Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare is one of the most famous tragedies of the modern world. A timeless tale of boy meets girl with a tragic twist, this story has been adapted countless times before into plays, novels, and even songs. But today, the topic of movie adaptations comes up. More specifically, the success of Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 adaptation, Romeo and Juliet, featuring Leonard Whiting and Olivia Hussey, and Baz Luhrmann's 1997 version, Romeo + Juliet, featuring Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes. These both have strengths and flaws, but the question here is which is better? Which is more successful, and why? Many aspects, such as acting style, the chemistry between actors, how well the original text's message was conveyed, …show more content…
If the characters are portrayed as too mature, too serious, too stupid, too silly, or anything along those lines, it can lead to a major flop in film quality, even if other aspects are done to a T. In Romeo + Juliet, the casting was on par with what one would expect, with both Romeo and Juliet feeling like young kids in slightly silly love. They were clumsy, shy, and earnest, and fit in well with the movie's setting. Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes knew their lines well, and it didn't feel rehearsed or forced and went smoothly. Shakespeare's original lines were well spoken, with the right inflections in all the right places. Zefirelli's adaptation, however, is a different story. The acting was off and was strained and dry. The actors stumbled over their lines, and it was more like people trying to get through a reading of the text in class, rather than a heartfelt love scene. Hussey and Whiting didn't appear to be in love at all, and when it came to kissing during the balcony scene, they commenced in an outlandish tongue-lick neck scene, which made all viewers uncomfortable, whereas in Romeo + Juliet, despite the kisses being unneeded and long-lasting, felt real. DiCaprio and Danes' acting styles were better aligned with the text and greatly aided in the conveyance of the text's