I wouldn't say that it was the best representation of Shakespeare ever made, but at least it made 16th century English literature cool again.

Rating: 6/10 (12 May 2007)

The 1996 film, Romeo + Juliet was quite over the top in many cases. Jeff Millar of the Houston Chronicle puts it well when he says, "its so overloud and overdirected, and overproduced and so energetic that finally, you can't do anything except smile at it." The concept is simple, a modern day Romeo and Juliet located in Verona Beach (a fictional place very similar to Miami beach), situated between two warring mob families, but the catch is that every spoken word is directly quoted from Shakespeare. Apparently, the directorial decision on how to fulfill the task of verbatim delivery in a modern setting was to make the visuals, the acting, and tempo of the film extremely eccentric. There is no other way to describe it other than: bright colors, flashing attire, "in your face" production design, with overly exaggerated acting in a land, where guns are swords, families are gangs, and paraphrasing is not an option.
In most cases in modern film, melodramatic acting is looked down upon, but when quoting Shakespeare, it becomes excusable. Though it seems out of place when a goon flashing a 9mm gun exchanges witty remarks with a cross dresser, it somehow fits into the style of this movie. That is why I think it was a good decision to make the film so over the top. The lines of Shakespeare coming out of anyone's mouth just adds to the overall pageantry of the film. The actor's delivery could have been better, but it is very difficult to act modern, hip, and cool, and at the same time deliver archaic lines of Shakespeare, especially when they are some of the most quoted and overused lines in history. One thing that I felt was very well done, which I think was intended, was making Shakespearian writing very understandable to their target audience whom I assume are not scholars of English literature. The visuals and the overemphatic acting are so self-proclamatory that you could probably watch the movie in a different language and still easily understand what was going on. Almost everything spoken is shown, and if its not then you just have to be smart enough to catch it.
One thing about the film that is very hard not to notice is the use of religious icons and imagery littered throughout the film. When I say littered, I mean literally littered: postcards of Mary scattered along the streets and different forms of shrines of Mary and crosses exalted in every household and even police stations. There is such an excess of pious imagery in every situation that it's almost iconoclastic. Romeo and Juliet consecrate their marriage in front of a shrine of the Virgin. Neon blue lighted crosses line the pathway to Juliet's tomb. Statuettes of Mary are seen in the same shots as the cross-dressing Mercutio (did I mention he's a cross dresser in this movie?) parties at the Capulet house. It seems very odd and discomforting to visually mix sexuality and religious icons. I am not sure if the director was just doing this to be cool, or he was making some kind of statement dealing with religion and love. It seemed slightly emphasized when Juliet calls Romeo her God whom she worships. I wonder if the interpretation of Shakespeare was taken to an extreme regarding the love and passion of two human beings. Does it override religion in this film? In the play, Shakespeare obviously followed along with the standard of marriage before sex, and the film also respected that moral statute, but sex in front of the Virgin? What are they trying to say? One can only guess.
Romeo + Juliet was a unique and enjoyable experience, and that is about it. I felt like the challenge of the film, being the use of literal Shakespeare, was so pronounced and sought after, that it didn't get much past that. It was an interesting experiment and a bold move from a filmmaker's standpoint. They accomplished what they wanted to achieve, and I applaud them for it. I wouldn't say that it was the best representation of Shakespeare ever made, but at least it made 16th century English literature cool again.