Romeo & Juliet
Tags: romantic

Plot synopsis:
The play, set in Verona, Italy, begins with a street brawl between Montague and Capulet servants who, like their masters, are sworn enemies. Prince Escalus of Verona intervenes and declares that further breach of the peace will be punishable by death. Later, Count Paris talks to Capulet about marrying his daughter Juliet, but Capulet asks Paris to wait another two years and invites him to attend a planned Capulet ball. Lady Capulet and Juliet's nurse try to persuade Juliet to accept Paris's courtship.
Meanwhile, Benvolio talks with his cousin Romeo, Montague's son, about Romeo's recent depression. Benvolio discovers that it stems from unrequited infatuation for a girl named Rosaline, one of Capulet's nieces. Persuaded by Benvolio and Mercutio, Romeo attends the ball at the Capulet house in hopes of meeting Rosaline. However, Romeo instead meets and falls in love with Juliet. Juliet's cousin, Tybalt, is enraged at Romeo for sneaking into the ball but is only stopped from killing Romeo by Juliet's father, who does not wish to shed blood in his house. After the ball, in what is now called the "balcony scene", Romeo sneaks into the Capulet orchard and overhears Juliet at her window vowing her love to him in spite of her family's hatred of the Montagues. Romeo makes himself known to her and they agree to be married. With the help of Friar Laurence, who hopes to reconcile the two families through their children's union, they are secretly married the next day.
Tybalt, meanwhile, still incensed that Romeo had sneaked into the Capulet ball, challenges him to a duel. Romeo, now considering Tybalt his kinsman, refuses to fight. Mercutio is offended by Tybalt's insolence, as well as Romeo's "vile submission", and accepts the duel on Romeo's behalf. Mercutio is fatally wounded when Romeo attempts to break up the fight. Grief-stricken and wracked with guilt, Romeo confronts and slays Tybalt.
Montague argues that Romeo has justly executed Tybalt for the murder of Mercutio. The Prince, now having lost a kinsman in the warring families' feud, exiles Romeo from Verona, under penalty of death if he ever returns. Romeo secretly spends the night in Juliet's chamber, where they consummate their marriage. Capulet, misinterpreting Juliet's grief, agrees to marry her to Count Paris and threatens to disown her when she refuses to become Paris's "joyful bride". When she then pleads for the marriage to be delayed, her mother rejects her.
Juliet visits Friar Laurence for help, and he offers her a potion that will put her into a deathlike coma for "two and forty hours". The Friar promises to send a messenger to inform Romeo of the plan so that he can rejoin her when she awakens. On the night before the wedding, she takes the drug and, when discovered apparently dead, she is laid in the family crypt.
The messenger, however, does not reach Romeo and, instead, Romeo learns of Juliet's apparent death from his servant Balthasar. Heartbroken, Romeo buys poison from an apothecary and goes to the Capulet crypt. He encounters Paris who has come to mourn Juliet privately. Believing Romeo to be a vandal, Paris confronts him and, in the ensuing battle, Romeo kills Paris. Still believing Juliet to be dead, he drinks the poison. Juliet then awakens and, finding Romeo dead, stabs herself with his dagger. The feuding families and the Prince meet at the tomb to find all three dead. Friar Laurence recounts the story of the two "star-cross'd lovers". The families are reconciled by their children's deaths and agree to end their violent feud. The play ends with the Prince's elegy for the lovers: "For never was a story of more woe/Than this of Juliet and her Romeo."

Review: On the other hand there are several things that really bothered me and that I believe would disqualify it from being classified a "good" film.Firstly, the bad:1) The movie doesn't follow Shakespeare's original text.
(Another reviewer complained that Romeo is more beautiful than Juliet in this film and I have to agree that this is true)Now for the good: 1) Bringing fierceness and intense passion to the role, I thought Douglas Booth was a really good Romeo.
The words still bring layer upon layer of meaning to the story and brings so much depth and emotion to the story of the star-crossed lovers that one can't help but wander at just how Shakespeare was able to get so much emotion into so few lines.I give this film a score of 7 as I quite enjoyed it despite it's flaws.
Remembering the derision than was heaped against Powell and Pressburger's marvellous "Gone to Earth" when it first appeared in the early 1950's but has now achieved deserved recognition, I put it that Carlo's Carlei's "Romeo and Juliet" is possibly a film before its time.
No film production of this play will please everyone, alas I feel in love with it!It was those little details that were added that made me enjoy this adaptation.
The reason you're making a movie out of it again is because it is so amazing that no one has been able to surpass it and so you should never ever ever ever ever under pain of death and torture even consider bastardizing that perfect language.Some people think that "Shakespeare would have written a different script for film."No. He wouldn't have.
That kind of thinking is actually making the world a dumber place.In terms of casting (something that professionals actually get paid to do, by the way Carlo) I get the distinct impression that Hailee Steinfeld was chosen for this role very soon after True Grit, before she grew out of her pretty young charm and into a tomboy.
"For never was a story of more woe Than this of Juliet and her Romeo." Count Paris (Tom Wisdom)The "woe" in this umpteenth adaptation of Romeo and Juliet over the last 400 years is that the titular lass, as played by Hailee Steinfeld, is weakly acted with immaturity, poor elocution, and disappointing physical presence.
She also had a role in Romeo And Juliet, a straightforward film adaptation of William Shakespeare's romantic tragedy that works thanks to the actors and the screenplay.
Carlei makes the dramatic scenes work, especially at the end when Romeo Montague and Juliet Capulet have to make difficult decisions because of unfortunate circumstances.
I like that Romeo And Juliet was filmed in Italy, including in Verona, where Shakespeare's tragedy is set.
This is probably where people see the lack of chemistry, because the kisses seem to come out of nowhere, are accompanied with virtually no crescendo musical masterpieces or great camera shots, and are usually cock-blocked by the nurse.Unless your students are well versed in the play, this shouldn't be the go to for schools studying Romeo and Juliet.
You would really be better of watching 'Shakespeare in Love' if you want an introduction to Romeo & Juliet that stays true to the text & also has an enjoyable narrative rather than this drivel.
Replacing Shakespeare's words with his own, which he does far too often, invariably results in poorer and less interesting lines.Unfortunately, the leads aren't persuading anyone that they are in love, and our attention is drawn instead to some good performances by the supporting cast, especially Damian Lewis's Capulet, which I think is the best performance by anyone as Capulet on screen ever.So, generally, apart from Lewis, you are much better off watching Zeffirelli's film..
This may not be the perfect version of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet - if such a thing is possible - but it is much better than the rating of 5.7 suggests.
The cinematography, the layout, the scenery, the dresses, the dialog, the dialect, the acting and the actors especially the Romeo, Juliet and the father played their part to the limit.
Well I loved this version of Romeo and Juliet - the scenery is stunning, the music is beautiful, the acting authentic and Douglas Booth as the lead is incredible.
The film is full of passion and action and the young cast add to the authenticity of it.As a lover of Shakespeare I thoroughly enjoyed the film and feel it's a good introduction for youngsters.it's a fabulous movie if you love romance and drama and I would thoroughly recommend it..
Romeo + Juliet (1996) understood and played on the idea that you don't need to place Shakespeare in Elisabethan times to make the story work.
there is a reason why R+M (96) is shown to English students, because even though how vastly removed from original time and location, the characters, dialogue, plot are more relatable and loyal to the original material.the story allows the director to experiment with countless adaptions, this movie could have been made out in space, a pixar animation, gay lovers, anything fresh and re imagined would have been welcomed,the director got it backwards, he kept the era and plot but changed the dialogue shamelessly.
Both Steinfeld and Booth are excellent in their roles and even though I have read this love story over and over and completely know the outcome (even if you have not the narrator tells you the whole story in his opening monologue), this adaptation still managed to bring tears to my eyes, which no other version has managed to do before.
I believe it and I love it-- and while Romeo + Juliet has its flaws (and there are many) it is a MUCH better film and adaptation.
Paul Giamatti as the Friar is one of the best casting decisions of the century and I am BEYOND UPSET that I will never hear him speak the Friars "Two Opposed Camps" speech because Julian Fellows thought people couldn't "understand it." JULIAN FELLOWES thought he could write a better Romeo and Juliet than WILLIAM GODDAMN SHAKESPEARE and he was WRONG.
This is a movie that will NEVER be shown in an English classroom and THAT is the greatest tragedy to befall this film because it could have been the greatest film adaptation of Romeo and Juliet PERIOD-- instead it is a steaming pile of garbage that is UNWATCHABLE to anyone with even the least amount of self love.
That's the first time I've been truly touched by the drama of Romeo and Juliet and I'm not afraid to shout it out!Lots of hate was spread on the lead-pair, but I totally disagree: they're young (as, in fact, the characters in the Shakespeare's play!), and well maybe a bit inexperienced, but that's what makes them beautiful, what makes they're love so 'real'!
Moreover, as it comes to the cast, you'll love Paul Giamatti's performance as Friar Laurence, which is definitely both touching and flawless.To sum up, I do think you should give this movie a chance and watch is as it is meant to be: not a impeccable Elizabethian's play, but a story of a young true love struck by hate.
Hailee Steinfeld and Douglas Booth did an amazing job playing those roles, you could feel their emotions which is important in these types of movies.
I think that Hailee Steinfeld and Douglas Booth did an amazing job at portraying the characters and the love that Romeo and Juliet have.
The lady-in-waiting, the Capulet king and queen, Paris, Vivolio, Tybalt and Romeo's father all acted their parts extremely well and couldn't of done it better.Overall, I thought the movie really reflected the story of Romeo and Juliet, it was great!.
Many films, not all alike in quality, In fair cinema, where we lay our scene, From ancient story to new screen idolatry, Where repetition makes some critics mean.Shakespeare's tragic young lovers on screen oft before, for each generation and all others, in '36, '68, '96 and more.This time Hailee Steinfeld plays Juliet, With Douglas Booth, her devoted Romeo, She, an Oscar nominee for the film "True Grit".
The love story of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet is so powerful that it still holds sway on every stage devoted to the bard's works, as well as school and general productions and various cinematic interpretations.
Carlo Carlei makes Fellowes adaptation work in the splendid way he opens up the story and draws powerful performances form a very well selected group of actors.The story is so well known that it need not be summarized: Romeo and Juliet secretly wed despite the sworn contempt their families hold for each another.
I truly loved the Julian Fellowes adapted, Carlo Carlei directed film version of Romeo & Juliet.
I think the problem is it doesn't really feel like Romeo and Juliet, because it only uses some of the lines from the play.
The acting isn't terrible, and I don't think Hailee Steinfeld was as bad as people say she was, but this isn't a film I'd watch again either..
Fans of the play will definitely be pleased by balcony scene where Romeo is professing his love for Juliet as it is one of the better scenes in the movie.
I was hoping for something different as the director should have known that this story has been told many times before and in this day and age, it doesn't make sense just doing the same type of movie that we have seen on stage and on film.
The leading characters wasn't anything special and I personally thought that Juliet looked way too young for Romeo.
I gave Romeo and Juliet a nine out of ten because i loved the film it was the play by William Shakespeare made into a film.
I wen to watch this movie with three of my friends that are not really into Shakespeare and they came out of the cinema with wet cheeks as the acting skills from Douglas Booth who played Romeo was amazing and there wasn't a dry eye in the cinema by the end of it.
It feels like the actors are merely playing dress up, they neither embody their respective characters nor the time period in which the film is set in.
Giamatti gives a great performance in nearly everything, though his direction is so bad here that (somehow) even he gets some bad reads on occasion.Douglas Booth plays Romeo like a British version of a High School frat boy.
It was an embarrassment, poor adaptations like this are exactly why Romeo & Juliet gets so unfairly dismissed as a Shakespearean story.I'm not sure who's a worse actor; Christian Cooke as Mercutio or Ed Westwick as Tybalt, both of whom somehow manage to out-terrible Stanfield's performance as Juliet.
Then again, I really didn't think it was an awful movie.I mean, it told the basic story of Romeo and Juliet.
After watching this latest film adaptation of Romeo and Juliet the first question that came to mind was 'did we actually need another film adaptation of this play?'In my opinion the answer is no, that Baz Luhrmanns 1996 Romeo and Juliet was enough and captured this classic love story in a way that this 2013 adaptation could not do.
In my opinion there has been more far too much emphasis placed on the visual aspect of this film than the actual acting itself.If you ask me the director and casting crew made a huge mistake during the casting process as the actors playing Romeo and Juliet were not suited to their roles.
This lack of chemistry has a lot to do with the huge age difference between Douglas Booth (Romeo) and Halie Steinfeld (Juliet).
This adaptation just didn't live up to my expectations of what a Romeo and Juliet film should be like.
But even so Romeo and Juliet fall in love but ultimately since the very beginning, their future is in jeopardy ,with the tragic chain of events that take place throughout the play its seems that faith itself wants to teach these two young lovers a lesson they would both never forget.
Julian Fellows the Oscar- winning actor and writer took Shakespeare's traditional classic tale of star-crossed lovers and adapted a 21st century version of Romeo and Juliet.
This adaptation was directed by Italian director Carlo Carlei who has a background of directing TV movies and unfortunately his version of Romeo and Juliet seems to be made for the small screen too.
Both Hailee Steinfield and Douglas Booth look the part as the titular lovers and although they both hold a strong performance they lack the strong passionate chemistry that Romeo and Juliet hold in the play.
(And to think that the one who played Lord Capulet is better than Romeo's and Juliet's acting?) The thing is, it is noticeable that they just memorized the line and feels like they are just reciting it...
I have never been a Shakespeare fan and in terms of direct movies based off his work I have really only liked the Romeo & Juliet with Leonardo DiCaprio and Clare Danes.
I feel like the director made this effort to make Benvolio a larger character, which I think made for some powerful scenes at the end of the movie, but when this is at the expense of Mercutio's character, who is one of the few really interesting/dynamic characters in the play, I felt that was a mistake.
Let's just say that if I have never heard of Romeo and Juliet before and watched this movie for the very first time, I'd probably never understand it or even see the beauty in it.
Their Romeo and Juliet lacked chemistry and the passion that was supposed to drive the story was underwhelming.The additional scenes and original dialogue changes were unnecessary and kind of grating but not as much as the seriously miscast Hailee Steinfeld who couldn't handle the dialogue and rushed her delivery.
For a better and more modernized version I would highly recommend Bar Luhrmann's 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet, or should you prefer an old time classic, the 1968 film by Franco Zeffirelli.
Watching this film only gives only provides me more reasons to love the 1968 Romeo And Juliet film that starred Leonard Whiting and Olivia Hussey.This 2013 film adaptation is definitely a poor version of the William Shakeaspere tragic play of romance.Douglas Booth and Hailee Steinfeld,who stars as Romeo and Juliet respectively,simply lacks the passion,energy and realism as the star-crossed lovers of feuding Verona and Montague families.
Too bad that the decent performances of the other stars or the so-called "adults" such as Damian Lewis,Kodi Smit-McPhee,Ed Westwick,Stellan Skarsgård and Paul Giamatti are not and will never be enough to compensate for the poor performances of the lead stars.What's worse,it also does not use the written dialogues of Shakespeare in it.Parts of it were only used.It only follows the plot of the play and the Verona setting.Nothing more.Too bad that people looking forward to this film felt cheated thus arising the controversy for false advertising.Or better yet,the film simply did not meet the standard for it lacks passion,romance,lyricism and eroticism expected from any Romeo And Juliet film.Truly disappointing.No question that the 1968 version remains the best film adaptation ever made..
Although Carlei obviously had Zeffirelli's version in mind, which is noticeable from the setting and on-shot locations, he lacks the power to make this film work properly.In my opinion the main issue concerns the casting of the two lovers: Romeo, interpreted by Douglas Booth, seems directly taken from an Abercrombie campaign.
After Zeffirelli's "classic" version of the drama, Luhrman did well and gave a new interpretation of Romeo and Juliet, changing the setting and incorporating modern elements, making us look at the story from a different perspective.
Even though the costuming is impeccable and the locations breathtaking, there is no Romeo and Juliet without actors who succeed in conveying the passion, love and desire of the two protagonists.In conclusion, Carlei's adaptation becomes ineffective since it doesn't bring anything original to the story, limiting itself to a successful reconstruction of the scenography.
We waited 16 years for a new Romeo and Juliet to appear on screen, and I would have been happy to wait a little longer to see a different, fresh adaptation of the most famous love story of all times..
In that vein, this movie is a faithful adaptation of old Bill's hate speech, showing R.C. Friar Laurence (Paul Giamatti) conspiring with fickle serial killer Romeo Montague (Douglas Booth) and near-bigamist Juliet Capulet (Hailee Steinfeld) to break as many of the Ten Commandments as they possibly can in 118 minutes (or three days, story time).
The most recent 'Romeo and Juliet' (2013) adaption directed by Carlo Carlei is certainly a film worth talking about but not necessarily for all of the right reasons.
The original text of Shakespeare's was chopped and changed to fit this interesting adaption; there were scenes cut and added in order to get across this love filled film.
For all of these reasons I have mentioned I believe, that Carlei's and Fellowe's adaptation will not be rated at the same level as the outstanding versions of Romeo and Juliet by Zeffirelli and Luhrmann..
Haliee Steinfeld plays a good Juliet and Douglas Booth gives us a decent Romeo.
The dialogue was terrible and all the actors were wasted in their supporting roles to those lustful teenagers known as Romeo(Douglas Booth) and Juliet (Hailee Steinfeld) One would think that with a marquee that boast such masterclass actors like Damian Lewis, Natascha McElhone, Paul Giamatti and Stellan Skarsgård that something interesting and riveting would be brought to the screen or at least fleshed out scenes that would keep the audience from yawning and checking the time every few minutes.
Everyone knows the story of Romeo and Juliet, and for the most part everyone loves it.