MovieChat Forums > Romeo and Juliet (2014) Discussion > Too old!

Too old!

posted 10 years ago by mercychaplet
9 replies | jump to latest

I'm wondering what a 37 year old Orlando Bloom can bring to the timeless tale of the star-crossed lovers. Part of what allows the play to work is the fact that this involves two adolescents, 14, 15 years old - they're impulsive, they don't think things through, they're capable of this intense, instantaneous attraction, this death-defying emotional state, the inability to seek out help, or any solution that involves something as simple as oh, say, getting on a horse and getting the hell out of there, LOL He's 22 years older than the character Shakespeare wrote the part for - it will be interesting to see how he manages to take the brainless impulsivity of a child's first tempestuous love affair and applies it to an adult's mature passion.

[–] matthewclan 10 years ago

I agree that he is much older than Romeo as written, but I also believe that he is perfect for the part. In the long run I don't really care how old the actors are as long as they play the characters successfully. I personally can't wait to see it! I've seen some footage on youtube and it looks great.

[–] LOTRinger02 10 years ago

They were actually 13 and 14, and no live version of the play has been portrayed by a 13 and 14 year olds. Most of them can't handle the source material, also there is the work issue with child actors that is why so many TV shows and movies that have teen characters are portrayed by actors way older. I really don't see what the problem is.

~~~~~
"We're going to see the elves!"

[–] Bologna King 10 years ago

Shakespeare does give us Juliet's age (almost 14), but he does not give Romeo's and it is inconceivable that he was intended to be younger than 20. The actor who Shakespeare specifically wrote the part of Romeo for was 28 at the time this play was written. A love affair between a thirty-year old man and a thirteen-year old girl was not considered creepy in those days. The idea that Romeo was the same age as Juliet is us pushing our morality onto the play.

Anyway, if we can have race-blind casting I don't know why we cannot have age-blind casting as well.

[–] IrishEyes2787 9 years ago

Though Romeo's age is never explicitly stated, the context clues lead most Shakespearean actors and scholars to believe that he is meant to be in his late teens. The original actor may have been 28, but that would have been a reflection of the company makeup at the time, not the intended age of the character. His projected youth is not an attempt to superimpose modern morality on the play, so much as an acknowledgement of the sort of relationship the two leads have. It is idealistic, intense, rash...the sort of thing that only two young people in their first real relationship experience can pull off.

[–] GassyTroll 9 years ago

I agree. Some of the clues we have that Romeo is still a youth are:

- He's not married and there's no mention of his friends being either;

- His friends walk around in a gang, taunt people like the Nurse, and of course, are up for a good fight. All very teen-like behaviour;

- Romeo's lovesick over Rosaline then forgets her the moment he sees Juliet. This capriciousness is more typical of a young person;

- The Friar refers to him as "young" and calls him "son" a few times. Enough times to create the image that Romeo isn't an adult.

[–] Bologna King 8 years ago

There is no question that Romeo is intended to be a young man. But my comment was directed to the statement that Romeo was intended to be 14 years old, and that a 37-year old actor could not convincingly play him. To respond,

-People in Shakespeare's day married on average at the age of 26 or so. Shakespeare was an exception.
-People in motorcycle gangs hang around in gangs, taunt people and fight. They are not therefore under the age of 20. Some of them are over 60.
-Capricious love is not restricted to those under 20 years. In literature, at any rate, it is a favourite theme to depict "love at first sight" for lovers of all ages.
-All that we learn from the Friar calling Romeo "young" is that the Friar is older than he is. And you must not have much familiarity with priests: EVERYONE calls them "Father" and they call all men "son", no matter what age.

A twenty-two year old man would still be a young man. The whole concept of "teenagers" is a twentieth century invention, and Shakespeare's intention was almost certainly to have Romeo portrayed as being in his early 20s rather than being 14. And Orlando Bloom does convincingly play a man in his early twenties. In fact, I'd say he nails it.

[–] ellandroad_allstars 10 years ago

Shakespeare's plays are notorious for having 'youthful' characters with very vague ages. The fact of the matter is actors that young would struggle with the source material. Look at Hamlet as a prime example. He's meant to be a university student yet actors normally play him on stage in their primes, usually around 35-40. Lawrence Olivia was 48 I believe.

I think Orlando's youthfulness, despite his age, and rather naive acting style are perfect for Romeo

[–] vs-dot-vaughn 8 years ago

I would not have thought Bloom to be 37 at the time. He pulls off the needed youth of the character. Also, since they omit the lines that are more explicit about Juliet's age and Condola Rashad's Juliet is conceivably older than the original, the match works.

[–] wolfster2010 8 years ago

Orlando brings his long white tinkle!!