

































Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202462

A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William 
Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet 

by Cli! Butler

Prologue: Romeo and Juliet in a series of Veronas
 “Two households, both alike in dignity” 
(Shakespeare 1.1.1), engaged in a long violent feud. 
A romance between “a pair of star-crossed lovers” 
(Shakespeare 1.1.6) known to the masses, o"en 
ending in death. #ese, of course, are identi$ers of 
William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. Despite the 
o"en (mis)representation of Shakespeare’s plays as 
an unreachable, elevated, “high and mighty” canon, 
the world unashamedly loves his tragic tale of the 
two doomed lovers, and in accordance with “our 
belief that Shakespeare’s plays, in order to be truly 
and fully understood, must be seen as well as read” 
(Anderegg), $lm is one of the most common ways 
of engaging with Shakespeare beyond the English 
classroom. #e most iconic scene from Romeo and 
Juliet is undoubtedly the balcony scene. Time and 
time again we follow Romeo as he explores the “light 
(that) through yonder window breaks” (Shakespeare 
2.2.2), the $ery sun that ignites his heart, and 
whether his Juliet is found in Natalie Wood (Maria, 
West Side Story, 1961), Olivia Hussey (Juliet, Romeo 
and Juliet, 1968), Claire Danes (Juliet, Romeo + 
Juliet, 1996), Gwyneth Paltrow (Viola de Lesseps, 
Shakespeare in Love, 1998), Emily Blunt (Juliet, 
Gnomeo & Juliet, 2011), or in Rachel Zegler (Maria, 
West Side Story, 2021), she always speaks again to her 
lover as the bright angel she has become—both for 
Romeo and the audience (Shakespeare 2.2.29) #en, 
“O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?” 
(Shakespeare 2.2.36) Juliet famously exclaims in 
response from atop her balcony, looking for her 
lover, her star-crossed lover that she is kept from by 
family and fate, but as she looks for her Romeo, she 
looks not for his name, but for the love-$lled escape 
she hopes to $nd. Whether her Romeo is found 
in Richard Beymer (Tony, West Side Story, 1961), 
Leonard Whiting (Romeo, Romeo and Juliet, 1968), 
Leonardo DiCaprio (Romeo, Romeo + Juliet, 1996), 
Joseph Fiennes (William Shakespeare, Shakespeare 
in Love, 1998), James McAvoy (Gnomeo, Gnomeo 

& Juliet, 2011), or in Ansel Elgort (Tony, West Side 
Story, 2021), he always replies to be called only 
love, and never again be Romeo (or by what other 
name he happens to carry) (Shakespeare 2.2.53-55). 
#e idea of the power held by names is prevalent 
throughout Romeo and Juliet both in original form 
and in all reinterpretations. #e story acts as a tale 
told by many other names than the origin, with many 
alterations, liberties taken, as di!erent directors and 
creators work to “attempt to illuminate one or more 
facets of Shakespeare’s meaning” (Anderegg). In 
$lm, “our culture has created, in e!ect a ‘new’ theatre 
for Shakespeare, with a new audience” (Millard), 
and throughout time, we have reinterpreted Romeo 
and Juliet repeatedly as new audiences emerge and 
develop.

Act One: Adaptation, Interpretation, and Re-
cognition of Romeo and Juliet
Act One, Scene One: Romeo and Juliet can be 
successfully adapted/interpreted as !lm
 As $lm interpretations of Shakespeare’s Romeo 
and Juliet gradually emerged into pop culture, they 
were met with criticism from scholars of literary, 
theatrical, and $lm disciplines in that the art forms 
are too far removed from each other in distinction 
to be merged in adaptational projects. However, 
Shakespearean text, by nature, invites adaptation, 
reinterpretation, and di!erences within perspectives 
and portrayals. Shakespearean $lm directors are 
meant to simultaneously "synthesize Shakespeare's 
verbal dexterity and $lm's visual power" (Crowl, 
qtd. in Borlik), which is in fact a di%cult task to 
perform well, but as proven by a long history of 
successful, critically acclaimed, and well received 
$lms, is entirely possible. Sidney Homan presents a 
very well written account of the arguments and ideas 
surrounding Shakespearean $lm adaptation:

#e extreme right position…holds that it cannot 
be done, that…the message is the medium. 



A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202463

#e media, in this view, are antithetical, and 
no successful or living cross-over is possible…
Moving to the le", we $nd the more moderate 
view that Shakespeare can, at best, only serve 
as a source of inspiration for the cinema. But 
the resulting product will bear little of no 
resemblance to the stage play…#e middle view 
holds that he can make the journey, but that all 
the verbal business of the plays must be replaced 
by visual, cinemagraphic equivalents. Much 
of the dialogue must go: if there are too many 
problems “$lming” the text’s verbal imagery, 
then new visual images, not originating in 
Shakespeare, must be found (Homan).

 
Homan presents these arguments as clear 
representations of the criticisms surrounding 
Shakespearean $lm, yet goes on to “argue that the 
most pro$table questions to ask are not whether the 
cinema is too visual for Shakespeare, or whether 
Shakespeare is too verbal for the cinema, but rather: 
are there any similarities of e!ect and therefore of 
meaning in the “worlds” being advanced by artists 
in sight and sound?” (Homan). #is presents a 
clear direction for cross-referential analysis of 
Shakespearean-based $lms: judgment based on 
e!ect and meaning rather than technique and 
authenticity. As Kenneth Rothwell comments, “In 
$lm, the aura of Shakespeare may be gone, but in 
the lingering a"erglow, the Shakespeare-on-$lm 
critic $nds a niche” (Rothwell). Shakespearean $lm 
can be processed through many lenses, theories, 
and from many di!erent disciplines with histories 
of subscribing to speci$c ideologies, but as Kamilla 
Elliot writes, “if we use all the theories, then we will 
arrive at a comprehensive picture of adaptation” 
(Elliot). As demonstrated extensively throughout 
time, adaptation of Shakespearean canon—
speci$cally through $lm—is not only possible but 
can be artistically and culturally signi$cant as well 
as economically successful in the greater worldwide 
market of cinema.

Act One, Scene Two: Romeo and Juliet is a perfect 
source to be adapted into !lm
 #ese $lms that reinterpret and adapt 
Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet are consistently 
evolving and changing to $t the audiences they are 
made for from version to version, $lm to $lm: they are 

not just interpreting Shakespeare, as Ariane Balizet 
would put it, they are re-cognizing it. “Re-cognition, 
however, goes beyond a purely interpretative gesture 
by challenging a seemingly basic understanding of 
the play. Re-cognition is not the suggestion of new 
meaning, but the destabilizing of traditional modes 
of viewing the texts” (Balizet). #ese $lms employ 
various tactics that make them more accessible to 
current audiences (current, of course, being relative 
to the time each was released), providing an easier 
way to access the greatly esteemed Shakespearean 
tragedy without the preconceived notions of 
pompous elegance, overly &owery speech, or 
pretention. Film’s integral role in modern American 
pop culture situates the media form as a perfect 
candidate to bring forth Shakespeare in an easily 
accessible, understandable, and relatable fashion. 
#e timeless narrative of Romeo and Juliet $nds itself 
as one of Shakespeare’s most reinterpreted for good 
reason: it has become more than just a play, it has 
become a legend, as Courtney Lehman deems it: 

Legends count on the $xed nature of their 
citational power regardless of changing historical 
contexts, the exigencies of genre, or the subjective 
predispositions of authors and audiences. 
Proceeding via a kind of cultural repetition-
compulsion, legends are driven by the force of 
inevitability, ultimately leading to widely known 
and in$nitely recyclable conclusions (Lehman).

It is this status as a legend that allows Romeo and 
Juliet to be constantly reinterpreted so e!ectively and 
successfully. In the commentary about Romeo and 
Juliet’s status as a legend, Chris Palmer writes, “#e 
story has so much potential that virtually any version, 
no matter how stereotypes or improvised, updated, 
or radicalized, will move its audience” (Palmer). 
#e general American public has a good grasp of 
the story’s major moments, characteristics, and 
plot points, providing for a shared knowledge that 
$lmmakers can and regularly play o! of and work 
from. #e balcony scene is well enough known to be 
recognized with or without the “traditional” balcony 
set. It works just as well at a swimming pool (Romeo 
+ Juliet) or a $re escape (West Side Story, Spielberg 
and Wise), and if a traditional balcony set is used, 
the audience reacts immediately in anticipation of 
the iconic lines that will soon follow in some version 



A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202464

or another. #e throngs of love, despair, frustration, 
violence, and being held apart from one’s passion 
pull at the heart of every audience member, and even 
as we know exactly how the story plays out, we watch 
it, again and again and again. As new players take the 
stage—in new costumes, new settings, even in full 
reconceptualizations—we continue to feel moved by 
Shakespeare’s great tragedy of star-crossed lovers.

Act Two: !e Film Representations of Shakespeare’s 
Romeo and Juliet
Act Two, Scene One: West Side Story (Wise, 1961)
 West Side Story is adapted from the Broadway 
Musical of the same name with music from Leonard 
Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim and is held as 
a great Broadway classic. It is set in the streets of 
New York City, the Montagues and Capulets are 
exchanged for the gangs of the Jets and the Sharks, 
and a new con&ict is based not on a family feud, but 
on racial tension between the white residents of the 
city and the Puerto Rican immigrant population. #e 
$lm follows the basic plotline of Romeo and Juliet, 
allowing space for musical numbers and situational 
commendations, and concludes with the death of 
Tony (Romeo) and Maria (Juliet) following Tony’s 
funeral procession, in which both Jets and Sharks 
carry the dead body o!-screen, with Maria, alive, 
following behind. #is iteration of the story appealed 
to a wider audience, building from the success of the 
Broadway musical while also employing a widely 
popularized medium in the movie musical format. 
West Side Story has had an extremely visible cultural 
impact, from Michael Jackson’s “Beat It” music video 
and countless other parodies and cultural references, 
to its inclusion in the Library of Congress. West Side 
Story has been recognized extensively as a great piece 
of art and a phenomenal example of greatness that 
can come from reinterpreting Shakespearean text 
into other areas.

Act Two, Scene Two: Romeo and Juliet (Ze"relli, 
1968)
 Ze%relli’s Romeo and Juliet is perhaps the 
most “truthful” adaptation. It is set in a truthful 
Verona during the renaissance period, and Ze%relli 
uses actors that are close in age to the characters 
themselves. #is iteration of Romeo and Juliet 
involves the essential ending as the original play, 
albeit with some variations in the accompanying 

events: Romeo dying from self-in&icted poison, Juliet 
dying by stabbing herself with Romeo’s dagger. #is 
$lm was received well by critics and audiences alike 
and was nominated for Best Picture by the Academy. 
Ze%relli’s Romeo and Juliet stands to prove that a 
(mostly) faithful adaptation can serve as a wonderful 
method of expanding the reach of a particular piece 
of literature. 

Act Two, Scene #ree: Romeo + Juliet (Luhrmann, 
1996)
 Baz Luhrmann’s Romeo + Juliet is the classic 
Shakespearean text and story fused with modern 
day (1990’s) pop culture. It mixes styles in a 
postmodernist pastiche that o"en resembles an 
MTV-esque aesthetic, and overall, “Luhrmann’s 
$lm creates a pop version of Verona that not only 
questions the traditional interpretation of the play, 
but also re-frames the way audiences cognize Romeo 
and Juliet” (Balizet). It ends in the same vein as 
the original tale, with Romeo succumbing to self-
administered poison and Juliet killing herself with 
Romeo’s weapon—in this rendition, a pistol. #is 
movie has had a phenomenally large cultural impact, 
which only seems natural due to its very culture-
present stylistic presentation. It also generated a large 
amount of box o%ce success and heavily contributed 
to Leonardo DiCaprio’s early fame.

Act Two, Scene Four: Shakespeare in Love (Madden, 
1998)
 John Madden’s Shakespeare in Love is perhaps 
the most unique recon$guration of the legend to be 
included in this paper. #is $lm centers on the poor 
playwright William Shakespeare himself during his 
love a!air with the wealthy Viola de Lesseps which 
inspires him to write the honored romance. It exists 
as a comedic parody of Shakespeare the $gure and 
of many of his works, as well as making jokes based 
on other writers at the time. “Kingsley-Smith, for 
example, argues that Shakespeare in Love ‘respond[s] 
to an authorial absence created by adaptation ... 
enacting a comic ritual in which the death of the 
Author is threatened but $nally averted” (Geal). As 
Yong Li Lan notes, “In Shakespeare in Love, the tragic 
ending of the play is a success in the real life of the 
$lm, and the tragic ending in real life is de&ected 
into the start of a comedy. #is circle of tragedy and 
comedy, that turns life back into art and endings into 



A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202465

beginnings, is accomplished by revolving between 
three scenes that dissolve continuously into each 
other,” as Viola’s exile to America inspires William to 
begin writing Twel$h Night.

Act Two, Scene Five: Gnomeo and Juliet (Asbury, 
2011)
 Kelly Asbury’s Gnomeo & Juliet is by far an outlier 
amongst the other $lms included in this paper, as it 
is a fully-&edged children’s movie. It centers on a 
feud between the blue (Montague) and red (Capulet) 
garden gnomes of two feuding neighbors’ yards. #e 
$lm has many nods to other Shakespearean works 
and to the man himself, as he appears as an animated 
statue during Gnomeo’s exile. #is is the only 
interpretation to conclude happily, as both Gnomeo 
and Juliet survive, and Tybalt is revived for the 
curtain call included at the end of the $lm. Gnomeo 
& Juliet found fairly high commercial success in the 
box o%ces and brought the Shakespearean love story 
to children worldwide—not as a tragedy, but as a fun, 
Elton John-$lled romantic comedy.

Act Two Scene Six: West Side Story (Spielberg, 2021)
 Stephen Spielberg’s take on West Side Story 
serves very similar purposes to the original in terms 
of the role of Shakespearean adaptation in modern 
culture. It stays in the same period with the same 
con&icts, events, and classic musical numbers. #e 
only major di!erence between the two iterations is 
the cinematographic styles and the order of songs 
and events. Spielberg altered the song order and, 
consequently, the plot. #is makes his rendition a 
stronger deviation from the original West Side Story, 
which still retains a similar distance to Shakespeare’s 
work as the original 1961 $lm. It was well received 
by critics but due to several factors, including release 
issues and a global pandemic, it turned out to be a 
major box o%ce &op. However, it is still regarded as 
a very high-quality movie musical, and a very good 
adaptation of the musical and original $lm.

Act !ree: !e Film Realities of Shakespeare’s 
Romeo and Juliet
Act #ree, Scene One: #e Ever-Changing Reality of 
Shakespearean Adaptation
 As Michael A. Anderegg states, “Shakespeare 
must be interpreted and evaluated anew every 
generation,” and these interpretations and evaluations 

o"en contradict or con&ict with their predecessors. 
How then, do we $nd the “reality” of Shakespeare’s 
play? Robert Geal argues that the pursuit of realism 
is useless in Shakespearean $lm, as he discusses 
how “Shakespearean cinema's self-re&exivity [is] 
praised by many critics as the medium's principle 
way to manipulate and explore the plays’ pluralistic 
themes and overcome realist $lm's monolithic 
interpretations.” Shakespearean $lms are able to 
recognize and address their origins within their 
narrative through subtle nods—for example, many of 
the smaller and more niche details in the background 
of Madden’s Shakespeare in Love, or, contrarily, the 
animated statue of William Shakespeare in Asbury’s 
Gnomeo and Juliet—which can connect the audience 
further to the material at view. Many arguments 
against cinematic representations of Shakespeare 
in contrast to theatrical or literary representations 
emphasize that the visual aspects of $lm may take 
away from the greater linguistic and depths of 
Shakespeare’s work but, as Sidney Homan argues, “In 
a sense, physical vision gives way to a metaphorical 
vision which at length admits a metaphysical vision,” 
showing how physically viewing the performance, 
for many, enacts the connections necessary to fully 
understand the breadth of Shakespeare’s work. 
Performance o"en aids understanding of the work, 
and as Courtney Lehman writes:

“Dramatic performance, as Worthen explains, 
should not be conceptualized as a straightforward 
‘performance of the text but as an act of iteration, 
an utterance, a surrogate standing in that 
positions, uses, signi$es the text within the 
citational practices of performance’ and which, 
as a result, achieved at least a semi-autonomous 
existence apart from the text.” 

Cinematic performance can give actors the 
opportunity to perform in an autonomous 
existence, removed from the text in situations 
such as Shakespeare in Love, West Side Story, and 
Gnomeo and Juliet, where the performance material 
is far enough removed, in part, from the original 
Shakespearean source that the performance can exist 
entirely alone without any audience knowledge of 
the Romeo and Juliet story, albeit at a possible lesser 
level of appreciation and understanding of the $lm’s 
purpose. 



A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202466

Act #ree, Scene Two: #e True Reality of 
Shakespearean Film
 As Kenneth Rothwell asked in a 2001 article, 
“Shakespeare $lms still trigger the cry: ‘Is it 
Shakespeare?’” (Rothwell). To which, of course, the 
answer is: yes. #is question directs one back to the 
question of the reality of Shakespeare: how do we 
$nd and de$ne the “reality” of Shakespeare’s play?
“For most viewers, clearly, $lm captures an illusion 
of reality not available in the act of reading or even in 
the theater…Do we want this kind of reality imposed 
on Shakespeare’s text? Or is Shakespeare, by the very 
nature of his poetic art, anti-representational? Perhaps 
the $lm medium inevitably betrays Shakespeare at 
the very source of his creative greatness.” (Anderegg)
Returning to Rothwell, 

“#is nagging interrogation concealed a deeper 
insecurity, what might be called ‘the anxiety of 
inauthenticity,’ the fear that any derivative of 
Shakespeare, mechanical reproduction as Walter 
Benjamin would put it, must necessarily lose the 
‘aura’ of the original.” 

#ere is a complex nature between theatre and 
reality, as one is o"en an escape from the other, but 
the con&ict between $lm and Shakespeare o"en 
arises from a misunderstanding that the only style 
available for $lms is realism. #ere are many ways 
to reveal alternative realities within $lm and leave a 
character’s experiences in a subjective state, wherein 
the audience is le" to determine what has happened 
on the screen before them. #ere are various points 
of criticism against adaptive, re-interpretive and 
re-cognitive Shakespearean $lms, but the bene$ts 
include bringing Shakespeare’s works to more 
audiences that would otherwise not be able to access, 
understand, or become engaged with Shakespeare 
through the airs of pretension and formality. 
      

“Shakespearean $lms (whatever their overall 
quality) are a rich source for the survey of 
trends and styles in $lm-making with the added 
advantage of a constant element: Shakespeare. 
We are privileged to watch Shakespeare’s 
plays as $ltered through a variety of cinematic 
consciousnesses as well as through a variety of 
theatrical traditions and social movements.” 
(Anderegg)

#e reality of Shakespeare is that it is for everyone, 
it has always been for everyone, and for any work 
to exist for a great, worldwide audience, it is always 
open to alternative interpretations without the loss 
of its quality as a work. A myriad of these alternative 
interpretations, and the most easily accessible of 
these for the public exists in $lms—namely, the $lm 
interpretations of the legend of William Shakespeare’s 
Romeo and Juliet.

Epilogue: Romeo and Juliet Everywhere: Verona 
and beyond
 “For never was a story of more woe / #an this 
of Juliet and her Romeo” (Shakespeare 5.3.320-321). 
Such are the $nal lines of William Shakespeare’s 
Romeo and Juliet, which are re&ected in some way 
or another in most of these $lms, except Shakespeare 
in Love and Gnomeo and Juliet, which both entail 
less deadly ends for our star-crossed lovers. #ough 
most versions of Romeo and Juliet tell the same tale 
without much alteration, the work is adored and 
appreciated nonetheless as if they were each a fully 
original, standalone piece. “Texts remain alive only 
to the extent that they can be rewritten and [...] to 
experience a text in all its power requires each reader 
to rewrite it" (Leitch, qtd. in Walker), and every new 
director, actor, $lmmaker, and audience member 
rewrites and recon$gures the story of Romeo 
and Juliet with every $lm released, watched, and 
rewatched. William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet 
truly is “A Tale Told by Many Other Names.”

Works Cited
Anderegg, Michael A. “Shakespeare on Film in the 

Classroom.” Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 
2, Spring 1976, pp. 165–75. EBSCOhost, search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=u'
&AN=12201101&site=ehost-live.

Balizet, Ariane M. "Teen Scenes: Recognizing 
Shakespeare in Teen Film." Shakespearean 
Criticism, edited by Lawrence J. Trudeau, vol. 181, 
Gale, 2018, pp. 49-55. Gale Literature Criticism. 
Originally published in Almost Shakespeare, 
edited by James R. Keller and Leslie Stratyner, 
McFarland, 2004, pp. 122-136.

Borlik, Todd. “Shakespeare on Screen 101.” 
Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 4, Oct. 
2009, pp. 318–20. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.



A Tale Told by Many Other Names: Films of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet

Aisthesis      Volume 15,  202467

com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN= 
44882117&site=ehost-live.

Elliott, Kamilla. “Rethinking Formal-Cultural and 
Textual-Contextual Divides in Adaptation 
Studies.” Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 
4, Oct. 2014, pp. 576–93. EBSCOhost, search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=u'
&AN=99263209&site=ehost-live.

Geal, Robert. “Suturing the Action to the Word: 
Shakespearean Enunciation and Cinema’s 
‘Reality-E!ect’ in Shakespeare in Love and 
Anonymous.” Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 42, 
no. 2, Apr. 2014, pp. 438–50. EBSCOhost, search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct= true&db=u'
&AN=95923149&site=ehost-live.

Gnomeo & Juliet. Directed by Kelly Asbury, 
Performances by James McAvoy, Emily 
Blunt, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures, 
Entertainment One Films, 2011.

Homan, Sidney. “A Cinema for Shakespeare.” 
Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 2, Spring 
1976, pp. 176–86. EBSCOhost, search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=u' 
&AN=12201121&site=ehost-live.

Lehmann, Courtney. "Strictly Shakespeare? Dead 
Letters, Ghostly Fathers, and the Cultural 
Pathology of Authorship in Baz Luhrmann's 
William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet." 
Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Michelle 
Lee, vol. 97, Gale, 2006. Gale Literature 
Criticism, link-galecom.uab.idm.oclc.org/
apps/doc/IWWRUJ624415866/LCO?u=birm9 
7026&sid=bookmark-LCO&xid=73a29498. 
Accessed 28 Nov. 2023. Originally published in 
Shakespeare Quarterly, vol. 52, no. 2, 2001, pp. 
189-221.

Li Lan, Yong. “Returning to Naples: Seeing the 
End in Shakespeare Film Adaptation.” Literature 
Film Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, Apr. 2001, p. 128. 
EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/log in.aspx
?direct=true&db=u'&AN=4769871&site=eho
st-live.

Millard, Barbara C. “Shakespeare on Film: Towards 
an Audience Perceived and Perceiving.” 
Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 4, Fall 1977, 

p. 352. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&db=u'&AN=7151554&site=
ehost-live.

Palmer, Chris. "What Tongue Shall Smooth #y 
Name?: Recent Films of Romeo and Juliet." 
Shakespearean Criticism, edited by Michelle 
Lee, vol. 145, Gale, 2012. Gale Literature 
Criticism, linkgalecom.uab.idm.oclc.org/apps/
doc/NDKHYU070951663/LCO?u=birm9 
7026&si=bookark-LCO&xid=699f331d. 
Accessed 5 Oct. 2023. Originally published in 
Cambridge Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 1, 2003, pp. 61-
76.

Romeo + Juliet. Directed by Baz Luhrmann, 
Performances by Leonardo DiCaprio, Claire 
Danes, 20th Century Fox, 1996.

Romeo and Juliet. Directed by Franco Ze%relli, 
Performances by Leonard Whiting, Olivia 
Hussey, Paramount Pictures, 1968.

Rothwell, Kenneth S. “Now the Twentieth Century 
Saw the Shakespeare Film: ‘Is It Shakespeare?’” 
Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 2, Apr. 
2001, p. 82. EBSCOhost,s earch.ebscohost.com/
login.aspx?direct=true&db=u'&AN=4769864
&site=ehost-live.

Shakespeare in Love. Directed by John Madden, 
Performances by Joseph Fiennes, Gwyneth 
Paltrow, Miramax Films, Universal Pictures, 
1998.

Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Romeo and Juliet, 
1597. Oxford: published for the Malone Society 
by Oxford University Press, 2000.

Walker, Elsie M. “‘Rewriting’ Shakespeare, Rewriting 
Films.” Literature Film Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 
2, Apr. 2009, pp. 82–85. EBSCOhost, search.
ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=u'
&AN=39885836&site=ehost-live.

West Side Story. Directed by Stephen Spielberg, 
Performances by Ansel Elgort, Rachel Zegler, 
20th Century Studies, 2021.

West Side Story. Directed by Robert Wise, Jerome 
Robbins, Performances by Richard Breymer, 
Natalie Wood, United Artists, 1961.


