Saturday, April 20, 2013

Romeo and Juliet (1936)

Romeo and Juliet (1936)
Directed by George Cukor
Screenplay by Talbot Jennings, based on the play by William Shakespeare
Runtime: 2 hr, 5 min
Ah, William Shakespeare.  His plays have delighted the multitudes, brought enlightenment to theatre-goers and confounded high school English students for centuries.  It is no surprise, then, that the Bard’s works have been adapted many times over for the big screen.  And why not, with dialogue larger than life, sword play aplenty, and the fact that all of his works are in the public domain?  Yet there weren’t too many Shakespeare adaptations during Hollywood’s golden age, making the 1936 version of Romeo and Juliet a relatively unique specimen.
If you don’t know the tragic tale of Romeo and Juliet, then welcome to Western civilization.  For all others, you know the drill; “star-cross’d lovers” and all that entails.  Here, we find Norma Shearer as Juliet of the Capulet clan and Leslie Howard playing Romeo, a Montague.  Their families hate each other but they fall in love and get married.  Only problem: the universe is conspiring against them, and as the prologue tells us, they commit suicide.  Their deaths bring forth reconciliation between the warring families, and the credits roll.
In terms of adapting the text for the screen, this version does its job rather nicely.  Screenwriter Talbot Jennings did cut some scenes out, particularly comic relief sequences in the second half, but the story itself is intact and is easy to follow.  In addition, the decision to show some of the offstage action is a welcome addition.  For example, this film shows the messenger getting quarantined on the way to Mantua.  While it does remove the textual suspense regarding whether Romeo gets the message, it also makes the event more believable and less of a plot convenience.
Furthermore, the way in which the filmmakers use new medium is indeed inspired.  One of the advantages of film is that the director and the cinematographer can choose which part of the scene to focus on at any given point.  This is used to great effect when Romeo first lays eyes on Juliet.  The camera cuts between Juliet’s grand entrance, complete with choir and dance, and Romeo’s mesmerized reaction.  This sequence underscores the pivotal nature of that first encounter, and similar scenes in the film have a very similar nature.
All that out of the way: let’s talk about the casting.  The cast list to this film still has me scratching my head.  On paper it looks excellent.  Howard, best known for playing Ashley Wilkes in Gone with the Wind, is perfect for the part of Romeo, Basil Rathbone is a top-notch choice for Tybalt, and they even got John Barrymore to play Mercutio.  This tale of star-cross’d lovers merits a star-studded cast, and that’s exactly what it got.  The only problem was that this particular adaptation was made in 1936.
Everyone, and I do mean everyone, is far too old for their roles.  Romeo, Juliet and their pals are teenagers.  That’s kind of why they act so impulsively throughout the story.  The fact that Shearer, then in her early-thirties, is the closest to her character’s age should tell you something.  This causes some massive incongruities in the characters’ actions.  It is so jarring to see someone who is clearly an adult trying to tap into the emotional immaturity of a 14-year old.  It’s as if the audience has entered into a topsy-turvy world.
Still, I could forgive the odd casting choices if the performances were good.  But, well, they aren’t.  Well, okay, most of them are passable, and Rathbone was made to play a man such as Tybalt.  However, the train wrecks are far more vivid in this film.  Most unfortunately, Barrymore is beyond wretched as Mercutio.  There’s no liveliness to his mayhem and humor; he looks as though he’s simply going through the motions.  But we’re talking about Mercutio, the guy cracking jokes as he lies dying.  The result is a performance which is annoying and boring simultaneously.
Granted, some performances have memorable moments, such as Shearer’s contemplations and fears before taking the sleeping potion.  But these problems with the performances prevent me as a viewer from getting invested in the film.  Who cares that Mercutio is dead and all hell has broken loose as a result?  Who cares that Romeo has been banished from Verona?  These guys have become archetypal characters; it should not be so difficult to latch onto their plight, yet this adaptation of Romeo and Juliet finds a way.
I really did have high hopes for this film, and had the casting department done its job properly instead of simply grabbing at names, I could easily see this film as a smashing success.  There’s weight to sets and the costuming; there’s the sense that Verona is an actual city with hordes of citizens.  It has all of the trappings of a major production that a Shakespeare play deserves.  As it stands, however, Romeo and Juliet as directed by George Cukor is a failure.  Not one on the level of the Baz Luhrmann version, but a failure nonetheless.

No comments:

Post a Comment