Wednesday, 5/30
Compare and contrast the films, showing
Act III, scene i. Which is more intense, believable, moving? Which captivates you more? Which captures Shakespeare's intent thoroughly? Why? Post your response, 200 words: DUE 6/1
I liked both films but the old version was more believable than the new version. The old version had swords and that’s how it was supposed to be so it seemed real compared to the old, which had guns. The new version was more intense and had more action. Tybalt and Romeo got into a fistfight and there was a car chase. Also they made the scene very dark with the storm and that made it more interesting. The car chase wasn’t exactly what I thought best fit the scene for Romeo to kill Tybalt. In the old version there wasn’t as much action, which made it not as intense. I like the new version because they showed how mean Tybalt really is compared to the old they don’t make Tybalt seem as frightening. The old version definitely captures Shakespeare’s intent the best. This one doesn’t have guns but swords and that is how Shakespeare wrote it. Also when Mercutio was dying everyone thought it was a joke and was laughing at him just like it explained in the play.
Personally I didn’t like either of the movie clips because they were both too spread out if they were meant to die I think they should have just said their dialogue and died. I thought that the new version was more intense though because it had the new affects and a car chase; it was also more captivating because it’s a modern twist with guns as opposed to swords. On the other hand though it was unbelievable and I feel that could never happen. So I think that the old version was more of what Shakespeare meant with the medieval sword fighting in the plaza. The new version is more moving though because the actor that plays Mercutio, it seemed like he was in real pain and Romeo was with him when he died and his reaction to the death was sad and more moving.
I enjoy watching both films because if one of them does not say a line and the other does it helps me understand it. I like the older movie better because it is more realistic, I liked how in the climax, which is when Mercutio dies they use swords instead of guns. The language that they use belongs in the early times. That is why it makes more sense in the older version. I find it funny how in the new version they say old words; it seems a lot less realistic in the new version. Also in the new version I did not like the scene, which took the place of the balcony scene, because it was too obvious that he was standing right in back of her. Overall I think that the older version does a better job at explaining and covering everything in the actual text.
Personally, I prefer the modern version. To me, the modern version is more intense, believe able, and I believe it conveys what Shakespeare intended the best. The modern version payed more attention to the script and what it meant. For example, in the older version, it looked as if the people were having fun and laughing, while in the newer version it seemed more accurate because it has an intense atmosphere. The older version dragged out and was a lot of the same actions, while in the newer version, there was a variety of actions. I also enjoyed how repetition was used in the dialogue in the newer version.
I thought both films were ok but if i needed to chose one it would be the modern version. In the modern version there was a lot more action. The modern version was way more intense and believe able because there was a car chase and there were guns. Nobodys going to believe that people are haveing sword fights anymore.For me i thouight the modern one moved me more because there was better acting and you can see how said romeo was. The modern movie captivates me more because it is intense and your not really sure whats going to happen next. I think the morn movie captures shakespears intent more. For example in the modern movie the battle was taken very seriously unlike in the older film it looked like the people were haveing fun when they were fighting. In my opinion the new film is much better.
I think the scene in the newer version with Leonardo di Caprio is more intense because it has much more action because of the guns and car chases. But, the feeling of action is taken away because of the Shakespearean dialog. The dialog makes the movie seem out of date and makes listening to the movie annoying and hard to do. And the newer version is more believable due to the actors and their acting, but because of the dialog, it seems a lot less believable. It is also much more moving thanks to leorando di caprios acting. The newer version captivates me more because it has much more action, and is much more moving. I found the newer version of Romeo and Juliet was more captivating because of the action and the acting of the actors. But, I think the older version captures Shakespeare's intent, because it takes place in older times, like the time Shakespeare would have actually been alive. I think it does this by taking the setting and placing it in the time that Shakespeare would of lived. The older version gets shakespeares message across much better because of the setting, and the way they talk goes better with the way the act, move and dress.
I think that both films were both intense. But the modern version was better in the way that it showed how intense everything was. Yes, there were car chases and guns instead of swords but you could really capture the feeling throughout it. In the older version you couldn't really tell Romeos emotion, but the Modern version definitely was able to show how intense everything really was. Where the modern one took place wasn't realistic, because the language and the setting of the play is suppose to be in the modern times, so even though the modern one showed more action and made it seem more intense. With the way that the play is written, and how it should be acted out, the older version does captivate what it is suppose to look and sound like. But the modern version does show a huge part of how intense the scene was made out to be
I would say the older version of the movie is more believable because the newer version has a thunder storm magically appear on the scene and there is excessive bleeding involved. However, these are the reasons I think the newer version is more intense and more moving. It may be over the top dramatic, but it really captures the climax of Romeo & Juliet. I preferred Mercutio in the 1995 version better because in the 1968 version, Mercutio was oblivious to the fact that he was dying, and even if he had known, he sure wasn't acting like it. I found that all too confusing. The newer version really drives the point home.
Both movies are good but I enjoyed watching Act III scene 1 in the modern version more. I think that because Romeo and Benevolio show more emotion in the modern film it makes the scene more meaningful and their emotions have a greater effect on the audience. Also, I think the car chase and the use of guns makes this scene more exciting and intense. Something else I thought was effective was the rain starting when Mercutio dies because it helps set the mood for the rest of the scene. Although the modern version is more exciting and has better weapon use, I think that the older version captures Shakespeare’s intent more thoroughly because the dialogue makes more sense than it does in the modern version. Although they are speaking in old English in both films, it sounds out of place when the characters have cars and guns. Also, the setting of the older version captures Shakespeare’s intent more because it takes place in the time period that Shakespeare was from. This way we can see why Shakespeare had certain things in the script since we are seeing the movie almost from the point of view of someone from that time period.
The film that I think was more intense has got to be the newer version. I feel this way because in the newer version the movie directors have better technology and are able to put in better and more spectacular effects as opposed to the older version. I think that the older version is more believable because in the time period that it was in they used the appropriate weaponry and it made sense why they dueled. In the newer one to me it felt like a bunch of scenes put together without any thought put into it. The film that I felt was the most moving would have to be the newer version because after Romeo killed Tybalt you could really see Romeos remorse of killing him as opposed to the older version which I didn’t really feel that he was sad. All they showed in the old one was Romeo’s friends yelling at him to leave. The one that captivates me the most is the newer version because I like up-tempo action scenes and in the new one that’s what act III, scene 1 was. In the old version it was kind of boring and predictable. The older version captures Shakespeare’s intent because the screenwriter tried to stay close to the actual story as opposed to the newer version which the screenwriter was very creative and put his own twist on the story.
I believe that the old version of Romeo and Juliet seemed much more compelling in every way. Way too many things made the 1996 version seem dumb, like when Mercutio was randomly shooting the ocean, when Tybalt and Mercutio were spinning around each other “hissing” at each other. It just seemed so unreal. The Capulet gang guys had dumb tattoos of the Virgin Mary and of Jesus while their attitude contradicted any sense of righteousness. The Montague’s, aside from Romeo, all wore Hawaiian shirts and dyed hair and all they accomplished was to look like wimpy kids who think they can threaten the whole world because they have a holster and exposed chest hair. The thing they “did” do relatively well was when Mercutio yelled, “A plaque on both your houses”. After that they just had Leonardo Dicaprio cry his eyes out and yell at the top of his lungs at a silly looking man who slightly resembled Luigi from the Mario Games. Then he shot him and Leonardo cried some more and yelled….see that’s the thing, I couldn’t understand what he said. If I hadn’t read the book or seen the play countless times I never would have known he said that he is fortune’s fool. The other movie on the other hand had this strange fight scene that was limited to the technology of it's time. Yes they made Mercutio look like an fool (though he usually is portrayed as one) and yes the wounds inflicted on the actors made the film look dumb and yes it looked wrong to watch men wrestle in tights and YES Romeo looked like Luke Skywalker but still, with all the drawbacks, either personal or general, this film was still better. You see, the old film was given what they had in 1968 and they made good with it, the 1996 movie was given better EVERYTHING and still was a piece of ****. Besides one or two good parts in the newer movie, this movie was literary a piece of junk and Act III scene I was no exception. The 1968 movie was more compelling, and believable. When you’re given lemons, make lemonade and when you’re given lemons 30 years later….. make lemonade that tastes 30 times better than before, not some piece of junk.
I think that the 1996 depiction of Romeo and Juliet provided a better version of the scene with the death of Tybalt and Mercutio. In the older version I feel that Mercutio and Tybalt kind of danced around for ten minutes looking like neither actually had the intent too kill each other. I feel that this takes away from the dramatic effect that Shakespeare wanted this scene to have. I also think that the way that Romeo killed Tybalt was unsatisfying and it also looks as if it was an accident. In the 1996 version they do a great job of showing the dramatic effect of the scene. An example is when Mercutio in his final moments screams " A plague on both your houses" and it echos through the beach. Then when he dies Romeo is filled with rage and chases Tybalt. When Romeo crashes Tybalt's car he grabs his pistol and screams in fury and puts three in Tybalts chest. This is a much better depiction because it shows Romeo's true feelings toward losing his friend and his blind rage instead of making it look like he is trying to cuddle with Tybalt in the streets. In any other scene though the 1996 version absolutely sucks.
If i had the choice to watch either the original film or the newer film, it would probably be the original film. I feel so because in the original version of the film, i feel it did a better job of portraying the play, but with the newer film, it was just a more current version, which i didn't like. It is a lot easier for me to understand the old version because beck then, they didn't have cars, and guns, and bustling cities that were in the new version, but with the original, its definitely more relative to the time of when the play was written.But although i do prefer the original, version of the film, the newer film was more intense because I for sure would rather watch people shoot each other than a bunch of guys in tights stab each other with swords. The original version captures Shakespeare's intent more thoroughly than the new version because the original was based more on the time period of which the article was written, so it gave the viewer(s) more of an idea on the play was really like.all in all, i'd rather watch the original version
In my opinion I felt like the modern movie clip was better made where the older one was more authentic. I like the modern one because it was more moving, the fights where more personal and fought with rage not with like a playful act. Again the modern one captivates me more because Romeo, Tybalt, and Mercuitio fought with there hands and guns instead of swords. The movie that I feel like got Shakespeare captivate across was the older one because he intended for it to be in Verona, Italy during the middle ages, not modern day Verona, California. Anyway both of the clips where all right and in result has a major role in the play when Romeo gets banished and forbidden to ever enter Verona again, i would watch the newer one again... but only once.
I think the older version is better than the new one because in the older version, the dialogue matches the time period. The new version however is more entertaining because the dialogue doesn't match the time period and there are car chases and guns. The old version is the one that is more authentic because I don't think that Shakespeare wanted Romeo unloading a 1911 into Tybalt after a car chase through the city. He wanted an emotional, heated confrontation between Romeo and Tybalt. I like the new version because it offers a lot of symbolism and is an interesting take on the classic story. The new version, I think, is more moving because Mercutio's reaction to getting stabbed is more realistic than in the old version. Because one can see that he is in pain and is more angry when cursing the two houses.
Both of the Films demonstrate what Shakespeare is presenting but the film that captivates me more and captures Shakespeare’s intent thoroughly is the older version. The older version is more believable and realistic. The newer version doesn’t show the same clothing and technology as the time period Shakespeare lived in. The clothing is too modern and there were no cars or guns so you don’t experience the full effect of Shakespeare’s great work. The old fashion version expresses how realistic the film is. When your watching it, you feel like you are living in Shakespeare’s world with his language. Act 3 scene 1 was very dramatic. It was more dramatic in the older film and to me the newer film was injudicious. The older film followed the script exactly and made you feel everything that you felt when you read the scene. The swords made it more realistic then guns and more entertaining to watch instead of one shot and then he was dead. The newer film was funnier then the older one but it wasn’t a better version.
I think that the newer and more modern version is more intense. I think this because in the older version made it so it was almost more comical than serious. For example when Mercucio was dead his friends thought he was joking and where laughing, but in the newer movie you can feel that the people around him where sad about his death. I think that the older version is more believable because in the newer one when the where fighting with guns it seemed as if the seen could have ended much shorter because if Tybalt really wanted Romeo dead he could have just shot him, but in the old film when Tybalt and Romeo where fighting they where using swords. I think that the older version of the movie captured Shakespeare's thoughts more thoroughly than the more modern version because in the play Shakespeare intended for the fight to be a duel mean a sword fight like when Mercucio draws his sword and so does Tybalt. Also the older version is closer to the original story in general.
I think that the modern version is the best portrayal of the scene because it really got the point across about how serious the fight was. The older version made the fight seem like they were just playing around and that Tybalt didn't really want to kill Romeo. In the newer version you see how angry Tybalt is and how he is pugnacious and fiery and always looking to pick a fight. I liked the portrayal of the characters more in the newer version but the older version was more realistic to the time period. I think that Shakespeare's thoughts were best shown in the old version. Although I liked the characters in the newer version, I think that they portrayed Shakespeare's thoughts too silly and weird. Instead of just putting a modern twist on it, I think they took a bit of a stretch. Overall, I like the older version better but I think the scene was best portrayed in the newer one.
I thought both movies showed the intensity of Shakespeare's play in their own ways. I thought however the newer film was more dramatic. The newer film had a lot of over-acting and dramatic scenes, but I thought the older film showed more of Shakespeare's point and his intention in writing the play. I thought that the old film was more traditional and had more of Shakespeare's dialogue and theme because of the time period, clothes, swords and many little details. Although the new movie was well acted and was very believable and understandable and uses a lot of scenes from the play and and makes it a lot more interesting and exciting to watch. Some scenes that really showed the drama of the film were when Mercutio got stabbed and said " A plague on both your houses" several times, it really added a lot of intensity to that scene opposed to the scene in the older version. Another scene was when Romeo and Juliet found out they were supposed to be rivals, this scene really showed the pain and hurt in Romeo and Juliet because their love each other wasn't meant to be, and their lives were at stake while being with each other. The second film was a very dramatic film and I thought it was made well as a modern version of a classic film.
By watching both films it helped me understand better about the story. The film that captivates me more is the original film because i think it describes the characters better and helps show how each character plays their role in the story. The story that is more intense is the more modern film because that film has guns and different style so when the the two families fight they use their guns and seem more aggressive. the film that is more believable and moving is the original film because that film follows the real story better then the modern film and because the original film has older technology and in the story they view it as an older story. The original film describes the story more thoroughly as the modern film , i think tries to be older and more like the original film when everything else is modern. I think the original film captures Shakespeare's intent more because it has more scenes then the modern version that help understand. The original film goes with the verbal words from the story better than the modern version because both stories are in different time periods and location. In the original film Shakespeare's intent is shown through the love of enemies between Romeo and Juliet and there are different times in the tory where it is shown like the balcony scene because Romeo is in love so he sneaks onto his enemies property so that he can be with Juliet and that scene in the film goes with the story very well.
the original is more believable to me, even though Leonardo DiCaprio is wonderful to look at,I feel the original shows the characters better. I think the modified version is to dramatic. I think the modified version is more moving because i think the actors are better in the modified version compared to the original. the movie that captivates me more is the original in the modified version I don't like some of the changes that were made and I like how they make just like the the book in the original. The one that is almost exact to Shakespeare intent i think is the original, it's really got all the major points in it and it is done perfectly.
I feel like the older version of romeo and juliet is more captivating for many reasons. The modern version has it set in present day which I personally do not like because they are dressed in modern clothes and it is not as suspenseful as I would like it to be. The older version feels right because the costumes and scenery look just like I would picture it in my mind. The older one is moving and the actors play the part really well. The modern version doesn't depict the way shakespeare would want it to be because it is over the top. There is a lot of bleeding in act III scene 1 in the modern version and I don't like mercutio in it because he doesn't play the part as well as the older one, because he is a lot less believable.
Maddy: In my opinion I prefer the older movie version a lot better. I think that the newer version is very unrealistic and i like that that the older vision goes off more of what the actual play says. they don't try and change it and i think it helps me see whats going on in the book better. i think that fact that they have guns and I think that it captures what Shakespeare is trying to convey in thee book because in the book the dual with the swords lead to the death of both Mercuito and Tybalt. In the movie the fact that its not a dual makes it less intense. I like that that dual in the old version is more intense because they have to work hard to try and stab the other opponent where as in th new version they could have pulled the trigger and the other man could have been dead in a moment
I liked both films but the old version was more believable than the new version. The old version had swords and that’s how it was supposed to be so it seemed real compared to the old, which had guns. The new version was more intense and had more action. Tybalt and Romeo got into a fistfight and there was a car chase. Also they made the scene very dark with the storm and that made it more interesting. The car chase wasn’t exactly what I thought best fit the scene for Romeo to kill Tybalt. In the old version there wasn’t as much action, which made it not as intense. I like the new version because they showed how mean Tybalt really is compared to the old they don’t make Tybalt seem as frightening. The old version definitely captures Shakespeare’s intent the best. This one doesn’t have guns but swords and that is how Shakespeare wrote it. Also when Mercutio was dying everyone thought it was a joke and was laughing at him just like it explained in the play.
ReplyDeletePersonally I didn’t like either of the movie clips because they were both too spread out if they were meant to die I think they should have just said their dialogue and died. I thought that the new version was more intense though because it had the new affects and a car chase; it was also more captivating because it’s a modern twist with guns as opposed to swords. On the other hand though it was unbelievable and I feel that could never happen. So I think that the old version was more of what Shakespeare meant with the medieval sword fighting in the plaza. The new version is more moving though because the actor that plays Mercutio, it seemed like he was in real pain and Romeo was with him when he died and his reaction to the death was sad and more moving.
ReplyDeleteI enjoy watching both films because if one of them does not say a line and the other does it helps me understand it. I like the older movie better because it is more realistic, I liked how in the climax, which is when Mercutio dies they use swords instead of guns. The language that they use belongs in the early times. That is why it makes more sense in the older version. I find it funny how in the new version they say old words; it seems a lot less realistic in the new version. Also in the new version I did not like the scene, which took the place of the balcony scene, because it was too obvious that he was standing right in back of her. Overall I think that the older version does a better job at explaining and covering everything in the actual text.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I prefer the modern version. To me, the modern version is more intense, believe able, and I believe it conveys what Shakespeare intended the best. The modern version payed more attention to the script and what it meant. For example, in the older version, it looked as if the people were having fun and laughing, while in the newer version it seemed more accurate because it has an intense atmosphere. The older version dragged out and was a lot of the same actions, while in the newer version, there was a variety of actions. I also enjoyed how repetition was used in the dialogue in the newer version.
ReplyDeleteI thought both films were ok but if i needed to chose one it would be the modern version. In the modern version there was a lot more action. The modern version was way more intense and believe able because there was a car chase and there were guns. Nobodys going to believe that people are haveing sword fights anymore.For me i thouight the modern one moved me more because there was better acting and you can see how said romeo was. The modern movie captivates me more because it is intense and your not really sure whats going to happen next. I think the morn movie captures shakespears intent more. For example in the modern movie the battle was taken very seriously unlike in the older film it looked like the people were haveing fun when they were fighting. In my opinion the new film is much better.
ReplyDeleteI think the scene in the newer version with Leonardo di Caprio is more intense because it has much more action because of the guns and car chases. But, the feeling of action is taken away because of the Shakespearean dialog. The dialog makes the movie seem out of date and makes listening to the movie annoying and hard to do. And the newer version is more believable due to the actors and their acting, but because of the dialog, it seems a lot less believable. It is also much more moving thanks to leorando di caprios acting. The newer version captivates me more because it has much more action, and is much more moving. I found the newer version of Romeo and Juliet was more captivating because of the action and the acting of the actors. But, I think the older version captures Shakespeare's intent, because it takes place in older times, like the time Shakespeare would have actually been alive. I think it does this by taking the setting and placing it in the time that Shakespeare would of lived. The older version gets shakespeares message across much better because of the setting, and the way they talk goes better with the way the act, move and dress.
ReplyDeleteI think that both films were both intense. But the modern version was better in the way that it showed how intense everything was. Yes, there were car chases and guns instead of swords but you could really capture the feeling throughout it. In the older version you couldn't really tell Romeos emotion, but the Modern version definitely was able to show how intense everything really was. Where the modern one took place wasn't realistic, because the language and the setting of the play is suppose to be in the modern times, so even though the modern one showed more action and made it seem more intense. With the way that the play is written, and how it should be acted out, the older version does captivate what it is suppose to look and sound like. But the modern version does show a huge part of how intense the scene was made out to be
ReplyDeleteI would say the older version of the movie is more believable because the newer version has a thunder storm magically appear on the scene and there is excessive bleeding involved. However, these are the reasons I think the newer version is more intense and more moving. It may be over the top dramatic, but it really captures the climax of Romeo & Juliet. I preferred Mercutio in the 1995 version better because in the 1968 version, Mercutio was oblivious to the fact that he was dying, and even if he had known, he sure wasn't acting like it. I found that all too confusing. The newer version really drives the point home.
ReplyDeleteBoth movies are good but I enjoyed watching Act III scene 1 in the modern version more. I think that because Romeo and Benevolio show more emotion in the modern film it makes the scene more meaningful and their emotions have a greater effect on the audience. Also, I think the car chase and the use of guns makes this scene more exciting and intense. Something else I thought was effective was the rain starting when Mercutio dies because it helps set the mood for the rest of the scene. Although the modern version is more exciting and has better weapon use, I think that the older version captures Shakespeare’s intent more thoroughly because the dialogue makes more sense than it does in the modern version. Although they are speaking in old English in both films, it sounds out of place when the characters have cars and guns. Also, the setting of the older version captures Shakespeare’s intent more because it takes place in the time period that Shakespeare was from. This way we can see why Shakespeare had certain things in the script since we are seeing the movie almost from the point of view of someone from that time period.
ReplyDeleteThe film that I think was more intense has got to be the newer version. I feel this way because in the newer version the movie directors have better technology and are able to put in better and more spectacular effects as opposed to the older version. I think that the older version is more believable because in the time period that it was in they used the appropriate weaponry and it made sense why they dueled. In the newer one to me it felt like a bunch of scenes put together without any thought put into it. The film that I felt was the most moving would have to be the newer version because after Romeo killed Tybalt you could really see Romeos remorse of killing him as opposed to the older version which I didn’t really feel that he was sad. All they showed in the old one was Romeo’s friends yelling at him to leave. The one that captivates me the most is the newer version because I like up-tempo action scenes and in the new one that’s what act III, scene 1 was. In the old version it was kind of boring and predictable. The older version captures Shakespeare’s intent because the screenwriter tried to stay close to the actual story as opposed to the newer version which the screenwriter was very creative and put his own twist on the story.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the old version of Romeo and Juliet seemed much more compelling in every way. Way too many things made the 1996 version seem dumb, like when Mercutio was randomly shooting the ocean, when Tybalt and Mercutio were spinning around each other “hissing” at each other. It just seemed so unreal. The Capulet gang guys had dumb tattoos of the Virgin Mary and of Jesus while their attitude contradicted any sense of righteousness. The Montague’s, aside from Romeo, all wore Hawaiian shirts and dyed hair and all they accomplished was to look like wimpy kids who think they can threaten the whole world because they have a holster and exposed chest hair. The thing they “did” do relatively well was when Mercutio yelled, “A plaque on both your houses”. After that they just had Leonardo Dicaprio cry his eyes out and yell at the top of his lungs at a silly looking man who slightly resembled Luigi from the Mario Games. Then he shot him and Leonardo cried some more and yelled….see that’s the thing, I couldn’t understand what he said. If I hadn’t read the book or seen the play countless times I never would have known he said that he is fortune’s fool. The other movie on the other hand had this strange fight scene that was limited to the technology of it's time. Yes they made Mercutio look like an fool (though he usually is portrayed as one) and yes the wounds inflicted on the actors made the film look dumb and yes it looked wrong to watch men wrestle in tights and YES Romeo looked like Luke Skywalker but still, with all the drawbacks, either personal or general, this film was still better. You see, the old film was given what they had in 1968 and they made good with it, the 1996 movie was given better EVERYTHING and still was a piece of ****. Besides one or two good parts in the newer movie, this movie was literary a piece of junk and Act III scene I was no exception. The 1968 movie was more compelling, and believable. When you’re given lemons, make lemonade and when you’re given lemons 30 years later….. make lemonade that tastes 30 times better than before, not some piece of junk.
ReplyDeleteI think that the 1996 depiction of Romeo and Juliet provided a better version of the scene with the death of Tybalt and Mercutio. In the older version I feel that Mercutio and Tybalt kind of danced around for ten minutes looking like neither actually had the intent too kill each other. I feel that this takes away from the dramatic effect that Shakespeare wanted this scene to have. I also think that the way that Romeo killed Tybalt was unsatisfying and it also looks as if it was an accident. In the 1996 version they do a great job of showing the dramatic effect of the scene. An example is when Mercutio in his final moments screams " A plague on both your houses" and it echos through the beach. Then when he dies Romeo is filled with rage and chases Tybalt. When Romeo crashes Tybalt's car he grabs his pistol and screams in fury and puts three in Tybalts chest. This is a much better depiction because it shows Romeo's true feelings toward losing his friend and his blind rage instead of making it look like he is trying to cuddle with Tybalt in the streets. In any other scene though the 1996 version absolutely sucks.
DeleteIf i had the choice to watch either the original film or the newer film, it would probably be the original film. I feel so because in the original version of the film, i feel it did a better job of portraying the play, but with the newer film, it was just a more current version, which i didn't like. It is a lot easier for me to understand the old version because beck then, they didn't have cars, and guns, and bustling cities that were in the new version, but with the original, its definitely more relative to the time of when the play was written.But although i do prefer the original, version of the film, the newer film was more intense because I for sure would rather watch people shoot each other than a bunch of guys in tights stab each other with swords. The original version captures Shakespeare's intent more thoroughly than the new version because the original was based more on the time period of which the article was written, so it gave the viewer(s) more of an idea on the play was really like.all in all, i'd rather watch the original version
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I felt like the modern movie clip was better made where the older
ReplyDeleteone was more authentic. I like the modern one because it was more moving, the
fights where more personal and fought with rage not with like a playful act.
Again the modern one captivates me more because Romeo, Tybalt, and Mercuitio
fought with there hands and guns instead of swords.
The movie that I feel like got Shakespeare captivate across was the older one
because he intended for it to be in Verona, Italy during the middle ages, not
modern day Verona, California.
Anyway both of the clips where all right and in result has a major role in the
play when Romeo gets banished and forbidden to ever enter Verona again, i would watch the newer one again... but only once.
I think the older version is better than the new one because in the older version, the dialogue matches the time period. The new version however is more entertaining because the dialogue doesn't match the time period and there are car chases and guns. The old version is the one that is more authentic because I don't think that Shakespeare wanted Romeo unloading a 1911 into Tybalt after a car chase through the city. He wanted an emotional, heated confrontation between Romeo and Tybalt. I like the new version because it offers a lot of symbolism and is an interesting take on the classic story. The new version, I think, is more moving because Mercutio's reaction to getting stabbed is more realistic than in the old version. Because one can see that he is in pain and is more angry when cursing the two houses.
ReplyDeleteBoth of the Films demonstrate what Shakespeare is presenting but the film that captivates me more and captures Shakespeare’s intent thoroughly is the older version. The older version is more believable and realistic. The newer version doesn’t show the same clothing and technology as the time period Shakespeare lived in. The clothing is too modern and there were no cars or guns so you don’t experience the full effect of Shakespeare’s great work. The old fashion version expresses how realistic the film is. When your watching it, you feel like you are living in Shakespeare’s world with his language. Act 3 scene 1 was very dramatic. It was more dramatic in the older film and to me the newer film was injudicious. The older film followed the script exactly and made you feel everything that you felt when you read the scene. The swords made it more realistic then guns and more entertaining to watch instead of one shot and then he was dead. The newer film was funnier then the older one but it wasn’t a better version.
ReplyDeleteI think that the newer and more modern version is more intense. I think this because in the older version made it so it was almost more comical than serious. For example when Mercucio was dead his friends thought he was joking and where laughing, but in the newer movie you can feel that the people around him where sad about his death. I think that the older version is more believable because in the newer one when the where fighting with guns it seemed as if the seen could have ended much shorter because if Tybalt really wanted Romeo dead he could have just shot him, but in the old film when Tybalt and Romeo where fighting they where using swords. I think that the older version of the movie captured Shakespeare's thoughts more thoroughly than the more modern version because in the play Shakespeare intended for the fight to be a duel mean a sword fight like when Mercucio draws his sword and so does Tybalt. Also the older version is closer to the original story in general.
ReplyDeleteI think that the modern version is the best portrayal of the scene because it really got the point across about how serious the fight was. The older version made the fight seem like they were just playing around and that Tybalt didn't really want to kill Romeo. In the newer version you see how angry Tybalt is and how he is pugnacious and fiery and always looking to pick a fight. I liked the portrayal of the characters more in the newer version but the older version was more realistic to the time period. I think that Shakespeare's thoughts were best shown in the old version. Although I liked the characters in the newer version, I think that they portrayed Shakespeare's thoughts too silly and weird. Instead of just putting a modern twist on it, I think they took a bit of a stretch. Overall, I like the older version better but I think the scene was best portrayed in the newer one.
ReplyDeleteI thought both movies showed the intensity of Shakespeare's play in their own ways. I thought however the newer film was more dramatic. The newer film had a lot of over-acting and dramatic scenes, but I thought the older film showed more of Shakespeare's point and his intention in writing the play. I thought that the old film was more traditional and had more of Shakespeare's dialogue and theme because of the time period, clothes, swords and many little details. Although the new movie was well acted and was very believable and understandable and uses a lot of scenes from the play and and makes it a lot more interesting and exciting to watch. Some scenes that really showed the drama of the film were when Mercutio got stabbed and said " A plague on both your houses" several times, it really added a lot of intensity to that scene opposed to the scene in the older version. Another scene was when Romeo and Juliet found out they were supposed to be rivals, this scene really showed the pain and hurt in Romeo and Juliet because their love each other wasn't meant to be, and their lives were at stake while being with each other. The second film was a very dramatic film and I thought it was made well as a modern version of a classic film.
ReplyDeleteBy watching both films it helped me understand better about the story. The film that captivates me more is the original film because i think it describes the characters better and helps show how each character plays their role in the story. The story that is more intense is the more modern film because that film has guns and different style so when the the two families fight they use their guns and seem more aggressive. the film that is more believable and moving is the original film because that film follows the real story better then the modern film and because the original film has older technology and in the story they view it as an older story. The original film describes the story more thoroughly as the modern film , i think tries to be older and more like the original film when everything else is modern. I think the original film captures Shakespeare's intent more because it has more scenes then the modern version that help understand. The original film goes with the verbal words from the story better than the modern version because both stories are in different time periods and location. In the original film Shakespeare's intent is shown through the love of enemies between Romeo and Juliet and there are different times in the tory where it is shown like the balcony scene because Romeo is in love so he sneaks onto his enemies property so that he can be with Juliet and that scene in the film goes with the story very well.
ReplyDeletethe original is more believable to me, even though Leonardo DiCaprio is wonderful to look at,I feel the original shows the characters better. I think the modified version is to dramatic. I think the modified version is more moving because i think the actors are better in the modified version compared to the original. the movie that captivates me more is the original in the modified version I don't like some of the changes that were made and I like how they make just like the the book in the original. The one that is almost exact to Shakespeare intent i think is the original, it's really got all the major points in it and it is done perfectly.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the older version of romeo and juliet is more captivating for many reasons. The modern version has it set in present day which I personally do not like because they are dressed in modern clothes and it is not as suspenseful as I would like it to be. The older version feels right because the costumes and scenery look just like I would picture it in my mind. The older one is moving and the actors play the part really well. The modern version doesn't depict the way shakespeare would want it to be because it is over the top. There is a lot of bleeding in act III scene 1 in the modern version and I don't like mercutio in it because he doesn't play the part as well as the older one, because he is a lot less believable.
ReplyDeleteMaddy:
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I prefer the older movie version a lot better. I think that the newer version is very unrealistic and i like that that the older vision goes off more of what the actual play says. they don't try and change it and i think it helps me see whats going on in the book better. i think that fact that they have guns and I think that it captures what Shakespeare is trying to convey in thee book because in the book the dual with the swords lead to the death of both Mercuito and Tybalt. In the movie the fact that its not a dual makes it less intense. I like that that dual in the old version is more intense because they have to work hard to try and stab the other opponent where as in th new version they could have pulled the trigger and the other man could have been dead in a moment