NT Film: Romeo and Juliet (April 2021)

I've hesitated about writing this review. I prefer to assess a play rather than a film, and this was advertised to us as a film recorded in a theatre. Absolutely, theatrical elements are thrown at the viewer throughout the production, many of which I will enjoy discussing in this blog. Yet, the effect of a film, no matter how theatrical or Shakespearean, will always be different to the effect of live theatre.

For a start, the immediacy is changed. When watching a play, the audience has a real sense of this is happening now, even when watching a live broadcast (although this effect is best when you are in the audience next to the stage). With films however, we get a sense of this is pre-recorded. A great film will make it feel more immediate, but we always go into a film with the knowledge that there will be different angles, different takes, even different days all edited together to make up the version that we as viewers are presented with.

I realise this all sounds very biased and pro-theatre, even anti-film. I enjoy films as much as the next person, of course, and there are some films that just cannot be achieved on stage in the same way. I would even go as far to say that there are some Shakespeare films that are bloody fantastic and work better than some theatrical productions I have seen. But Shakespeare on film is difficult. It was written 300 years before the first film came out, and 400 years before the types films that we are accustomed to today. Editing is necessary, and certain theatricalities just don't translate very easily.

That said, I was very excited when National Theatre announced a new Romeo and Juliet - especially starring Josh O'Connor (I've been loving The Crown on Netflix). Let me start by saying what I loved about the film. 

Photo taken from National Theatre's website: 
https://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/shows/romeo-and-juliet-film

1. The intimate atmosphere. This is something that film does better than theatre. Thanks to close-ups, camera angles and narrow alleys created on set, the whole production felt close and almost private. You have a real sense of watching without the characters knowing - the polar opposite of what many of Shakespeare's characters go through. Romeo and Juliet's relationship was steamed up by this intimacy, but we also got up close and personal with the likes of Tybalt and Mercutio in the fight scenes, revealing the anger and pride on their faces and allowing us to watch as it turns to pain.

2. Tamsin Greig. I mean what's not to love. I'd recently seen her as Malvolia in Twelfth Night in which she was absolutely fantastic and presented Malvolio to me in a new light. I was sort of surprised when I saw that she was to play Lady Capulet - I hadn't considered the role to be very big - but as the play progressed I realised why. Many of Lord Capulet's lines were also given to her. In a genius move, the stereotypical family hierarchy of mean-father-controls-daughter was completely removed from the play, I think for the better. We know that mothers can be controlling too, and something about this change made her character feel fresh and modern. By having both parents' lines, Greig was tender and maternal when Juliet obeyed, yet cold and tyrannical when Juliet refuses to marry Paris. As a result Lord Capulet shrank into the background and became more of a passive figure, but the twist was intriguing for anyone already familiar with the play and allowed Greig to shine in this commanding role.

3. Juliet's bedroom speech. Wow. For me, this was Jessie Buckley's shining moment. An element of theatricality was brought into this monologue - for how else can a monologue be convincingly achieved - as Juliet's bed was moved away from the set and all other actors circled around her to watch. Her speech was delivered as what I can only describe as an anxiety attack, questioning every person involved and how this plan could go horribly wrong. Her pacing was perfect, lingering on each cause for anxiety just long enough for the viewer to consider it before moving onto the next tragic possibility.

However, there were some elements that just didn't work for me.

First of all, the drastic cuts. I've seen a review that calls it "Romeo and Juliet cut in half but twice as good" and I have to disagree. How can taking all the comedy out of the play possibly improve it?! For me, a key point of the play is to have the happy, comedic, everything-is-fine first half, then BAM Mercutio dies and its all doom-and-gloom tragedy from there. You're not supposed to feel impending doom right from the start, that's what Hamlet is for. 

Next, the love interest between Benvolio and Mercutio - don't jump to judging me because one thing I'm not is homophobic. I'm all for extra romances and gender swaps etc to speak to the LGBTQ+ community, and theatre is a fantastic way to celebrate this because ultimately theatre celebrates being human. BUT. In this particular production, it felt like a box ticking exercise. Both Mercutio and Benvolio had had their lines drastically chopped, and their characters suffered for it. You don't have time to get to know Mercutio before he dies (no, the Queen Mab speech alone is not enough), and Benvolio felt like more of a background character. Giving them a romantic subplot just did not make up for this, and in a film that is already restricted by time I feel they could have added something more effective instead. What, you ask? Try more of their lines.

Finally, and I hate to return to this, but putting Romeo and Juliet in a film doesn't always work. Yes, you get intimacy, but you also get access to how ridiculous the story actually is. Baz Luhmann gets away with it with his fantastically bizarre adaptation, and the Olivia Hussey version was exceptional. But when the actors (as brilliant as they may be) are not teenagers and it is played naturalistically, the whole story becomes difficult to digest. Combine that with the cuts to shorten the time they have to fall in love even further (Romeo only has two lines from when he sees Juliet to fall in love with her) and it becomes more and more implausible. Godwin attempted to fill these gaps with montages of Romeo and Juliet chasing each other around the stage, but it wasn't enough to justify how they fell so madly in love and why the consequences are as extreme as exile and death. In English theatre, sense rarely prevails, but it is asking much more of the viewer to follow Shakespearean reasoning in a modern film. 

NT Live At Home: Twelfth Night (2020)

I've been terrible at writing reviews lately thanks to lots of changes in my life, but I recently watched National Theatre's production of Twelfth Night starring Tamsin Greig. It was a phenomenal production for many reasons (hello, incredible set design), but rather than write a review gushing over how amazing it was (definitely 5 stars from me) I thought I'd focus on the element that interested me the most: Malvolia.

Tamsin Greig as Malvolia. Photo taken from:
https://www.comedy.co.uk/tv/twelfth-night-nt-live-2020/

Casting a female Malvolia, on the surface, feels like any other gender swap: interesting, modern, revealing. For me, Malvolia was all these things and more, and the consequences this might have for a modern audience are very exciting and multifaceted.

Traditionally, Malvolio's malcontentedness is wrapped up in class. He can be seen as an archetypal Malcontent, an outside character who is dissatisfied with the social structure and provides a commentary on the play and by extension on wider society. The irony is that he is an outsider as far as the other characters are concerned, but he is designed to be the most relatable and entertaining for the audience. Of course, Malvolia still does all of these things - the lines were not changed except for a few pronouns. But by changing the gender of the character, an extra layer was added and suddenly Malvolia represented so much more than class.

Gender speaks to today's society perhaps more than class. Looking at the Royals as a modern example, Kate Middleton was wholeheartedly accepted into the Royal family despite her being classed as a 'commoner' by the media at the time (though we all know she is far from common).

As an actor, Greig was fully aware of the implications of portraying a female Malvolia: "I was very nervous of making Malvolio a woman and therefore a lesbian, considering what happens to the character in the play, which is monstrous" (quote taken from her interview with the Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2020/apr/20/tamsin-greig-malvolia-twelfth-night-national-theatre). But I think that is precisely why this gender swap is so important. What happens is monstrous, and this production made an effort to point this monstrosity out to the audience.

Having an older Malvolia - perhaps of the generation between typically homophobic and LGBT accepting - gives the character a complex subtext. Gay marriage only became legal in the UK in 2013, and it was as recent as 1967 that consensual homosexual acts were legalised. The need to hide her feelings is fitting for Greig's character, and perhaps relatable to members of the audience who went through (or may still be going through) a struggle with their sexual identity due to the cultural pressures they grew up with. 

On top of the Malvolio-Malvolia switch, Fabian becomes Fabia and Feste is also female. The attacks on Malvolia are therefore attacks done by other women, again highlighting an area of society that is often not talked about: women can be incredibly cruel.