Friday, November 1, 1996
By Michael Horowitz
Daily Bruin Staff
irector Baz Luhrmann’s "Romeo and Juliet" ain’t your traditional
"Romeo and Juliet." It’s not even "West Side Story."
It’s something approximating "Baz Luhrmann’s Favorite Romeo and
Juliet moments," and luckily this filmmaker’s got impressive
taste.
Plenty of people are going to hate this film just as much as
many will adore it, but the sheer excitement of what’s unfolding
on-screen should make this film a must see. If you love the rush of
stylish celluloid this is tonight’s fix.
Now, you may ask who this Luhrmann freak is, and why he’s being
treated here as an auteur. He’s no one you should have heard of yet
and no one’s conferring auteur status upon him for a long time to
come, but he’s shaping up to be one of Australia’s most enjoyable
filmmakers. His two films, "Strictly Ballroom" (1992) and now
"Romeo and Juliet" show off the sensibility that will undoubtedly
become his directorial signature.
The Australian "Strictly Ballroom," a breakout hit a few of
years ago, is the tale of a ballroom dancer who breaks the rules,
dances to his own beat, and outperforms all challengers en route to
the ballroom dance championship.
The film is well aware of every skill movie that comes before it
("Top Gun," "Karate Kid," et al.), and treats every cliché of
the subgenre to a tongue-in-cheek grin.
But the Luhrmann touch isn’t about parody and caricature; that’s
only half the battle. "Ballroom" has heart. It loves its
broadly-drawn characters, and it sucks the audience into really
caring about its protagonists as they rush down their
obstacle-strewn path. The film is an artistic step past parody,
it’s a stylization, and the effect on the viewer is far greater
than hollow laughter. "Ballroom" playfully acknowledges its mastery
of form, and simultaneously revels in its own centrifugal
passion.
Enter Shakespeare’s most popular play. While "Romeo and Juliet"
certainly isn’t anything close to a parody, it’s a fairly thorough
compendium of Western Civilization’s favorite clichés. There
are people dying in each other’s arms, family feuds, and
star-crossed lovers. Luhrmann isn’t naive enough to pretend this is
the first time the audience has seen this stuff before. He makes
some huge decisions as far as interpretation and gets to the scenes
he likes most as fast as he possibly can.
Enter Montagues. Enter Capulets. Forget old Verona, this is
Verona Beach, some kind of alternate reality Mexico City. Luhrmann
doesn’t waste any time setting the mood; he starts slapping names
on-screen, introducing his growling enemies. Everything you used to
think was cheesy about filmmaking (wipes, constant title cards,
old-style zooms) Luhrmann loves. He’s all about mood, he’s all
about action, and he just wants you to feel.
By the time Romeo and Juliet make it on-screen, you’ve swallowed
a fairly huge high-concept pill. Everyone’s speaking Shakespearean
English but they’re dressed modern day and waving around guns. It
doesn’t matter. Enter totally sassy Romeo (Leonardo DiCaprio).
Enter somewhat sassy Juliet (Claire Danes). This is not a great
movie. This is not going to sweep the Oscars (although it stands a
good chance if remembered for the MTV awards). But it never gets
pretentious for a second. It guts parts of the story, pays scant
attention to most of the lines, and even gets bogged down a few
times around halfway through. Yet it’s so pedal-to-the-medal for
most of its runtime that it’s hard not to get caught up in the
swirling adrenaline.
Performances seem secondary to this concoction, but not because
they are weak. DiCaprio is as poised as he’s ever been, a perfectly
reckless and romantic teen. His shirt keeps falling off and he
never even notices. While he’s certainly shown more acting aptitude
("What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?" and others), here he gets to be a
movie star, and close-up after close-up he proves his mettle.
Danes, just as much of a talent, gets slightly upstaged. She has
her own charm as Juliet, and never hits a false note, but she’s too
reactionary to make as bold an impression as DiCaprio. She’s still
marvelous as tears roll down her face, but her costar is the one
who gets to throw his arms into the air and wail. Somewhere along
the line, her Juliet took a little step backward into the
shadows.
The supporting players are a more inconsistent bunch. Pete
Postlethwaite doesn’t disappoint as the priest, delivering a touch
of wisdom to the proceedings, but few others shine in their limited
limelight.
This is Luhrmann’s circus, and actors aren’t around to act as
much as look great. This could be a horrible thing, but the way his
first two films have turned out, it’s hard to second guess the man.
Start waiting in line for his next film now.
Twentieth Century Fox
Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes play the star-crossed lovers
in "Romeo and Juliet."