'Romeo and Juliet' is one of William Shakespeare's, one of the greatest and most important playwrights that ever lived, most famous plays and also one of my favourites of his and overall. It is such a lovely, powerful story, that is the quintessential depiction of passionate love descending into tragedy perhaps, chock-full of iconic lines and speeches and characters hard to forget.
The available versions of 'Romeo and Juliet' are variable, the best being the Zeffirelli and Leslie Howard versions. Also liked the divisive Castellani version from 1954 although it was very uneven admittedly. Didn't actually care personally for the Baz Luhrmann version, though that is probably not going to go down well with some. Consider this 1978 BBC version, one of the BBC Shakespeare adaptations from the late 70s and early 80s (an interesting series of adaptations/performances but with both hits and misses), one of the weaker available versions of 'Romeo and Juliet' and one of the lesser adaptations of the series. That is not saying that this 'Romeo and Juliet' is terrible, far from it. There are enough assets to make it worth watching. It does though have some severe short-comings that for me were difficult to overlook. A shame because, with such a good supporting cast, it had potential to be one of the better ones on both counts.
Of course there are plenty of good things. It's most of the supporting cast that are the main reason to see it, so good in most cases that it brings the production up more than one star. Michael Hordern plays Capulet with dignity and gusto, for me he was the best of the bunch, and Celia Johnson is a sympathetic and un-fussy nurse. Christopher Strauli is likeable too as Benvolio. The most interesting piece of casting though is Alan Rickman pre-'Die Hard' (a landmark performance in a genre benchmark), who makes for a suitably loathsome Tybalt. John Gielgud is interesting in a small role and Joseph O'Connor performs, if not completely lives, Friar Lawrence very well. Even with the omissions, it is a faithful interpretation, is coherent and flows, the supporting actors clearly having a feel for Shakespeare and with evidence of experience.
Visually, it is not exceptional and somewhat simple, have actually seen worse, but the simplicity works and doesn't look drab or ugly. Appreciate too that it didn't try to have enormous budget-looking production values (which the series didn't have) so the staging and action is not potentially swamped, didn't find it too stage-bound or confined. The costumes are lovely. The photography has an intimacy while having enough room for expansion. The staging has parts that are better than others, the ballroom, fight and tomb scenes fare best, even if the fight scenes are slightly balletic in places.
However, a major problem is the performances of the two leads, a problem so major that it brings the production down significantly. Apart from his rage and upset in the culmination of the big tragic fight scene, which was intensely moving, Patrick Ryecart is rather wooden and was in need of more expression and nuance as Romeo. Rebecca Saire does have the advantage of being the most age appropriate Juliet of all the available versions and shows more emotion than Rycart (she does well in the tomb scene), but her inexperience shows in her mostly bland, wide-eyed and too subdued performance.
Ryecart and Saire's chemistry doesn't properly ignite and the balcony scene completely lacks passion and comes over as very static. Count me in as another person who found that Anthony Andrews doesn't work as Mercutio, he certainly seems to be having fun with the character but he really does overact in especially in the facial expressions that it gets tiring.
On the whole, not a bad production but really could have been better. 6/10 Bethany Cox
The available versions of 'Romeo and Juliet' are variable, the best being the Zeffirelli and Leslie Howard versions. Also liked the divisive Castellani version from 1954 although it was very uneven admittedly. Didn't actually care personally for the Baz Luhrmann version, though that is probably not going to go down well with some. Consider this 1978 BBC version, one of the BBC Shakespeare adaptations from the late 70s and early 80s (an interesting series of adaptations/performances but with both hits and misses), one of the weaker available versions of 'Romeo and Juliet' and one of the lesser adaptations of the series. That is not saying that this 'Romeo and Juliet' is terrible, far from it. There are enough assets to make it worth watching. It does though have some severe short-comings that for me were difficult to overlook. A shame because, with such a good supporting cast, it had potential to be one of the better ones on both counts.
Of course there are plenty of good things. It's most of the supporting cast that are the main reason to see it, so good in most cases that it brings the production up more than one star. Michael Hordern plays Capulet with dignity and gusto, for me he was the best of the bunch, and Celia Johnson is a sympathetic and un-fussy nurse. Christopher Strauli is likeable too as Benvolio. The most interesting piece of casting though is Alan Rickman pre-'Die Hard' (a landmark performance in a genre benchmark), who makes for a suitably loathsome Tybalt. John Gielgud is interesting in a small role and Joseph O'Connor performs, if not completely lives, Friar Lawrence very well. Even with the omissions, it is a faithful interpretation, is coherent and flows, the supporting actors clearly having a feel for Shakespeare and with evidence of experience.
Visually, it is not exceptional and somewhat simple, have actually seen worse, but the simplicity works and doesn't look drab or ugly. Appreciate too that it didn't try to have enormous budget-looking production values (which the series didn't have) so the staging and action is not potentially swamped, didn't find it too stage-bound or confined. The costumes are lovely. The photography has an intimacy while having enough room for expansion. The staging has parts that are better than others, the ballroom, fight and tomb scenes fare best, even if the fight scenes are slightly balletic in places.
However, a major problem is the performances of the two leads, a problem so major that it brings the production down significantly. Apart from his rage and upset in the culmination of the big tragic fight scene, which was intensely moving, Patrick Ryecart is rather wooden and was in need of more expression and nuance as Romeo. Rebecca Saire does have the advantage of being the most age appropriate Juliet of all the available versions and shows more emotion than Rycart (she does well in the tomb scene), but her inexperience shows in her mostly bland, wide-eyed and too subdued performance.
Ryecart and Saire's chemistry doesn't properly ignite and the balcony scene completely lacks passion and comes over as very static. Count me in as another person who found that Anthony Andrews doesn't work as Mercutio, he certainly seems to be having fun with the character but he really does overact in especially in the facial expressions that it gets tiring.
On the whole, not a bad production but really could have been better. 6/10 Bethany Cox