonrise Kingdom is (mostly) comic and has a happy (though unlikely) ending. M.K. & R&J are not at all the same stories – but there is enough similarity between the two to invite comparison.
Common to both stories is the background idea that romantic love, especially among the young, can flare quickly and intensely – but usually burns out quickly. I say "idea" – but really it is a truth understood by nearly all grown-ups, including the theater audience. Young lovers almost never understand that truth – or do not care about it. The wiser audience has to smile at the children's antics – but it must be understood that the children's passion for each other, though naive, is the real thing. It may look from the outside that they are playing at love – but in fact they are not playing. They may be awkward and ignorant, but they are truly in love.
Parents may have (do have) an interest in protecting their youngsters from the consequences of a premature consummation. Very early marriage or very early pregnancy are not good things in our society. In Romeo & Juliet, however, what is chiefly on their parents' mind is not their children's welfare, but their idiotic family feud. Like most such, the feud is irrational – even whimsical, you might say -- but also full of self-indulgent hatred and violence. The lovers, though they are little more than children, are wiser than their narrow-minded, pigheaded elders. It takes their death to wake up the parents.
Moonrise Kingdom is an altogether more amiable tale. The children's love is not based on sudden passion, but grows from the real and prolonged experience of helping each other, especially in their escape. They have good reason to run away. Their home situations are a bit short of desperate, but they are not good. The children are, in my view, not so much defiant as insistent on being their own person (if that distinction makes sense). And note that in the boy's case, his oppressors include the other boys at scout camp. They form a united front against him. Later, to their credit, most of his campmates switch sides.
As in R&J, the grown-ups in M.K. are clueless buffoons – but their characters are nuanced. The police captain and the scoutmaster are not the smartest or most sophisticated people, but their hearts are good through and through and they give the children effectual aid. The girls' parents are neurotic & self-absorbed. The dad sweeps aside his daughter's feelings and concerns. He lays down the law as though he were a wise and knowledgeable man -- powerful, too. But in fact he is weak and pathetic. His pretension to wisdom is based merely on the fact that he is middle-aged. He is not, however, vicious -- just clueless. The Scoutmaster-in-Chief and "Social Services" are, indeed, vicious – but (in this fairy tale) they are defeated in the end. As in Romeo & Juliet, the children are wiser than their elders. The bad folk in M.K. are immoveable – completely convinced of their own rightness. The good folk in M.K. (including the children) are more modest and have the capacity to change.
Let me add that it is very funny in parts. Especially touching is the "courtship" scene on the beach -- which is the children's "moonrise kingdom". The boy and girl have somehow gotten it through their heads that lovers have to go through the ritual of dancing together to popular music, and having a lover's quarrel. They proceed to do those things before "consummating" their love. (It is a bit unclear -- but I think their lovemaking does not go beyond making-out.) A fine movie with exceptionally good acting all around (though the girl is maybe a bit weak).