and I was able to appreciate it on the level I think the director intended. It was easier to take the second time, knowing what to expect.

There might be something to that - I do think it improves on rewatch, when you can dig into the details since you're not so occupied trying to figure out where they're going.

R + J was the first time I felt old in a movie theatre.

Many cultural references were completely missed by everyone in the theatre not sitting in my group, due to extreme youth.

Sigh.

Reinventions of classics are always tricky. Still, Great Performances did a variant of Tosca in the costume of Mussolini's Rome that leant a neat angle to the story.

(Yes, music, not literature, but the "modernization" of an existing story counts, I think)

Branagh's Hamlet rocks. Jacobi and Branagh glaring at each other--yum. And it finally made sense, seeing the entire political intrigue and Hamlet's uncertainty unfold.

I saw R+J in the theatre with another English major when I was in grad school, and we had great fun.

I like it, although Claire Danes was a little too old for Juliet IMHO, but I use it when teaching R+J and the kids freakin' LOVE it (ah, whenever I teach Shakespare, there is a rash of thumb-biting and people calling each other trollop and strumpet -- which personally, makes me SO happy!!)

R+J is a Renn. soap opera...no, a telenovela. It's a great vehicle to introduce kids to Shakespeare because it's so melodramatic and lets the whole difficult language barrier down and they can climb over it and explore the ideas.

I am thankful that I saw both R + J and Branagh's Hamlet on DVD and could fast-forward thru parts.

There was good stuff in each, and really bad stuff in each.

You know the story about how the script for Arsenic and Old Lace was intended as a tragedy, and the (agent/producer/whatever) said, "With a couple more jokes, it's a great comedy!" ? Someone ought to do that with Romeo and Juliet.

Another topic - a friend just told me that MSNBC's doing a piece on Great American Literachoor and they keep referring to Harper Lee as "he." Anyone else see this?

Also, what Erin said. I taught it in my ESL high school English classes always.

I did love Julie Taymor's Titus.

So did I, Laga.

I guess my problem with Too Stupid To Live is that, well, Too Stupid To Live = Me Cheering For Their DOOM.

Yep, this. OTOH, it is somewhat comforting to know that Shakespeare agrees. Since they do, you know, die.

It's a great vehicle to introduce kids to Shakespeare because it's so melodramatic and lets the whole difficult language barrier down and they can climb over it and explore the ideas.

Maybe because I grew up around theatre buffs and had already seen a fair amount of Shakespeare performed by the time we studied it in middle school, but we did R&J and Midsummer Night's Dream because they're The Plays You Teach To Children So They'll Like Shakespeare, and to this day I can't stand either one.

I did love Julie Taymor's Titus.

Second that love. Ebert had a great review of it where he basically said Titus Andronicus was Shakespeare doing a grindhouse movie, and it really does work on that level (the play I mean). That was the first place I'd seen Harry Lennix and I've kept my eye out for his name every since.