Comments | daddio914: It lives...

daddio914

It lives...

Sep 24, 2007 09:22

Yes indeed, the 5 questions meme lives on. And I'm too lazy to link back to my original post.

Here're the questions from luckyckljw and my answers:

( I've put everyone else's behind a cut... )

Comments 31

serendipitygirl September 24 2007, 16:41:57 UTC

Interesting. I find that (with regards to number 2) I'm a total sucker for variations on the standard shakespearian tales - about the only one in the last ten - fifteen years I've really not cared for was the variation of Hamlet done a few years ago with Ethan Hawke. I didn't care for that much (at all)...but then there's the Richard III set in a fascist England of the 1930s from, I think, about ten years ago. :) There's an incredibly variety of ways you can turn those symbols around and make them fresh and invigorating without, I think, losing the intent behind them...not that it always works. :)

daddio914 September 24 2007, 17:02:41 UTC

Oh, I don't mind the variations -- I just think if they're using the original title and the original dialog they should stick with the original setting, as well. The one I mentioned really got to me -- the DiCaprio one. I like a lot of the modern versions they've done. The version of A Midsummer Night's Dream with Michelle Pfeifer (I think it was), for instance, had me questioning a lot of their casting choices, but I still enjoyed it.

I guess I just wasn't making that distinction clear? If you're using the name and dialog, use the whole script, setting and all.

serendipitygirl September 24 2007, 18:01:35 UTC

No, no, you were perfectly clear - I was just offering up my own (however divergent) two cents. :)

daddio914 September 24 2007, 19:45:45 UTC

I think I was mis-reading a bit, as well -- in light of the new comments below. :)

lilies_and_pan September 24 2007, 17:07:02 UTC

I thought the modernized version of Romeo and Juliet was excellent, though it totally changed the context of several of the lines... but it also gave new life to others. For example, in the very beginning of the movie they made it out as though the Capulets were the ones picking the fight with the Montague's when in the play it was the other way around. Also, there was right before Romeo went to the party at the Capulet's house he said, "these drugs are quick" when that line didn't appear in the play until after he swallowed the poison. Beyond that, it was pretty much word for word from the play. (I say this because for some reason in 9th grade I decided to memorize the whole play and was very impressed when I saw the movie... and no, I don't still have the whole thing memorized, but I do remember a great deal of it.) Granted, they left about a fifth of the lines out of the movie, but that's understandable. But I thought in general they did a great job of expressing the play. The cast, I thought, was perfect. And some lines were said ( ... )

lilies_and_pan September 24 2007, 17:10:44 UTC

edit: "These drugs are quick" in the movie = "Thy drugs are quick" in the play

Re: 10 Things I Hate About You luckyckljw September 24 2007, 17:29:39 UTC

The movies that I had in mind (and failed to communicate clearly) were those: the ones like 10 Things I Hate About You and Scotland, PA (MacBeth). I understand that there's a more recent one (She's the Man, I think), but I didn't bother with it as it seemed rather, ah, badly done in general.

Re: 10 Things I Hate About You daddio914 September 24 2007, 17:55:32 UTC

Ah. Yes. Those.

Would you believe I haven't bothered to see a one of them?

There are some movies that I've liked that are definitely plot/story rips from Shakespeare, though I can't think of the names right off the top of my head. I can't think of any that have been put out in the last five years or so.

It's actually quite common, and part of the reason that so many things are predictable... you really have seen them before.

Thread 27