MovieChat Forums > Romeo & Juliet Discussion > Julian Fellowes 'broke the rule' (added ...

Julian Fellowes 'broke the rule' (added new dialogue).

posted 11 years ago by Zuko-Halliwell
14 replies | jump to latest

The way I see it, there's an unwritten rule when adapting Shakespeare for the screen. You can remove scenes or dialogue, you can move scenes around, but you do not write new dialogue. All of the film's dialogue should come from the original play.
Now, I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure some of dialogue from the trailer isn't in the play. For example:

Romeo: Juliet, if your heart like mine is full then tell the joy that weights us this night.
Juliet: I cannot tell of what is limitless.

In my opinion, this is unacceptable!

EDIT: I saw the movie this morning. The whole new-dialogue thing is worse than I thought; I'd estimate somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of the dialogue in the film wasn't in the original text.

Please reply

[–] rabbyx7 11 years ago

yes i feel exactly the same... hope that is just a line shown in the trailer and not in the full movie....

Perfection Doesn't Exist, But You Have to Look For It Anyway

[–] Zuko-Halliwell 11 years ago

I highly doubt it, but I hope so too.

Please reply

[–] jschillig 11 years ago

I hope so too. I like to think it's just for the trailer, to get people who normally wouldn't watch Shakespeare interested.

Although come to think of it, Ian McKellen's Richard III did tweak the language somewhat to make it fit with its new setting--giving some lines to different characters and changing the "thee's" and "thou's" to "you's".

[–] Flame-Trees 11 years ago

That's not the only line he changed/added: http://folgereducation.wordpress.com/2013/07/30/wherefore-art-thou-not -shakespeare/

[–] ShiversOfHorror 11 years ago

It seems they also switch dialogue...

In the trailer it is said "these violent passions can have violent ends" and It's really "these violent delights have violent ends"

[–] superjedijetboy 11 years ago

That's some pretty big balls on the guy to change Shakespear's dialogue.

But I doubt critics and audiences would even notice. Still, it's a bit upsetting. Yet I guess it's understandable if the goal is to make Shakespeare more, uh, understandable to modern audiences; substituting "violent passions" for "violent delights" for example. Still, I think it's a dumb thing to do and I hope the movie receives some measure of backlash for it, otherwise it may start an unfortunete trend in future Shakespeare adaptations.

[–] Zuko-Halliwell 11 years ago

Either big balls or small brains.

Please reply

[–] Virginiana 11 years ago

Well, he's certainly damaging his potential DVD sales to schools! I think every 9th grader in America reads R&J, and both the Zefferelli and Lurhmann versions of the movie are commonly used to supplement instruction. But if Fellowes is messing around with the dialogue, that will be regarded poorly by English teachers.

[–] notacastingcouch 11 years ago

I was just going to say, they won't be able to play this in school if the dialogue is not accurate to Shakespeare. That kind of makes this version disposable.

[–] chrisrocks14 11 years ago

Oh no, you are right. Absolutely right. I'll admit that they even fooled me for most of it. Some of the lines in the trailer have received such subtle changes that they are almost unnoticeable.

But then I heard some of Tybalt's dialogue. He said something to Juliet about never mentioning Romeo's name in their house again. No such scene exists in the play, let alone such dialogue. I don't mind that they are trying to create more of a character relationship between Juliet and her cousin, but you CAN. NOT. ADD. LINES. This literally is the first unwritten but nevertheless important rule of adaptations of Shakespeare. Then, the more I looked into the trailer's dialogue, the more changes I saw, both in additions and alterations.

Hollywood, understand something: The reason Shakespeare is so amazing, the reason he is so popular, the reason he is the single most influential and arguably most important playwright of all time is NOT because of his stories. Hell, he stole most of his stories from other sources or existing tales at the time. No, it was his WORDS. His words, his knowledge of language, his beautiful melding of every syllable is poetry redefined. When you mess with the language, you are no longer performing Shakespeare.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] applecounts 11 years ago

I feel the same way. I am SO UPSET that they changed "these violent delights have violent ends and in their triumph die like fire and powder which as they kiss consume" to "these violent passions have violent ends" or whatever they changed it to. Romeo and Juliet is supposed to be poetic with how Shakespeare wrote it, not dumbed down for people who, if they can't understand how it was originally wrote, shouldn't see it.

[–] Yorick_Brown 10 years ago

All of the film's dialogue should come from the original play.

That's ridiculous.

Some lines must be simplified or altered or merged to continue the story.

In my opinion, this is unacceptable!

Get over yourself!

Passenger side, lighting the sky
Always the first star that I find
You're my satellite...

[–] ehaas-3 9 years ago

I think it's acceptable to make changes to Shakespeare like adding is few words to smooth over grammar and sentence structure that was normal in his time but sounds clumsy in modern English or translating a few truly obscure terms into their modern equivalents for the sake of comprehension.

Even adding a little new dialogue to expand a conversation the people making the adaptation find interesting is fine with me if it sounds good. Reinterpretation of characters are very welcome if done well, as opposed to doing the same thing by rote for hundreds of years on end.

Editing the play both by cutting out certain parts or doing a little rearranging is the norm, especially on screen. I also have no problem with something like West Side Story that tells a story based on Shakespeare in entirely new dialogue.

The problem with the changes in this film is that they are dull. They add nothing creative and strip the language of its poetic power.