The works of William Shakespeare often haunt the nightmares of high school students. “I think [students] hear about Shakespeare, and what they know of it is that it’s complex language, and it was written a long time ago,” said freshman english teacher Ms. Eckert, when asked about why many students fear Shakespeare so intensely. Complicated language, intertwining plot-lines and lengthy speeches riddle the prose of the Bard’s work. It has become a cliche within our culture – high school students hate Shakespeare. But when a teacher puts on the 1996 film adaptation “Romeo + Juliet,” student’s eyes become glued to the Smartboard. “Because Shakespeare is so timeless, having modern adaptations and modern productions shows that the language is universal, and that the characters and conflicts are relatable to us even today,” said Ms. Eckert, who teaches “Romeo and Juliet” in her AS English I class. The film’s impeccable use of color and it’s iconic cinematography make it a 90’s classic, but are Shakespearean film adaptations ever as classic as the original play?
Recently, David Michod’s “The King” premiered at the Venice Film Festival. The adaptation of the final play in Shakespeare’s Henriad (“Henry V”) stars big names like Timothee Chalamet, Joel Edgerton and Robert Pattinson, but many critics question their ability to portray the storied, mature roles of Henry V, Falstaff and the Dauphin of France. In fact, the biggest question facing the film is whether Chalamet is a mature enough actor to portray a role as layered as the conflicted Henry V. “One watches Chalamet’s performance here with a simmering unease, willing him on but wondering if he is entirely fit for the task,” says critic Xan Brooks of The Guardian. While “The King” is not a word for word, stage-to-screen adaptation, it is still meant to draw directly from Shakespeare’s original work, and the complexity of the bard’s characters has always been one of the defining pillars of his work. Whether or not this complexity can be portrayed on screen by an actor is questionable, which is why direct screen adaptations like “Julius Caesar” and “Macbeth” are rare, and many filmmakers rely on alternative methods to portray this depth.
One of these alternate methods is a complete reboot of the story’s time and location. Movies like “She’s The Man” (2006) and “10 Things I Hate About You” (1999) make a direct attempt to draw in teenage viewers with their placement in modern day American high schools. Many of the characters in these films keep the same or similar names as their Shakespearean counterparts. The plot often remains extremely similar and simply modernized, in fact, “10 Things I Hate About You” employs direct quotes from the original text of Shakespeare’s “The Taming of The Shrew” at times, simply to remind the audience that the movie is based originally on a work of Shakespeare. These adaptations are a gamble when it comes to box office success. While “She’s The Man” was a success amongst young, teen viewers, critic Anna Smith of Empire says that “the highschool hijinks may entertain the young, but those more familiar with the Bard will recognise this as a wasted opportunity.”
In my opinion, the most artful reproduction of a work of Shakespeare was the aforementioned 1996 “Romeo + Juliet”. By maintaining the original dialogue but relocating 1594 Verona, Italy to mid-1990’s Verona Beach, California, the dreamlike experience of watching the film is increased. With it’s expert use of light and color, spot on set and costume design and impeccable acting from a young Leonardo DiCaprio, “Romeo + Juliet” received two Academy Award Nominations for Best Set Design and Best Art Design. The movie’s bold concept is executed elegantly, and proves that no matter the setting, William Shakespeare’s work is truly timeless.
Many Shakespeare to film adaptations are executed extremely poorly. Short-shot cinematography style, poor set design and shallow performance from actors can make a work of Shakespeare look like the chore so many students make it out to be. Without proper execution, the immersive experience of a live Shakespearean play can be lost. What “Romeo +Juliet” does so beautifully is that it maintains that experience. Through it’s immersive set design, spot-on delivery from actors and long-shot film style, it keeps the viewer ensorcelled within the universe presented to them on screen, just as Shakespeare once intended for his plays.