Emily Cotrufello

Jan Babcock

ENGL 137H

November 18, 2022

Shakespearean Shift: How Romeo + Juliet (1996) remade Shakespeare in the modern era

Practically everyone in English-speaking countries will encounter and have to read one or

more of William Shakespeare’s plays in their lifetime, particularly throughout their formal

schooling. Considered one of the greatest, if not the greatest, English writers in all of human

history, his plays are still read and taught over four hundred years after his death. There is a deep

cultural relevance tied to his works, with his famous plays influencing not only the English

language and literature, but also society and politics. However, Shakespeare is considered to be a

highly inaccessible form of literature, due to its older writing style and outdated contexts.

Though originally written and put on in the Globe Theatre to entertain the lower-income masses,

since his death, his work has become somewhat of an ancient, prestigious, and academic

phenomenon that is for the privileged few rather than the many. This perception has made

Shakespeare into a bit of an outdated beast that is a struggle to teach, read, and understand fully.

However, the overall view of Shakespeare in popular culture has drastically shifted since the

release of the film adaptation, Romeo + Juliet (1996), specifically concerning the incorporation

of modern context clues, higher accessibility of the original dialogue, and altering the way that

future productions adapt Shakespearean texts.

The 1990s was a decade rich with culture, and by producing the 1996 film in this time

period and having the setting of the play/movie take place in a “modern” setting with modern

symbols and devices, while still using the original text, created a perfect storm for the movie to
be the success that it is. Baz Luhrmann, the director of the film, did something that had never

been done before in any Shakespearean adaptation - make it “cool”. Various changes and artistic

choices were made to make the audience feel as though this four-hundred year old play was a

truly modern and relevant thing, and that first choice was setting it in the 90s.

The costuming is a major factor in how the filmmakers were able to fully modernize the

play in a convincing way, and this is thanks to Kym Barrett, the costume designer for the film. In

an interview with Vogue, she stated,

I think if you talk to most people who enjoy Shakespeare, the first time they start hearing

it or reading it, they’re like, “What’s going on?” But if you just settle in and go with it, it

starts to make complete sense to you. And that was one of the aims of doing the film. My

job was to support the language with imagery, to help you stop thinking about the

language and just go with the story. And I think it was successful in that way (Hess).

Instead of Elizabethan garb, the Montagues wear Hawaiian shirts and the Capulets wear Dolce

and Gabbana (Schmidt-Rees). Every character dresses in the same way regular young people

were dressing in the decade, though certainly with more affluence than regular young people.

Even at the Masquerade Ball, characters do not dress in reference to the way the play would have

originally been produced - rather, it is a vibrant costume party, with garish colors and 90s fashion

statements and even a Drag Queen moment from Mercutio, in which he wears lingerie, sequins,

heels, and a cape. These diversions from the original costuming practices do not detract from the

original story, but rather allow the audiences to be fully enveloped into the world of the play.

Instead of feeling like a fish out of water, trying to place one’s mind in a context that has long

since died, viewers are able to see themselves, their friends and family, and even celebrities in

the characters portrayed in a new sense on the screen.

 In addition, many props were updated to have more of a contemporary significance. Guns

and pistols are used in place of swords and daggers, which are directly referenced in the original

text and are almost always incorporated into adaptations. The handguns have names of swords,

such as “rapier” or “dagger”, inscribed in them, keeping to the source material while still

changing the context clues to fit a modern world (IMDb). Friar Lawrence, who in the original

script tends to and gathers herbs for medicines and poultices (Shakespeare 2.3.7-22), instead

grows marijuana plants in his greenhouse. General modern props are also included in the film

that are not directly in or are a slight alteration from the source material, in order to set the scene

in a realistic way: the Montague boys, just before the ball, take ecstasy, and there are

convertibles, limos, and cigarettes to highlight the wealth of the warring gangs as well as their

fixed belonging in the 1990s, a recent time that viewers can look to and see themselves and their

own lives reflected within.

The soundtrack to the movie, which consisted of both original songs and those already

popularized in recent years, was the final bit of 90s culture that ensured the full immersion of

audiences in this modern presentation of Shakespeare. Songs like “Lovefool” by the Cardigans,

“Young Hearts Run Free” by Candi Staton and covered by Kym Mazelle, and “When Doves

Cry” by Prince are still popular in 2022, and were incredible hits in the late 80s and 90s. These

are songs that countless people have heard at least once in their lives, and, more likely, are

familiar with and enjoy. Played on the radio, on television, performed at concerts, these songs

and artists defined a generation. Luhrmann quite intentionally incorporated them into the

soundtrack of the film at pivotal moments - “Young Hearts Run Free” when Romeo is tripping

on drugs and watching Mercutio perform in Drag, “When Doves Cry” as sung by the church

choir where Friar Lawrence meets with Romeo, and “Lovefool” as the Nurse tells Juliet that she
is to be married to Romeo (McGlone). The movie also had some original soundtracks, such as

“I’m Kissing You” by Des’ree, which played during Romeo and Juliet’s meeting scene at the ball

and continued on in an orchestral piece throughout the balcony scene. Though not as overt as

costuming or guns being pulled out, the decisions made surrounding the soundtrack create a

stronger emotional appeal overall and subconsciously draw the audience into the modern setting

of the play. Harps and lutes are noticeably absent in this adaptation, and that is a good thing - it

would have just been another barrier between the original text and the modern audience being

able to connect to it.

The second main reason as to why the film forever changed adaptations of Shakespere is

that, despite the modern contextualization, the original dialogue is never altered or sacrificed.

The use of Shakespearean, original, “Olde English” (Shakespeare is actually a modern writer)

helped to firmly adhere the 1996 film to being a loyal production despite the many departures in

much of the production. Luhrmann was able to pull this off due to the prevalence of modern

context clues, which aid in breaking down the difficult, older wording in a way that it can be

comprehended by a general audience, even if they have never read any Shakespeare before.

Every single line in the original text aligns with the lines in the 1996 film, though some lines are

cut.

For generations, the original text from Romeo and Juliet, and all Shakespeare plays, has

been considered “highbrow”. It can be a struggle to understand and is often seen as something

highly academic that is meant to be studied and analyzed rather than enjoyed in one’s free time.

Shakespeare has become a discipline, a field of study, rather than a form of pure entertainment.

Luhrmann brought back the ability for all to enjoy and understand Shakespeare, rather than the

privileged, educated few.

 By placing the original dialogue in a new historical context - the 1990s in “Verona

Beach”, a play on Miami Beach - the filmmakers brought new life to the text. There is

heightened diversity among the cast - Harold Perrineau, a Black actor, portrays Mercutio (who is

also presented as gay in this adaptation), and John Leguizamo, a Hispanic actor, portrays Tybalt.

The Capulets are portrayed as Hispanic, with heavy Catholic symbolism tying the family into

Latin American and/or Spanish roots, as Catholicism is the most popular religion in those

locations. Furthermore, the majority of the Capulets, excluding Juliet and her mother, speak with

a Latin accent. At the costume party, the Capulet boys dress honoring the Mexican Day of the

Dead, furthering this connection. The film has been criticized for this decision, as only Tybalt,

Fulgencio Capulet (Lord Capulet), and the Nurse are able to even appear as ethnically

ambiguous, let alone definitively Hispanic, while Juliet and Lady Capulet are white-passing in

the film and played by white actresses. There is tokenization as well as problematic portrayals of

Hispanic people by those who cannot claim that heritage (Jones). Furthermore, Mercutio, though

a revolutionary portrayal in this film, falls into the trope of the Black best friend whose death is a

sacrifice for his white friend (Radel).

Despite this, the often subtle, though present, racial differences contribute towards the

themes in the text in a way never done before. Luhrmann places the Hispanic Capulets in

contrast to the entirely white Montagues, creating heightened racial tensions which echo timeless

divides and discrimination between people of color and white people. The different ways that the

different crime families speak, intoning the text either with an American accent or a “Spanglish”

one, helps to deliver the original dialogue in a fresh way that represents modern people.

The delivery of the text, though the same words as the original, is also altered. Only Friar

Lawrence speaks in iambic pentameter, the formal style that Shakespeare wrote his plays in
(Peeke). The rest of the characters speak in modern speech that does not stress the same rhythmic

syllables as the original productions would have used. This is a significant change, but one that is

well worth it - it sets apart Friar Lawrence’s delivery of lines, particularly as he tends to

foreshadow the tragic events at the conclusion of the play/film, while also allowing the younger

actors, such as Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes, to be more free and fluid in the way they

delivered their emotional, youthful lines, presenting them as young, naive people rather than

seasoned, wise figures - which they certainly are not.

Since the release of the 1996 Romeo + Juliet, Shakespeare has continued to be adapted,

but rather than being held back by the original text and time period surrounding it, films and

theater productions have shifted to embrace modernity and presenting the text in a modern way.

In the years since its release - twenty-six - it has become a cult classic, with a lasting influence

on social culture for having “blasted the dust off Shakespeare” (Omar). With every rewatch of

the film, some new, intricate detail can be found, which draws viewers in. The film shot

Shakespeare into mainstream media, becoming immensely popular in the Box Office, grossing

almost $148 million worldwide following its release with over $100 million of that being

International (Box Office Mojo). This statistic indicates just how important improving

accessibility is when adapting Shakespeare - non-English speakers were not only able to

comprehend and enjoy the film, but rather love it and rewatch it again and again.

The film redefined how Shakespeare is perceived by the public, and this spurred further

adaptations based on Shakespearean classics. 10 Things I Hate About You, is a prime example.

Though not spoken in the original dialogue, and relatively loose in its ties to its source material,

The Taming of the Shrew, the film was a huge success when it was released in 1999, and was

certainly influenced by Luhrmann’s adaptation of Romeo and Juliet. This movie has also
remained a cult classic, as it reverses many harmful tropes of the 1990s as well as being a

“feminist” retelling of the “misogynistic” Taming that fans can get behind (Coll).

2006’s She’s the Man is also considered a highly successful and beloved Shakespeare

adaptation, taking Twelfth Night into the 21st Century and quickly gaining a cult following. The

basic plot points are all relatively the same in both the play and the movie, though the play has

Viola simply attempting to survive in an odd place as a woman by pretending to be her brother

while the movie is less out of survival and more for fun/equality in soccer (Renfro). Viola,

Olivia, and Sebastian’s plots are all incredibly truthful to the original play, and though this is a

lighthearted, goofy adaptation that does detract from some of the more poignant themes within

Twelfth Night, such as gender identity, queerness, and tragedy/loss, overall, it is highly loyal to

the Bard’s play.

Even the Globe Theatre’s Shakespearean productions have shifted since 1996 to better fit

the times and their audiences. Emma Rice’s 2016 production of A Midsummer Night’s Dream, for

example, takes on a “hipster” vibe and setting as well as a Bollywood influence. Rice herself

stated that “too often in [the UK] Shakespeare’s plays are treated like a kind of cultural medicine

that are supposed to do you good”, and her adaptation challenges the “all-importance” and

sanctity of the original text by spicing it up and modernizing it (Gardner). In this production,

Helena is made into Helenus, presenting queer love rather than the two straight-passing couples

of the original text. The primary cast is also almost entirely made up of people of color and queer

actors. This level of inclusion on the stage pulls in more people from the audience who can see

themselves in those performing. Even more, since the play is being performed at the Globe

Theatre, which is the original theater that Shakespeare’s plays were ever performed in, the
audience and greater society is able to seamlessly tie the past with the physical occupation of the

Globe and dialogue with the present and its modern issues and themes.

Before Romeo + Juliet (1996), Shakespeare was seen as a distant, unrelatable, and

privileged concept that was unreachable and difficult to be understood by the masses. After the

release of the film, however, this all changed - the movie, and by extension, the play itself,

became a pop culture phenomenon overnight, erasing hundreds of years of austerity and

“perfection” that the original play maintained that made it incredibly alien and foreign. This

public perception led to a sort of academic and recreational fear of the text, viewing it as

something only certain people - those with high degrees of education, higher socioeconomic

class, Native English speakers - could read, comprehend, enjoy, and share in. Now, Shakespeare

isn’t - and hopefully never will again will be - a thing to be dreaded or feared. Shakespeare’s

works are a fun, intriguing, relatable, and highly comedic canon, which is what Shakespeare

originally intended when writing them. They were always supposed to be entertaining, not

confusing. After all, Shakespeare didn’t write his plays for the rich and privileged, though he was

sponsored by the monarchy - he wrote them to please and delight the masses, who could afford

to attend the Globe and experience the drama of his written world.

Every single student in the public high school system in the United States of America

will be or has been exposed to some form of Shakespearean text, most likely Romeo and Juliet,

Julius Caesar, or Macbeth. This means that the majority of people in the United States will have

read Shakespeare before they turn eighteen years old, and their introduction will be in formal

education/academia. Shakespeare is fun to learn about now, and students are investing more

time, energy, and genuine interest in the original text, particularly when it is taught alongside the

1996 film or if they have watched it before. What would the world be like if more classic/ancient
works were broken down and out of their “ancient”, “revered”, “academic” boxes and translated

into pieces that appeal to modern pop culture? It would certainly open doors for people to enjoy

new forms of entertainment but also highlight new ideas and options for how to live their futures.

For example, as an English major, one of my focuses is Shakespeare and examining how it is

increasingly relevant to humankind with each coming year. In fact, the reason I decided to

become an English major was after taking a class on Shakespeare here at Penn State. Consuming

and understanding his works can truly change the course of lives. If I hadn’t taken that class out

of fear of misunderstanding or general fear of such iconic text, or had there not been a competent

teacher, or not even a class offered, I would not be who I am today. The gatekeeping of academia

needs to be deconstructed, and the creation of Luhrmann’s iconic film is just one of many easy

ways that those educational barriers are being torn down.

 Works Cited

Coll, Yenny. “How 10 Things I Hate About You Is Different From the Shakespeare Play.” Screen

Rant, 25 May 2020, screenrant.com/10-things-i-hate-about-you-shakespeare-differences.

Hess, Liam. “25 Years Later, the ‘Romeo + Juliet’ Costumes Are as Magical as Ever.” Vogue, 3

Nov. 2021, www.vogue.com/article/romeo-juliet-costumes-25th-anniversary.

Jones, Lily Margaret. “The Good, the Bad, and the Neutral: Race Theory in Romeo + Juliet.”

Film Theory in Baz-Land, 7 May 2016,

bazluhrmannisgod.wordpress.com/tag/race-theory.

McGlone, Allison. “Romeo + Juliet Soundtrack Guide - Every Song in the Movie.” Screen Rant,

21 Aug. 2021, screenrant.com/romeo-juliet-1996-movie-soundtrack-guide-every-song.

Omar, Yasmin. “Why Romeo + Juliet Is an Enduring Cultural Classic.” Harper’s BAZAAR, 4

Nov. 2021,

www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/culture/culture-news/a38131468/romeo-juliet-film.

Peeke, Dan. “Romeo and Juliet: 20 Differences Between the Play and the Movie.” Screen Rant,

17 Mar. 2022, screenrant.com/romeo-and-juliet-play-film-differences.

Radel, Nicholas F. "The ethiop's ear: race, sexuality, and Baz Luhrmann's William Shakespeare's

Romeo + Juliet." The Upstart Crow, vol. 28, annual 2009, pp. 17+. Gale Literature

Resource Center,

link.gale.com/apps/doc/A219520117/LitRC?u=anon~7b1d4924&sid=googleScholar&xid

=cb7bd1de. Accessed 13 Nov. 2022.

Renfro, Kim. “‘She’s the Man’ Is the Greatest Modern Shakespearean Remake.” Insider, 16 Mar.

2019, www.insider.com/shes-the-man-shakespeare-movie-2016-9.
“Romeo + Juliet.” Box Office Mojo, www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0117509.

“Romeo + Juliet (1996).” IMDb, m.imdb.com/title/tt0117509/trivia/?ref_=tt_ql_trv.

“Romeo and Juliet, Act 2, Scene 3.” The Folger Shakespeare, 12 Nov. 2019,

shakespeare.folger.edu/shakespeares-works/romeo-and-juliet/act-2-scene-3.

Schmidt-Rees, Hannah. “The Costuming of Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo and Juliet.” PERSPEX, 5

Sept. 2019,

www.per-spex.com/articles/2019/9/3/the-costuming-of-baz-luhrmanns-romeo-and-juliet.