by Kristian Cortez, Staff Writer

Twenty-five years have passed since Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of the Shakespeare tragedy hit movie screens in October of 1996, and it’s just as daring today as it was then. After all, how does one take the words of Shakespeare and present them in a way that is different from every adaptation that has come before it? For Luhrmann it was by transforming the setting into a modern context and leaving the dialogue as is. An idea that when said aloud or read on paper, should not work. But this is a movie we are talking about. A medium whose fundamental core lies solely in the moving image, and work it does.

Instead of Verona, Italy we are in Verona Beach. In place of swords, guns. A simple feud between families is now a feud between rival business empires. The film opens on an old television screen that has lost its signal. The channel flicks past the studio title cards and stops at a newswoman giving the day’s report. Except it is not modern-day language that escapes her lips, but Elizabethan dialect. The prologue is recited to us in the form of a news report. Some could say an opening like this is out of nowhere and functions only as a nod to the MTV era of the day, but one need only listen to the words being spoken to see that these visuals have been derived directly from the text.

The prologue’s purpose is to brief the audience on the background of the upcoming story by providing us with the setting, the characters, their turbulent history, and the major event that is the reason this report is even taking place. A structure not unlike most news reports. The biggest connection comes from one of the final lines informing us how this “is now the two hours’ traffic of our stage,” with the key word here being “traffic.” We know through the text that this word is referring to what is about to take place in the story, but by expressing it through a news report visual it takes on the meaning as we know it today: vehicles moving on a highway. Now the line and the visual paired together provide dual interpretations. It’s a brilliant analysis of the original text and it establishes right at the start how this version of Romeo and Juliet is committed to doing something with the material that has never been done before. The prologue is then repeated once more for good measure, in voice over, as a series of quick cuts flash across the screen.

To celebrate the 25th anniversary director Baz Luhrmann has been sharing photos and video commentaries on the making of the film to his Instagram page. In one post he breaks down the opening and explains how the idea for the whole film “was to find mundane images and equivalents that could decode the language of Shakespeare.” This is achieved through the aforementioned news report and then again in the immediate second reprising. Luhrmann’s intention of reiterating the prologue a second time was to give the audience a chance to familiarize themselves with the language they’d be hearing for the remainder of the film, and to introduce some of the main characters with freeze-frame titling. This way it would be clear to those unfamiliar with the play who each character is and how they relate to each other.

From here, the film moves at a semi-rapid pace introducing the remaining characters and setting the story up for the Capulet costume ball taking place that night. The Montague boys crash the party and it is here where Romeo first sets eyes on Juliet, through the glass of a fish tank that connects the women and men’s washrooms. It is one of the most romantic scenes ever put to film and should place highly on any list for best movie meet-cutes. Up until this point much of the film has moved rapidly. Whether through editing or scene duration, and the music has been vastly energetic. With the fish tank scene, it is almost like time stops. The rhythm of the editing has slowed and in replacement of the lively music is Des’ree’s hypnotizing performance of “Kissing You.” The decision to present many of the scenes with such energy maximizes the emotion of this scene by giving us only one singular thing to focus on—eye contact. The two are startled when they first lock eyes, but they can’t move away. They continue to steal glances, the fish dancing before their faces. At one point Romeo, forgetting there is glass between them, leans his head in and collides with it. The entire exchange is innocent and tender. It perfectly encapsulates the idea of love at first sight and what it would feel like to experience it.

In regular adaptations the actors rely completely on dialogue to emote their attraction but here it is communicated only with the camera. Instead, we are relying solely on the two leads, Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes, whose chemistry is so palpable they immediately have us hoping that the movie will find a way to end differently. And they haven’t even spoken to each other yet! When the two do finally meet it’s only fitting that it’s as fireworks are going off. They steal away from everyone and share a kiss in an elevator before finding out what families they each belong to. Refusing to accept the hate that has been passed down to him Romeo returns to visit Juliet at her balcony. Here is where the movie does something interesting. Instead of keeping the entire exchange at the balcony it moves to the pool below. Luhrmann explains in one of his Instagram video commentaries that the inclusion of the pool is the modern idea they came up with to be the obstacle in this scene for the two lovers. In the play, it’s the distance the two are from each other, Juliet on the balcony and Romeo on ground, and why words are all they have to express their love. Luhrmann asserts that “the scene only works if there is an obstacle, otherwise he’d just rush up and kiss her.” There is a push and pull element to the dialogue and because the two end up falling into the pool, now it is physical as well. It was a risky choice to alter a scene so famous but I think the payoff is vast. By switching up the location and trimming the dialogue down what we are left with are the visuals. Instead of looking to the words to find how to feel we need only follow the two characters on screen. As Romeo climbs the vines to her window. As he sneaks up behind Juliet. As they fall into the pool, share a kiss, and swim around together. You could take away the dialogue completely and still understand how this moment they are sharing is forbidden. The absence of words leaves way for emotion.

And sentiment is what I think this film understands very well. It doesn’t seek to simply tell us the story, it wants us to see the story. To accomplish this we are given bright colors. In the set design, in the costumes, and in the lighting of each scene. Bold visuals require bold performances and that is why every actor here is perfectly casted. John Leguizamo as Tybalt. Harold Perrineau as Mercutio. Everyone, down to the supporting roles succeed in telling this story loudly. So perfect is their interpretation that you can’t help but get teary eyed when Mercutio is slain and shouts, “a plague on both your houses!” or the look on Tybalt’s face as he realizes what he has done. It’s a feeling that lingers as the camera stays on Romeo holding a dying Mercutio, just as a storm reigns in. The sequence reaches its climax when Romeo corners Tybalt, pulls a gun on him, and shouts, “either thou or I, or both, must go with him!” over and over again. The scenes are not overdramatized for the sake of being audacious. Their function is to take a moment and amplify it. The results are not understated because these events are not. What has taken place amongst houses is heinous and it deserves a reaction worthy of such.

Still, one of the main gripes I’ve seen over the years in regards to this adaptation are issues with dialogue. Both how much of it was edited or changed up, and the terrible way it was recited (or, more appropriately, yelled) by the actors. To any that dismiss the movie because of this I say, you clearly don’t understand what Baz Luhrmann was trying to do here. It is perhaps sacrilegious of me to say that Shakespeare’s words, brilliant as they are, are not what is important here, but that is precisely what I am saying. This is a movie that relies on feeling, as I’ve outlined above, and it expresses this feeling through its powerful visuals and exuberant performances. One need not be an expert in Elizabethan English to follow this retelling, and how wonderful is that?

Universality is what the movies give us. We turn to them to learn and dream. That is why Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet will continue to be celebrated for decades to come. It is proof that a Shakespeare adaptation can be accessible to everyone while still maintaining the essence of it all.