review of the film (my rating = 8/10) - may contain spoilers

Rating: 8/10 (15 May 2003)

There are three types of Shakespeare films. The first are traditional Shakespeare films which remain wholly faithful to the original plays. The second are modernised Shakespeare films which update or contemporise certain aspects of the original plays while retaining Shakespearian language. The third are films which are loosely based on Shakespeare, usually just on the plot of the plays updating everything else including the language.
Franco Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet retained the Shakespearian language but cast two unknown and definitely not Shakespearian teenage actors in the two main roles of Romeo and Juliet. The film cut some of the dialogue from the original play which the director felt was unnecessary and would bore the audience, not being vital to the story. The film contained several contemporary flourishes and was ultimately a visual feast of a film rather than a filmed play with theatrical sets and scenery. However, although it succeeded as a film rather than a filmed play, this version of Romeo and Juliet was almost entirely faithful to the original play in comparison to Baz Luhrmann's Romeo+Juliet, which updated everything there is to update, while retaining the Shakespearian language, cutting unnecessary dialogue, updating the setting to Verona Beach, Los Angeles, replacing swords with guns, using cars, casting two very un-Shakepearian actors in the lead roles of Romeo and Juliet and more.
You cannot compare this film with Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet simply because you cannot compare a film whose plot is a modernised Shakespeare story and whose language is that of Shakepeare's original text (along with some editing) with a film adaptation of a Shakespeare play that may introduce several contemporary flourishes but nevertheless remains a traditional and faithful film version of the play. Zeffirelli's version is obviously the best adaptation of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, but likewise Luhrmann's Romeo+Juliet is the best modernisation of Shakespeare's play. Luhrmann's version is essentially a film while Zefferelli's is essentially a play made into a film.
As for the quality of acting, the level of traditional Shakespearian acting is higher in Zeffirelli's than it is in Luhrmann's, which is why Luhrmann's is a true modernisation of the play. This is not Leonardo di Caprio's very best performance, but it ranks among his best, which include 'The Basketball Diaries', 'This Boy's Life' with Robert De Niro and 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape' in which he gives his undeniably greatest and easily most amazing performance as a mentally handicapped boy. His acting in the film was so convincing that people thought that the director had cast a real mentally handicapped boy in the role (Leonardo Di Caprio was unknown when he made the film in 1993).
Still, in Romeo+Juliet he shows good acting ability in his violence, passion, romance and the characteristic innocence and obsessional love of Romeo. Many people have complained that he speaks his lines as if they are meaningless and that he 'loses' the emphasis of some of the lines that he rapidly delivers. As for myself, I heard every line that he and all of the other actors spoke, and his unconventional rapid delivery of the lines only adds to the fast and furious atmosphere of the entirely unconventional film and emphasises the fact that the text mostly constitutes conversations between people, not soliloquys and speeches, although there are some. Therefore he makes his lines in conjunction with those of other actors in the film sound like part of a conversation, rather than delivering his lines slowly and deliberately, pausing after very important lines. People have also complained that Leonardo di Caprio goes 'way over the top', especially in the scene where he learns of Juliet's supposed death. However, this only adds to the atmosphere of the film, which is meant to be 'over the top'.
Also, the fact that the two main characters are played by two non-Shakespearian actors only emphasises the fact that they are ordinary people who have experienced a tragedy in their short lives, rather than Shakespearian actors who deliver their lines with far more pretention and exuding a higher status than those 'below' in the audience, as it would have seemed in theatres in Shakespeare's days and in theatres today. Admittedly, though, the two actors who play Romeo and Juliet in Zeffirelli's version are also non-Shakespearian actors.
Luhrmann's film is also an undeniable visual extravaganza, with contemporary flourishes of western-type shoot-outs and other alterations such as the balcony scene, controversially held in Juliet's swimming pool.
Modernised versions of Shakespeare should, in my opinion, be accessible to everyone, not just those who love Shakespeare. In retaining the original language (something that is rare in modernized Shakespeare) Luhrmann could have confused the ordinary movie-goer, but instead he fuses action and visual aid with Shakespeare's language so effectively that the audience is never confused as to the trajectory of the plot.
In comparison to other modernised Shakespeare films (which update or contemporise certain aspects of the original plays while retaining the Shakespearian language) this surely ranks as one of if not the best. Indeed it is difficult to recall any other films that retain the original language or text while updating certain aspects of the play. The original language is probably the biggest feature of the film that gives it a high rank, for it introduces young and old audiences unfamiliar with Shakespeare to his brilliant language while revealing how thrilling the plots of his plays actually are, by using bright and colourful settings, scenery and action. The two main roles are backed up by a brilliant cast of cameos including experienced Shakespeare actors Pete Postlethwaite and Paul Sorvino, among others.
This is a brilliant film which, although not one of the very greatest (The Godfather, The Usual Suspects, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, The Shawshank Redemption etc.) definitely deserves a rating of 8/10.