Talk:Romeo + Juliet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Film (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Australian cinema task force.
WikiProject Shakespeare (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Florida (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida.
If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

References to use[edit]

Please add to the list references that can be used for the film article.
  • Walker, Elsie (2007). "Pop Goes the Shakespeare: Baz Luhrmann's William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet". In Welsh, James M; Lev, Peter. The Literature/Film Reader: Issues of Adaptation. Scarecrow Press. ISBN 0810859491. 

Business powers?[edit]

I don't recall the film expressly indicating that the two families had been replaced by two business powers...I saw no signs of a Montague Inc. or Capulet Corp. Or really anything to show they weren't just warring families like the original. Where did that description come from? (talk) 07:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Just after the introduction chorus / newscast, at 1:06 on the DVD, two high rises are shown (flanking the ever-present Jesus statue), topped with signs of "Capulet" and "Montague" respectively, each adorned with what looks like corporate logos (three hex cells for Montague, a panther (?) for Capulet). In front the of the Building with the Capulet sign, there is a rather run down apartment block with another Montague logo and sign reading "Retail'd to posterity by MONTAGUE CONSTRUCTIONS". Likewise, a building in front of the "Montague" high rise bears a sign that is hard to make out, but is seen later, at 13:33, with Fulgenico Capulet interviewed in front of it, reading, in the visible parts, "[...] Experience is by industry a[...]ved", adorned with the Capulet sign and logo. The montague construction sign is seen again as banner at 2:51. (talk) 21:09, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Request to add an external link[edit]

I run a website where we write synopses and spoilers for movies, and I'd really like to link to our Romeo + Juliet synopsis. I'm not trying to spam; I really think this would be useful and informative to anyone looking for a bit more detail on what happens in the movie. And this wouldn't break any Wikipedia rules concerning external links...but posting the link myself WOULD break the rules. I can only ask that folks here take a look and if anyone thinks it would be useful to others, to please post the link. Here's the synopsis:

Oh, I also fixed this discussion page; there were items without categories. Rasi2290

English language picture[edit]

While I appreciate the effort, wouldn't it be better to have a picture of the English-language release of the movie? -- Paul A 13:45 18 May 2003 (UTC)

I did not have the right one (as mentioned in the image), but now the problem is solved ;-) Fantasy

"MTV-like action?[edit]

I'm not sure the expression "MTV-like action" is very good - I can see what it means in the context (and the target audience that this imples for the film) ..but it isn't especially descriptive. I'll amend if I can think of something better. (tho I suspect it deserves a somewhat longer description) - SpinnakerMagic 17:19 16 August 2005 (UTC + 1)

Yes, I don't even know what MTV-like action means at all! (Jamandell (d69) 18:32, 9 September 2005 (UTC)) The MTV style action is the whirling, spinning scenes. the MTV extravagant sweet 16 style party, cars like off pimp my ride, houses like thoes on cribs. the music also contributes to the MTV-ness of the movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Personal POV[edit]

I think this article needs to change its personal point of view. It seems like an essay or homework, instead of article about a movie. HoneyBee

I don't have the expertise for this article, there are things to be consider:

1. Avoid personal POV 2. Add more information about the movie (cast, director, production, etc) 3. Good sources 4. Limited pics Anything else that we can add for this article?

Critical reception[edit]

The article mentions "mixed" critical reception and gives particular focus to a number of negative comments and reviews. I'd quite like to see some citation and context for this, since I remember the film being released to almost universal acclaim. I'm not saying there hasn't been any negative reaction (I note from a quick browse of IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes that Ebert in particular slammed it - but I could counter that by pointing to, say, Empire's review) - but it would be nice to see some evidence of the general critical context rather than simply some vague statements. Seb Patrick 10:59, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I HATED that movie. It stole an hour of my life, and I want it back... I'm waiting... -- 04:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

This isnt a page to blast the movie; its a page to discuss improvements for the films wikipedia page. if you want to bag the movie go onto fun. Lauren317 09:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The response section points out that reviews were overwhelmingly positive, but then the only review actually quoted is Roger Ebert's extremely negative review. This doesn't give a very balanced view. We should find a review that typifies the positive response and quote from it also. Capmango (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Los Angeles?[edit]

There's nothing in the movie that I see that states or implies that Verona Beach is a suburb of Los Angeles, or even that the setting is meant to be in the United States. Does anyone have a citation for this assertion? Capmango (talk) 17:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I've added a reliable source that says VB is a fictional city in Florida. Jim Michael (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


The article mentions that Candi Staton appears on the soundtrack, but I'm not so sure. I know a few volumes of the soundtrack exist, but not on the version I have. Istabo 21:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I think there are 2 or 3 soundtracks for this film. I know I own the regular soundtrack and the "second" soundtrack. I recall stocking three when I worked at Odyssey Records in 2000 in Las Vegas. Apple8800 (talk) 11:30, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Removed trivia section[edit]

I just removed the trivia section. A lot of the points were completely unecessary, original research, or were lifted almost verbatim from IMDB. Information like who auditioned for the role is completely irrelevent. Many actors/actresses audition for many roles in many movies. What's so different about this case? The list of guns is even more irrelevent and not even really a point of trivia at all, just random unecessary information. As for everything else, it could all be found at IMDB. That's why it's linked to at the bottom of the article, so people can go there and see this information rather than cluttering up the article with unecessary and unencyclopedic trivia points. --132 01:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The information about actors that were considered for a role and ultimately rejected is not irrelevant, and it is not trivia for people who actually study filmmaking. Capmango 15:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

If people who study filmmaking look Wikipedia up for sources, we're in for a grim future of cinema. --Soetermans 22:30, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler alert warning[edit]

I am curently in the process of watching this movie, and I was dissapointed when I read a piece that spoiled the ending for me. I really think a spoiler warning should be added in here. 21:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler warnings are against Wikipedia guidelines. Avoid anything that says plot summary or synopsis if you don't want spoilers. Or just watch the whole movie before reading any of the article. Capmango 14:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
But wouldn't everyone already know what happens at the end of Romeo and Juliet even if they hadn't watched the movie? :p

DarthSidious 12:31, 11 July 2007 (UTC)DarthSidious

Prince, Mercutio, and Paris[edit]

In the differences section, it says that Prince's relationship to Mercutio and Paris were absent from the film. I think this is right; the lines that establish that have been excised. An anonymous editor removed the Mercutio part while leaving the Paris part. I put it back, but if someone can point out the scene in the movie that establishes that Mercutio is related to Capt. Prince, then we can settle it here. Capmango 15:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Where's Postelthwaite?[edit]

Many viewers (including me) felt that one of the best cast members was Pete Postelthwaite, who gave us a very original and striking interpretation of Friar Lawrence. Why not mention him in the article? Tom129.93.17.229 (talk) 04:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC) Do it yourself. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 04:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

About the filming location[edit]

It says that the film was mainly recorded in Mexico City. However this is not entirely true. While some scenes were filmed in the Del Valle neighborhood in Mexico City, great parts of the movie were also filmed in Veracruz City. Indeed, you can see that the credits thank the government of the Veracruz state and both Veracruz and Boca del Río cities. (I know this because the record set was one block from my home).


Regards, Fernando Gómez.


Should the movie's plot synopsis be added? Angie Y. (talk) 02:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

  • Yes. Articles about films should contain a short section explaining the plot. AndyJones (talk) 06:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Then why isn't anyone performing one ounce of due diligence in writing one? Angie Y. (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Can I use those informations for Italian Wikipedia?[edit]

Hi, can I take some informations for the same voice in wikipedia italy transleated in italian? (sorry for my english) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stopthewar86 (talkcontribs) 10:07, 13 December 2008

Request for page protection[edit]

I think this article gets vandalized enough to qualify for page protection. I reckon semi-protection will do, what do you people think?--Chnt (talk) 16:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll watchlist the article and keep an eye on it to see if it warrants page protection. From what I can tell, the only serious vandalism is from one IP. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Not even remotely. Crotchety Old Man (talk) 17:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
"Serious" was the keyword here. :) I looked at the page history for edits in April, and it just doesn't seem like the article has been bombarded by anyone other than the one IP. Typical vandalism, but nothing on the scale on some other articles, especially for just-released films. In any case, if there is interest in page protection, WP:RFPP is the proper venue. —Erik (talkcontrib) 17:44, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Official site is dead[edit]

Shouldn't the link be removed? Or should it be archived? MagnoliaSouth (talk) 03:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine Petersam (talk) 08:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Not that it can be put into the article, but the website was up for ten years, and then some. It was weird the older it became, like stepping into the past in a time machine. Anyways, the site is at Wayback Machine now. Just type in I think: (talk) 14:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Strangely written summary[edit]

Has anyone noticed the last couple sentences of the summary? It looks like it was ripped from one of those Christian movie review web sites. I'm assuming this does not follow Wikipedia guidelines. (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)