Modern Shakespeare Adaptations
I'm sure we've all seen at least one adaptation of a Shakespeare play in our lives. Some of them are straight-forward, like the Henry V film we've been watching in class. Both of Disney's Lion King films are just Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet renditions. Even High School Musical borrows from Shakespeare (and what is it with Disney and Willy Shakes adaptations?) A specific adaptation comes to mind for me: Romeo x Juliet, an anime that aired in Japan in 2007.
Now, Romeo and Juliet is among my favorites of things to hate on, mostly for ironic reasons. It's a well-written play, but it's just so absurd to me as a 21st century woman that I can't help but rag on it. I watched Romeo x Juliet last year for lack of anything better to do. The opening song was a Japanese cover of Secret Garden's "You Raise Me Up," so of course I had to check it out based on that creative decision alone. I wanted to see what else the show had in store for me; and boy, was I not disappointed. Or maybe I was. I still can't really tell.
The show started out well enough. It had an Anastasia type feel, with Princess Juliet Fiammata Arst De Capulet being whisked away as an infant after her entire family was killed during a coup de tat. (This coup de tat was led, unsurprisingly, by Lord Veontes Van De Montague, Romeo's father.) Juliet grows up oblivious to her birthright, but she has a strong sense of justice that leads her to go gallivanting around the kingdom dressed as a boy, Robin-Hooding her way through life in a character change I was decently happy with.
But that's the only thing I really remember about the show, despite having watched all 24 episodes. It was a lot of pandering and pining and miscommunication (so the usual, I guess), and Juliet had turned into a giant tree by the end. Don't ask me how, because I won't be able to tell you.
This adaptation went off the rails at some point. But why was that necessary? Why couldn't the director just make a straight adaptation of Shakespeare's iconic play? The answer is probably complicated, but I have at least one theory. So many of Shakespeare's works have been adapted at various points. At some point, we all know how the story goes, so what would be the purpose of making another rendition?
Television and film directors avoid this question by taking the original premises and running to the hills with them. They want to tell the same story in a way no one else has before, and sometimes this leads to Scar pushing Mufasa off a cliff and scarring (ha!) the minds of millennials everywhere, or even anime-Juliet dressing as a boy and stealing from the rich just to turn into a huge tree at the end. This certainly stands out to me as being... different from all other adaptations I've seen of Romeo and Juliet. And maybe that's all the director was going for. In that area, at least, they succeeded.
I'll be sticking with Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 film for now.
Now, Romeo and Juliet is among my favorites of things to hate on, mostly for ironic reasons. It's a well-written play, but it's just so absurd to me as a 21st century woman that I can't help but rag on it. I watched Romeo x Juliet last year for lack of anything better to do. The opening song was a Japanese cover of Secret Garden's "You Raise Me Up," so of course I had to check it out based on that creative decision alone. I wanted to see what else the show had in store for me; and boy, was I not disappointed. Or maybe I was. I still can't really tell.
The show started out well enough. It had an Anastasia type feel, with Princess Juliet Fiammata Arst De Capulet being whisked away as an infant after her entire family was killed during a coup de tat. (This coup de tat was led, unsurprisingly, by Lord Veontes Van De Montague, Romeo's father.) Juliet grows up oblivious to her birthright, but she has a strong sense of justice that leads her to go gallivanting around the kingdom dressed as a boy, Robin-Hooding her way through life in a character change I was decently happy with.
But that's the only thing I really remember about the show, despite having watched all 24 episodes. It was a lot of pandering and pining and miscommunication (so the usual, I guess), and Juliet had turned into a giant tree by the end. Don't ask me how, because I won't be able to tell you.
This adaptation went off the rails at some point. But why was that necessary? Why couldn't the director just make a straight adaptation of Shakespeare's iconic play? The answer is probably complicated, but I have at least one theory. So many of Shakespeare's works have been adapted at various points. At some point, we all know how the story goes, so what would be the purpose of making another rendition?
Television and film directors avoid this question by taking the original premises and running to the hills with them. They want to tell the same story in a way no one else has before, and sometimes this leads to Scar pushing Mufasa off a cliff and scarring (ha!) the minds of millennials everywhere, or even anime-Juliet dressing as a boy and stealing from the rich just to turn into a huge tree at the end. This certainly stands out to me as being... different from all other adaptations I've seen of Romeo and Juliet. And maybe that's all the director was going for. In that area, at least, they succeeded.
I'll be sticking with Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 film for now.
Comments
Post a Comment