Is this Shakespeare? Or is this a film?

Rating: Null/10 (31 January 2003)

Luhrmann's film has a specific audience in mind (15-25). In this respect the dynamic cinematography, compression of action and, most importantly, the excellent casting of Di Caprio and Danes mean the film achieves its pragmatic ambition of reaching, and entertaining, a group perhaps otherwise naïve of Shakespeare's text. In promoting a visual poetic above the dialogic, Luhrmann diverts attention from much of Shakespeare's language. However, given that Shakespeare was to a large extent drawing his dialogue from conventionalised courtly speech, and parodying these ways of speaking, it would be unfair to criticise Luhrmann for this. If Shakespeare can alter the speech modes of others to suit his audience, Luhrmann can alter Shakespeare's language to suit his medium. Di Caprio does lack sensitivity to the pentameter but given the target audience this should not be a criticism, for his visual presence and the obvious chemistry between him and Danes substitute the quality of Shakespeare's lines for a more immediate emotive effect. This is an excellent film and the fact that purists will claim that this is not Shakespeare proves the film has achieved its goal. For this is not designed as a film of Shakespeare but as a piece of cinema in its own right. And the standard of its success is not as an interpretation of Shakespeare, but how well it is received by a cinema audience who might then use this film as a way into the authentic poet.