IMDb > Romeo and Juliet (1936) > IMDb user comments
Romeo and Juliet
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv schedule
Awards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotes
Fun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

IMDb user comments for
Romeo and Juliet (1936) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 31 comments in total 

19 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :-
Top Stars In Lavish, Intelligent Production, 8 July 2002
10/10
Author: Ron Oliver (revilorest@juno.com) from Forest Ranch, CA

ROMEO AND JULIET, the scions of old Verona's two most powerful families, become the playthings of fate & the fools of fortune.

This was a Very Big Film for MGM in 1936. No (reasonable) expenses spared. Not only was the Studio tackling The Bard for the first time in a major way, but the extreme celebrity of the original play guaranteed a great deal of public attention. Several choice roles were available for MGM's brightest stars and the part of Juliet would be the desire of every young actress on the lot.

Almost predictably the role went to Norma Shearer, who, as Irving Thalberg's wife, could almost pick & choose what she (or Irving) wanted. However, it should be stated at once that she is splendid in the role. Sweetly demure, innocent, apprehensive, fiercely protective of her love & recklessly heedless of her fate - she is Shakespeare's heroine.

She is matched by Leslie Howard's Romeo. A bit giddy at first with puppy love, he quickly matures into a tender lover & vengeful killer, finally willing, like Shearer, to forego all of his Catholic teaching and commit self-murder, thus dooming himself to Perdition.

Although decades too old for their roles (Juliet was 12, Miss Shearer 34; Romeo about 16, Mr. Howard was 43) they understand and speak their lines much more beautifully & proficiently than any teenager. Shakespeare's lines are really verse of a high order and demands skill & maturity. Howard & Shearer certainly have no problem there. Nor were they the only members of the cast whose ages were rather past the prime.

In his only feature length Shakespearean film, John Barrymore amply displays his celebrated talent in a bravura performance as an aging, sottish Mercutio. Barrymore understood the character thoroughly and he turns this strange, brilliant man into one of the film's chief treasures. Interestingly, much of his dialogue is rather scatological & gross, but being Shakespeare it seems to have flown under the radar of the Hays Office.

Edna May Oliver steals nearly every scene she's in as Juliet's waspish, eccentric Nurse. Basil Rathbone makes a fiery, insolent Tybalt. Reginald Denny adds a touch of distinction in the throwaway role of Benvolio, while wonderful old Sir C. Aubrey Smith & Violet Kemble Cooper are colorful as Juliet's parents.

At first blush, Andy Devine seems an odd choice for a Shakespearean production, but he is very competent as the Nurse's simpleminded servant.

Somewhat lost in this excellent cast is English actor Ralph Forbes in the rather thankless role of the County Paris. His is a somewhat sad story. Although replete with talent & charm, he still never quite reached the top echelons of stardom. He would have made a great Romeo.

Movie mavens will spot Katherine DeMille as the fair Rosaline (her cousin Agnes de Mille was the film's choreographer) and Ian Wolfe as the impoverished apothecary, both uncredited.

The film has wonderful production values - the sets, costumes and background score (borrowing themes from Tchaikovsky) all of the highest quality. For a small chuckle, watch closely during Juliet's dance at the Capulet ball - one of the dancers behind her steps on her dress hem and nearly trips. It's very fast, but worth catching.

Was the above comment useful to you?

22 out of 26 people found the following comment useful :-
A rare screen gem that far surpasses any other film of Norma Shearer's, 24 November 2001
Author: ladymarylasenby (fuzzyria@aol.com)

This movie, unfortunately, is not one of Norma Shearer's most famous. Even more unfortunately, it is not often given due credit: it is one of her very best. While some tout the film as slow-paced and unfittingly rigid for a film interpretation of one of Shakespeare's most famous plays, in truth it is a lush and hauntingly beautiful production that, in an instant, makes one forget that Leslie Howard and Norma Shearer ever acted in anything else. The impact they make upon the viewer is unshakable.

Leslie Howard, of gentle voice and fair form, plays Romeo, son of the house of Montague, who is branded simply by his name a sworn enemy of the Capulets, whose daughter Juliet he loves. Norma Shearer adapts her beauty to the role of Juliet and makes her character radiate a delicate, ethereal grace which is, nonetheless, suitably innocent. Both speak the elegant, refined words of Shakespeare with a strongly believable conviction and are perfectly paired, despite their ages.

The ever-brilliant John Barrymore gives a flawless performance as witty, merry Mercutio, and Basil Rathbone redefines the meaning of a tyrant as the violent Tybalt, cousin of Juliet, who desires nothing more than to shame all members of the house of Montague.

The settings are as decadent as one would expect those produced by MGM to be, and the costumes, designed by Adrian and Oliver Messel, transform an entire cast of normal everyday actors into players in a beautiful drama. Although two hours and six minutes long, Romeo and Juliet has a relatively fast pace, and although one is left awestruck by the breathtaking last death scene, the viewer is not emotionally exhausted over the course of the movie. Romeo and Juliet is a true screen classic, and one like it is seldom encountered. If you see nothing else, you must see Romeo and Juliet.

Was the above comment useful to you?

12 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
starry night by mgm, 27 June 2002
7/10
Author: didi-5 from United Kingdom

The lavish treatment given to this by MGM and Irving Thalberg (his final production showcasing his wife Norma Shearer as Juliet) does work, as do the mature lovers and their supporting cast (Leslie Howard fitting the part of Romeo perfectly, John Barrymore and Basil Rathbone out-swashing each other as Mercutio and Tybalt), Edna May Oliver as the Nurse, typically loud, and Ralph Forbes as a bizarre Paris (no, I can't see why Juliet would want to marry him either, despite her parents' wishes). The music is lovely, despite being stolen from more classical stuff, the settings are perfectly in tune, the verse is spoken with some feeling and inspiration. Why this version doesn't get seen more often I don't know (not even on video in the UK).

Was the above comment useful to you?

14 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
The Best of Cinema's ROMEO AND JULIETs, 5 May 2004
10/10
Author: EightyProof45 from New Jersey

This is quite simply the best version of Shakespeare's beloved tragic drama that has ever hit the screen. A quintessential problem with the play is that its characters are not at all well-suited to film. The stage allows middle-aged experienced actors to play the parts, for the distance between an audience and actor on the stage can supply all necessary illusion. The intimacy of the camera makes a demand, however: either sacrifice this understanding for youth or sacrifice the youth for understanding. The title characters are supposedly meant to be only in their mid-teens, but to successfully portray them, an experienced mentality is needed, and so it is imperative that the latter sacrifice be made. On film, rarely does the depth the two characters require come forth, instead substituted with this youthful energy. This has allowed plenty of young, age-appropriate actors to deliver perfectly horrible performances as the young lovers. When Franco Zeferelli produced his overrated version of this tale in the 60s, he cast Olivia Hussey and Juliet and Leonard Whitting as Romeo...and the two made Romeo and Juliet teenagers with no sense of real love and instead horny teenage lust. By casting Norma Shearer (around 36) and Leslie Howard (over 40) as the two, M-G-M lost the supreme youth, but gained a near-perfect asset of understanding of the characters. Shearer's delivery is perfect, particularly in the spine-tingling rendition of Juliet's death-contemplation monologue just before she takes the poison. Leslie Howard nearly matches her with his Romeo, throwing some lines at the audience in a totally new, fresh, and unexpected way. Edna May Oliver perfectly captures Shakespeare's Nurse, filling her with both bawdy humor and genuine care for Juliet's well-being. As Tybalt, a role cut down from the original length but nonetheless impressive, Basil Rathbone is astonishing; he earned a Best Supporting Actor nomination for his work here. Also of note is John Barrymore, whom I have read was at times totally ossified while filming his scenes. His age really shows, and he is no longer the leading Baron from Grand Hotel, but his controversial performance is, if not to all minds good, at least totally engrossing. He was at a time the most celebrated of all Shakespearean stage actors, and this film marks his only completely recorded performance in a sound film of the Bard's work; this makes the film further noteworthy. To add to this pedigree cast, M-G-M put their top technical men on the job. Adrian and Cedric Gibbons perfectly capture the look and flavor of the play with their elegant costumes and sets. The art deco, sleek look ingeniously blends modern architecture with what is expected from Shakespeare's day. The camerawork is brilliant also, and Herbert Stothart's blend of Tchaikalvski's haunting Love Theme and original music creates just the perfect musical score. All of these elements combine to create the first truly great Shakespearean film adaptation, and also one of the best films of the era, period. Far superior to Zeferelli's version, and any other one I've seen, George Cukor's Romeo and Juliet is another masterpiece from one of the all-time great directors, who helmed such classic, well-regarded productions as Dinner at Eight, David Copperfield, The Philadelphia Story, and Adam's Rib.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
No Tale More Tragically Told, 4 November 2007
8/10
Author: bkoganbing from Buffalo, New York

Despite the fact we have a 47 year old Romeo, a 36 year old Juliet, and a 54 year old Mercutio; George Cukor's production for MGM of Romeo and Juliet manages to entertain and well.

Of course these protagonists are all teenagers, but these players have all played romantic parts in an age when romance was not something to be cynical about and they do fit their roles well. No Romeo was ever more dashing than Leslie Howard or a Juliet as passionate as Norma Shearer.

John Barrymore as Mercutio is a bit of an exception. I look at him and I think of another Shakespearean character who simply doesn't want to grow up and spends his time with the young blades of his day at the tavern. That would be Falstaff in Henry IV in both parts and if you think of Barrymore's Mercutio in that way, his interpretation makes a lot of sense.

My favorite in this film has always been Tybalt and Basil Rathbone plays him with fire and passion. Rathbone got an Academy Award nomination, the first of two, for Best Supporting Actor in the first year Supporting Actor Awards were given out. He lost however to Walter Brennan in Come and Get It. He's just spoiling for a fight with some Montagues and in the end he unfortunately gets one.

Romeo and Juliet is insightful into the Italy of the times. Italy was a geographical expression not a nation. In fact it was ruled mostly by the German entity, the Holy Roman Empire. But inside the empire and out it was a succession of petty states, constantly at war with each other. Sometimes the causes of the wars were long forgotten, but the hostilities took on a life of their own.

Right down to a couple of wealthy families in the small town of Verona where the prince there has his hands full trying to keep the Montague and Capulet feud from spilling over into violence every time some of them meet in his town.

With this background a young prince of Montague just getting over another bad romance and a princess of Capulet whose father has her slated to marry another meet and fall in love. Even when they find out their respective pedigrees, it makes no difference.

In fact the idea that love can bridge all barriers is what I believe makes Romeo and Juliet as popular as it is. It's a lesson people and nations could learn.

Norma Shearer got an Oscar nomination for playing Juliet, but lost to Luise Rainer in The Great Ziegfeld as Best Actress. George Cukor and the film itself also were up, but lost for best director and best picture.

Andy Devine plays the small part of Peter, a Capulet servant and I'm sure you're wondering what Andy Devine was doing in Shakespeare. So did he when he was cast in the part. The story goes that he went to George Cukor and told him he hadn't foggiest idea what he was doing in a classic Shakespeare play, he'd never done anything like this. Cukor supposedly told him, that was to his credit and that he would be the only member of the cast who would not be telling him how to direct the film. Turned out Cukor was right, but the film got made.

And that's definitely for the better.

Was the above comment useful to you?

10 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
An English teacher shares her views, 7 June 2003
7/10
Author: Mistresschaosia (beccas_best@yahoo.com) from Texas, United States

While I was looking for new materials to help teach "Romeo and Juliet," I found the 1936 version of the play and naturally I was intrigued. I'm assuming that most people know the basic plot and have seen other versions of the film, if this is not the case you may want to stop reading and keep the surprise for viewing.

This version is faithful if not to the exact order of all the dialogue then to the acts and scenes written by Shakespeare. For those teachers that are looking for a version that explains how the letter from Friar Lawrence never reaches Romeo and the reaction of the local populace to "Plague," this is the version that does it very well. Not only do we learn why Friar John never gets to Romeo but we also get the death duel between Romeo and Paris, a scene that has been cut out of every other version I've seen. Plus we get the closing moment of peace between the families. However, the death of Lady Montague is omitted.

The movie leaves a little to be desired by modern audiences and the typical class of high school freshman many need some heavy prep work to get them ready to view "black and white" and "old" as something other than "lame." But, I think that segments of the film would be well worth showing to the class and viewed as a treat and not a torture when it's not the whole product being shoved down in one lump.

I recommend checking it out as an additional resource to add a balanced movie perspective to the characters Shakespeare created. The main problem with it is the age of the actors playing the parts of all these young people. Leslie Howard is 40 years old. Norma Shearer must be of a similar age and it shows in some of the scenes. The age of the people supposedly playing teenagers does strain credibility and at times the acting leaves a lot to be desired. They don't convincingly play "passion." You can chalk the overall feeling of muted emotion to the era because at times the emotions do come through brilliantly.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
A Nice Surprise, 14 December 2005
8/10
Author: Chris Kemp from California

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I am sick and stayed home from work and TCM was having a Shakespeare festival. Having never heard of the 1936 version of this play, I decided to give it a whirl even though I am not a Leslie Howard fan. Well, I have to say I was pleasantly surprised. Even though I knew the actors were too old for their roles (turns out they were even older than I thought!) their delivery was great, which is important when you are delivering the Bard's lines verbatim, for the most part. Even if you couldn't catch the literal meaning of the words, the actors provided plenty of non-verbal context for you to pick things up.

I thought Norma Shearer was going to be awful at first, as one other commentary has mentioned, her first scene makes her look a little too mindlessly sweet and giddy--almost like the look is plastered on her face--but she really came through in the end. When she had to amp up the emotion, she did, especially considering the Hayes Code was now being enforced.

I have to concur that one of the best character acting jobs I have seen in thirties cinema is by the lady who plays Juliet's nurse (her name escapes me). She switches from broad comedy to contemplation effortlessly. Basil Rathbone is appropriately vile, oily and relentless. I would have liked to have seen a little more of him on screen. And I had no idea that Barrymore's turn as Mercurito was so controversial until I read the other comments here. His approach may be an eccentric, idiosyncratic one, but it is absolutely riveting (although I CAN believe he was in his cups when filming it--which somehow makes it work all the more).

I do agree that there may be a whiff of the effeminate running through the major male characters (I had to chuckle when Romeo says his love for Juliet has made him "effeminate"), but that didn't ruin the picture for me at all. The sets are great. Though limited, they are attractive and the shots are well thought out. ****SMALL SPOILERS*** I found the crypt where the final sword fight takes place something right out of a Universal horror movie, and somewhat reminiscent of Fritz Lang, too.

A modern audience may find this version of the play a little deliberate, but I thought the Franco Zeffereti version, once you get past the novelty of its modern approach to sex and passion, dull at its heart, and this is much better than seeing John Luguzamo brandishing a weapon. Check it out.

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Sumptuous sets and costumes, good swordplay and only Shakespeare's words make this movie a pleasure for those who know the play., 23 November 1998
7/10
Author: Arthur Hausner (genart@volcano.net) from Pine Grove, California

This production got glitsy treatment by production head Irving G. Thalberg, who was showcasing his wife, Norma Shearer, playing Juliet: two years of research, a crew sent to Verona to photograph parts of the city; reconstruction of Verona's Church of San Zeno on the back-lot; thousands of extras; beautiful costumes and sets, etc. Although the screenplay was shortened, Thalberg also insisted that only Shakespeare's words were to be used in the dialogue. That would be a pleasure for those who knew the play, but a bane for those who didn't. Shakespeare's spoken dialogue isn't very easy to understand. Like any foreign language you learned a little bit in school, you can translate written material and get the gist of what is going on, but try deciphering normal speech in that language and you will be lost. I had a difficult time understanding some of the speeches (almost nothing that John Barrymore was saying) - they flew by me too fast. (On the other hand, I studied Hamlet and Macbeth in school and relish watching movie versions of those plays.) Still, I enjoyed this film, since I knew the general story, and there were sections that didn't tax my knowledge of Shakespearean English. Some of the lines were beautiful. I never new that the expression "star-crossed lovers" was Shakespeare's. Edna May Oliver's comedy was superbly played and the acting of the rest of the cast was excellent. The title characters were supposed to be teenagers, so that both Leslie Howard (at 54) and Norma Shearer (at 31) were a bit old for their parts, but that was a minor point. My advice to anyone wishing to watch this film: read the play first!

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Fine Cast & Lavish Production, 21 November 2005
Author: Snow Leopard from Ohio

The fine cast and production make this adaptation of "Romeo & Juliet" a satisfying one, both as a movie and as a realization of Shakespeare's play. Most of the cast is matched up very well with their characters, and the lavish settings provide a good backdrop for the drama.

Although it's soon clear that Leslie Howard and Norma Shearer are quite a bit older than the original characters were, in other respects they are well cast. Shearer's eager innocence and Howard's refinement fit together well, and although they are clearly not the teenage characters of the original, their romance is believable and convincing in itself.

The other roles include some nice casting. Reginald Denny as the loyal Benvolio, Basil Rathbone as the hard-hearted Tybalt, and Edna May Oliver as Juliet's bustling nurse are all enjoyable to watch. But the highlight of the cast is John Barrymore, who steals every scene as the fun-loving, ill-fated Mercutio, a character who is well-suited to Barrymore's strengths. It's a blessing that at least one of Barrymore's numerous Shakespearean roles was captured in a film for posterity.

The script abridges many of the scenes for cinematic purposes, and it does well in fleshing out the basic story with the duels, festivities, and other events, at times also dramatizing developments that in the original text are only mentioned by the characters. Overall, it is a well-conceived, well-executed, and enjoyable movie version of the famous story.

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Not a fan of Norma, 11 April 2001
Author: (patrick.hunter@csun.edu) from Northridge, Ca

Unlike so many of the other commentators below, I am not a fan of Ms. Shearer. In her opening scene, she gushily keeps herself wide-eyed and smiling--all the time acting innocent, while Olivia Hussey and other screen Juliets don't have to act innocent: they are innocent.

That said, this film has much to offer, despite its lacking the passion of other more recent versions. The verse is spoken well, and Barrymore is brilliant as Mercutio. Yes, he's pure ham---but a succulent one. His Mercutio is, as the character's name implies, mercurial as well as absurdist, ironic, and virile. Rathbone is like a living rapier and gets my vote as the best Tybalt the screen has ever seen. However, don't believe producer Thalberg's ballyhoo that every word spoken in this film is from Shakespeare's play: it isn't, although it's close.

Was the above comment useful to you?


Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another comment


Related Links

Plot summary Amazon.com summary Ratings
Awards External reviews Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history