9
out of
10
people found the following review helpful:
Characters so unmotivated and plot so contrived that it feels like one long SNL skit
Overall Recommendation:
1
out of
1
people found the following review helpful:
Shakespeared in the Heart -- And in the Funny Bone!
Overall Recommendation:
0
out of
0
people found the following review helpful:
Funny dialog but the Story is lacking and I am not feeling love for the characters.
Overall Recommendation:
Hendersonville, NC
March 08, 2013
P.2 – creepy smiles go around. The audience won’t know how creepy they are because we have no idea that tybalt is juliet’s cousin and lady capulet’s nephew. Throw in an indicator in the dialogue.
p.3 – unless you’re going for an anachronistic historical movie like A Knight’s Tale, then you should change the fruit. Banana’s would’ve been all but unknown in Europe at this time and certainly wouldn’t be in a street vendor’s possession. (update: after finishing the script I realize you ARE going for the anachronism, but that leads to problems in itself later in the script)
The flashback for Rosaline’s exposition is so on the nose. Is it even necessary? Can we tease out her motivations as the story moves along? It doesn't really motivate why she want to waste her time hurting Romeo or why it's important enough that she'd use her body and what's left of her reputation to do it.
What is Rosaline hoping to gain by meeting with Romeo? If it’s boredom then she’s not really trying to entertain herself. If it’s because she likes him then she’s sure not showing it. If it’s because he reminds her of someone that she wants to get back at then she should be acting as if that’s the plan (e.g. seducing him to lead him on and crush him or purposefully prolonging her taunting and torturing of him). Right now it feels unmotivated and plotted.
p.17 – things that fly in olden days don’t work when viewed by a modern audience without context. It’s going to be hard to sell a 16 year old playboy getting other teenage girls pregnant all over town. Especially if you’re playing up anachronism/modernism in the historical setting. It wasn’t unusual to have cousins marry but you make it gross because of our modern context. You can’t have it both ways by having 16 year old Romeo be a man that is impregnating teen women in that same modern context because by today’s standards he’s considered a kid and teen pregnancy is a stigmatism. I don’t think you have to be that obvious. Why do they need to have children? They could be just ruined women that he fooled around with, without being as explicit as showing a 16 year old is fathering lots of uncared for offspring.
You make familial connections almost entirely through description. Great for the reader but not practical on screen. Throw some of the associations into the dialogue.
p.20 – So Mercutio thinks he can turn Romeo, the greatest lothario of the city, gay? What?
p.24 – love montage: we don’t know what was in the letter Mercutio had her write, we don’t know what the plan is. Why the sudden change of heart. The audience will be confused as to whether they are really falling in love or if she’s just setting him up or if she intended to set him up but now she’s actually falling in love. Either which way it’s confusing and unmotivated to suddenly go from cold to kissing to love montage with no transition or motivation for the sudden change. I don’t know what she wants or hopes to get.
p.30 – Rosaline is supposed to be empowered but she doesn’t value her body (let alone her reputation) if she’s willing to have sex with Romeo, a guy she doesn’t even like, just to get a different, much older man. It’s all kind of gross. If she needed Paris as motivation to ruin Romeo then why did she start the plan in the first place? Why would the audience want her to succeed with hurting Romeo or getting Paris? There’s nothing about her that is very likable and nothing about her goals that are very worthy.
p. 34 – What could possibly be the Friar’s motivation for (seemingly) always helping out a kid that is creating bastards all over town? I’m pretty sure he would frown upon sex out of wedlock not to mention multiple partners and bastard children. Most characters seem unmotivated in this script and are bent one way by the original story of Romeo and Juliet and then bent another way to fit them into this plot. In the original the Friar is helping true love unite for the purpose of marriage and Romeo wasn’t a complete dog. In this version if you drastically change Romeo’s character you can’t have the Friar behave the same without drastically changing his character.
p. 38 – why make up a Romeo rape story??? Is this part of the plan? We don’t know the plan so we have no idea. Would Rosaline or Mercutio really want Romeo killed? Can the audience be expected to care about Rosaline if she lies and puts Romeo’s life in danger? Why should we care about a person like that?
p.44 – convenient and awful cheat on the audience. How exactly did Romeo’s dad talk Lord Capulet out of letting the guy that raped his niece off scott free? Prince Escalus hands out death penalties for simply disturbing the peace but rape can be brushed off?
p.47 - sending out invites on the day of the party???
p. 48 – servant’s motivation for following Rosaline’s orders? Apparently she has a bad rep. Probably everyone in the house knows she’s getting kicked out, and Lord Capulet is the servant’s actual boss and a person that would personally kill whoever invited a Montague. It’s so contrived and unmotivated. At the very least, Rosaline has nothing to lose and could easily invite Romeo herself. If the servant knows who Romeo is then the servant also knows he will be in deep trouble for inviting him. You’re telling us that servant is willing to risk the hell that breaks loose if Romeo shows up (and Lord Capulet only gave the invite list to one person so there’s no shifting the blame) just so Rosaline won’t ruffle his collar anymore?
By page 50 we still have no reason to care about Rosaline and what she wants. She seems like an evil schemer with no heart, no morals and a superiority complex. You could make her much more sympathetic if the rumors about her were untrue. Or if she wasn’t trying to destroy Romeo just so she can get something selfish for herself. She behaves like a villain more than a heroine. She also tells Mercutio to get over Romeo and that there are other men out there. But isn’t the same also true for her infatuation with Paris? Why go through some elaborate scheme to try and get an older man that rejects he because she’s not a virgin? Even if we liked Rosaline we wouldn’t want her to end up with a guy like that.
I believe Mercutio’s love for Romeo more than I believe any other love connection put forth in the entire script. I would want to see Mercutio use the potion to make Romeo fall in love with him. If Mercutio wants him as much as we believe, then why wouldn’t he try this one last thing before giving up on the love of his life? Why not steal the potion from Rosaline or change the plan at the last minute so that Romeo sees him first? You’re making Mercutio the selfless and most interesting character but he’s not the protagonist and it just makes Rosaline seem all the more shallow and selfish.
P.64 – Rosaline is engineering Romeo’s great speech, but that only works if you set Romeo up to be a not very charming or eloquent guy. However, most of the script Romeo speaks poetically and Rosaline speaks like a girl from modern times that never learned elocution. Yet, he needs her help thinking up flowery things to say??
Romeo is given a greater character arc than Rosaline. Her only insight and change seems to be that she recognizes that she needs friends?
p.79 – the trouble with trying to fold too much of Romeo and Juliet into this story is that you’re folding tragedy into a very broad comedy. There’s a serious tone shift once you kill Tybalt, but then it shifts right back into comedy. Very jarring.
Rosaline keeps asking people to trust her when no one really has any reason to trust her at all. She didn’t have a single scene in which she wasn’t deceiving someone.
p.86 – Rosaline has already used the “faking your death” trick to help Mercutio. It’s boring to re-use the same solution to a problem. Why couldn’t she just help them run away? You’re bending over backwards trying to fit the original story points into the new structure with Rosaline as the architect and it just doesn’t work.
It seems like your thread for Rosaline is “Rosaline wants a man” so then she tries to get Romeo for reasons unknown till Paris comes along and she tries to get him but then there are pages and pages where she gets sidetracked and instead helps Mercutio get a man and Juliet get a man and then finally she goes to another country where she gets a native American man. That shows how convoluted and unclear the story gets by trying to merge too much of Romeo and Juliet into the plot. If the major dramatic question is “will Rosaline ever find love?” then too much time and too many pages are wasted with a relationship with Romeo that she knows isn’t going anywhere and then helping Mercutio and Romeo find love. If the major dramatic question is “Can Rosaline bring Romeo and Juliet together before their families destroy one another?” Then there are too many pages wasted on trying to get Paris, trying to seduce Romeo to break his heart, etc. The script lacks focus, a clear goal, a likeable protagonist and motivated characters. In the end, I don’t think Rosaline is a changed person or has really learned much. Romeo and Mercutio go through much more dramatic life transformations. Make Rosaline likeable if she’s the hero. Give her a clear goal that the audience cares about (not winning over some shallow old man). Make sure all character actions are motivated by what they want and need whether it fits the original Romeo and Juliet or not.