This is a popular theme over at Wandering Through The Shelves who loves reading as many of you do out there in the dark…oops sorry, I was channeling Norma Desmond. There are so many films that I decided to do a theme within a theme. Here are my picks…
1. ROMEO AND JULIET-1936
We all know the famous story of those young teenage lovers who are part of 2 feuding families-the Montagues and the Capulets. They meet during a masquerade ball and fall hopelessly in love but their affair is doomed and ends tragically because, well, it is Shakespeare and it’s a tragedy. This wonderful( hahaha) adaptation stars 43 year old Leslie Howard as Romeo and 34 year old Norma Shearer as Juliet as those Dooey-eyed teens..hahahaaaa…. Sorry as dooey-eyed oldies who fall in love. You have Basil Rathbone and John Barrymore as the friends who fight one another. Basil was an expert swordsman and Barrymore was an expert drinker often drunk while doing his scenes who were also way too long in the tooth to play youngins. The sad reality is that Shearer’s husband, Irving Thalberg, who wanted this film as a showcase for his wife spring no expense, died the evening it premiered at the young age of 37 which cast a giant shadow on the film.
2. ROMEO AND JULIET-1968
This is the best version of this tragedy starring actual teenagers, Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting as the doomed lovers. It was directed by Franco Zeffirelli who deserves the accolades for making this film a success. The music is beautiful as well as the cinematography and costumes. For decades and decades, Olivia Hussey had nothing but praise for her director and always claimed she was perfectly fine with the nude scene….same for Whiting so it’s a shame that just a year or so ago, they decided to sue the estate of Franco Zeffirelli for what they claimed was a deafening blow to their emotional well being for the nude scene. Now, they were young, she was 14 and Hollywood was not one to care about the feelings of young people especially girls but it just seems weird that after everything, they come out now. I a, one for the Me Two movement but this doesn’t ring right to me.
3. SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE-1998
Ok, yes, this stars Goop, aka Gwyneth Paltrow, as a wealthy chick betrothed to a jerk ( luscious Colin Firth) who dreams of being an actress but there is one problem…she’s a girl and no girl ever acts on the stage. The performances, at that time, were played by men. Can you imagine a male Juliet? Well, neither can Shakespeare, played by Joseph Fiennes ( Ralph’s brother) who owes money and is poor as dirt. He meets Goop and they fall in love. She pretends to be a boy so she can play the girl, Juliet, opposite Joey, playing Romeo. This is quite good, to be honest, but Goop never should have won the Oscar ( it should have gone to Cate Blanchett). It is actually quite funny especially with Geoffrey Rush who plays Shakespeare’s agent. Judi Dench won an Oscar for her very short role as Queen E #1. I don’t think she should have won here either ( I would have chosen Brenda Blethyn, Lynn Redgrave or Kathy Bates) but this is a good movie to watch. It won best picture…no, it shouldn’t have won, if I had to chose from the nominees, I would have chosen “Elizabeth”.
So which movies would you pick?
The Lord of the Rings trilogy, one of those few instances where the movies were better than the books.
ReplyDeleteThis is Birgit….I still need to read the books. Adore the films
DeleteHi Birgit..just loved Shakespeare in love hope you are well xxxx
ReplyDeleteI liked the movie even though Goop was in it. I’ve been in quite. Bit of pain to be honest
DeleteI remember watching the 1968 version in my high school English class after we read the play and my teacher tried to fast forward past the nudity and failed miserably. Now all I remember about that one is boobs. I actually like Shakespeare in Love, I just don't think it should've won as many Oscars as it did.
ReplyDeleteThis is Birgit…that’s funny about the teacher. Why do they think we can’t see it…hilarious! I, too, like Shakespeare in Love but Paltrow shouldn’t have won at all and I hated her Oscar dress. Cate Blanchett should’ve won and it shouldn’t have won best picture.
DeleteI thought of books in a series and came up with Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, and the Swedish version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
ReplyDeleteThis is Birgit…I love your choices but I still have to see the Hunger Games
DeleteI loved the 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet and, like you, don't understand the recent furor. Why wait so long to air that grievance, especially when you claimed to be fine with it in the past? Didn't see Shakespeare in Love, but "Goop" also starred in another movie adapted from a book that I liked: The Talented Mr. Ripley. Matt Damon was so good in that! Another favourite is John Grisham's The Firm, Starring Tom Cruise, Gene Hackman, Ed Harris. Great cast! So many choices in this category, like MASH, The Godfather, etc.
ReplyDeleteThis is Birgit…I love your choices as well. Talented Mr. Ripley is excellent. Yeah…I don’t get it that they waited over 50 years. If they came out when the Me 2 movement started, maybe I would get it better but…no, don’t understand
DeleteI have seen the second and third, but not the first. I thought the trailer was hilarious though so I doubt I’ll be seeking it out! I didn’t know that about Hussey and Whiting suing. Like Brittani I was taken to see that from school and we were congratulated for not being “silly” about the nudity. Can’t believe we weren’t!
ReplyDeleteMy school would never have shown this version because I went to a Catholic school run by priests and nuns. The trailer makes me want to see it even more. I mean, Barrymore was in his 50s.
DeleteI loved the 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet. Definitely a classic for me. Hope your day is fun and pain free:)
ReplyDeleteSandra sandracox.blogspot.com
This is Birgit..yeah, aren’t we in the same boat tht our names don’t appear as they should. That film is a good one
DeleteHi Birgit,
ReplyDeleteYou know I love a theme within the theme, this one is no exception even if one of the films involves that self-important snake oil saleswoman!
Oof the 1936 version of R&J is such a slog! As soon as you see the credits roll and think Howard and Shearer should be playing the young lovers parents the battle is lost. Being a vanity project for Norma I suppose it achieves its purpose of spotlighting her but she was much better served a few years later when he did the same thing with Marie Antoinette (the plans for its production were in place at the time of his death and Mayer let it go forward….though not in color as Thalberg had wanted). Barrymore, though decades too old for Mercutio, is highly effective and poor Andy Devine sticks out like a sore thumb. Really the only player who achieves any kind of distinction is Edna May Oliver as the nurse since she is playing one of the few age-appropriate characters.
The Zeffirelli version is lovely and since the leads are the right ages more compelling, but this isn’t one of my faves of Shakespeare’s works.
I also agree that Shakespeare in Love is an enjoyable flick but nothing that wouldn’t have been improved by having Kate Winslet or Helena Bonham Carter as Viola. My vote would have gone to Saving Private Ryan for the Oscar, but I do love Cate Blanchett’s version of Elizabeth and she should have won Best Actress this year, as Lynn Redgrave should have taken Supporting Actress. Frustrating but so it goes.
I was inspired by Brittani’s choosing of The Lovely Bones where she liked the book but not the film, I just did a flip. Usually, I prefer the book to the film but in these three instances it was the other way around. With that said I did like all three novels I just thought the films were able to either correct or strengthen some shortcoming of the book.
Gone With the Wind (1939)-The book is fascinating and sprawling which applies to the film as well but with the elimination of some superfluous characters the film sharpens Scarlett’s story making her even more compelling.
Three Days of the Condor (1975)-The adapted novel is titled Six Days of the Condor, a great compulsively readable book (I consumed it in a day) but the film’s kaleidoscoping of the action into the shorter time span tightens the tension cinematically. That is aided enormously with the casting of an ideal Robert Redford as the pursued man.
Marathon Man (1976)-The film directed by John Schlesinger and starring Dustin Hoffman and Laurence Olivier is a wonderfully tense thriller of cross and double crosses swirling around an innocent victim with a satisfying resolution which the book just cannot quite match.
This is Birgit. Joel, I love all your comments!! I’m sorry for not replying but I always read them. I’ve been in quite a bit of pain. Anyhoo, it’s fun watching these people playing teens..it’s quite funny. I’m glad you like my theme. Ughh, Paltrow..I prefer your choices especially Kate Winslett.
DeleteI really like The Lovely Bones and don’t understand why it’s not liked even though it’s a disturbing film. Stanley Tucci was excellent as the killer.
Marathon Man is so scary and another reason 8n stayed away from the dentist for too long.
Gone With The Wind is perfect for this theme and I do love the film.
3 Days..is OK but I wasn’t enthralled by it. I should watch it again and see if I like it better.
Haven't seen your first version, but I got extra credit in senior English class for going to see the other version. It's a good film as is your last pick.
ReplyDeleteI feel like this theme has been done before and I would give the same answers I guess. First ones that come to mind are Deliverance, No Country for Old Men, and Great Gatsby. I could likely come up with a list if I considered this long enough.
Lee
Hi Birgit, I love the 1968 Romeo and Juliet, everything about the film. I don't like Gwyneth Paltrow at all, and didn't like Shakespeare in Love.
ReplyDeleteHope you are keeping well, Kate x
I only saw the 1968 version when I was showing it to some English class I was covering. It's a pretty decent version.
ReplyDeleteLet's see, if I would pick three, I would go with Stardust, Ella Enchanted, and How to Train Your Dragon. Although, if I were to spend more time thinking about it, I'd probably change my mind and go with a couple different others.
As usual, I haven't seen any of them and the only one I've head of is the last one. But I was never a Shakespeare fan and have never read any of his plays. Still, I enjoyed (and laughed at) your synopses.
ReplyDeleteBest rendition of Shakespeare done for the screen?
ReplyDeleteMoonlighting's 'ATOMIC SHAKESPEARE' episode, of course!!
~ D-FensDogG
Fascinating info about the actors in the 1936 version of Romeo and Juliet. A 43 year old Romeo who'd a thought. Have a wondrous weekend.
ReplyDeleteSandra sandracox.blogspot.com
West Side Story could go in this sub-category, too.
ReplyDeleteShakespeare in Love... That movie was my first date with my wife, at the Angelica in NYC.
Saving Private Ryan was the one that was expected to win that year and of course, now we all know that the evil Harvey Weinstein was pulling strings for SiL. Can you take an Oscar away later?
Shakespeare in Love has once scene I dearly love. I wrote the following on my blog a few years ago:
Overall, I would mostly agree with those who say Ryan should have won. It is an unforgettable and undeniably powerful movie. Its champions rightly point to the hyper-realistic opening 20-minute rendering of the D-Day invasion as one of the greatest film segments in cinematic history. However, I assert that Shakespeare in Love contains a segment of comparable, if qualitatively different, magnitude. Hugh Fennyman (played by Tom Wilkinson), Shakespeare's financial backer, is witness to the very first rehearsal of Romeo and Juliet's famous balcony scene. The look of astonishment and wonder on Fennyman's face is every bit as potent as the hellfire on the beach of Normandy. The horror of the one doesn't exceed the magic of the other. The overwhelming death in the one is not inherently more relevant than the celebration of life in the other. War is not greater than art. Ryan may still be the better movie - and I think it is - but the D-Day scene is not the reason why.
I like the 1968 Romeo and Juliet movie and haven’t heard about the latest scandal. I thought when there was nudity in a movie, then there would be a nudity clause in the actors’ contract. So if they performed it, they must have agreed and signed that contract. Since the actors were minors, their parents would have signed or countersigned the contract which kinda seem like they would have to sue their parents for not protecting them from doing something they were not comfortable with.
ReplyDeleteI have to say my favorite version of Romeo and Juliet was one that I saw in the theatre! That said, I haven't watched all of the movies mentioned here, but I'm looking forward to giving them a chance.
ReplyDeleteI think my favorite Romeo and Juliet version is the one Baz Luhrman did
ReplyDelete