"I slept in!" or "I thought I had more time before this was due!"

Since I missed class Wednesday, I'm not sure what we were supposed to write about for today, buuuut, I can talk a lot about more camp, parody and pastiche in the end of both the play and movie. I was thinking more about what we said on Tuesday, when Titus kills Tamora almost immediately after telling her about the fate of her sons. (Act V.III: lines 59-63) He doesn't even let her stew in it :) But then I saw it as just another example of how over the top the play is. Titus is just eager to reveal his plan and not able to hold it back. The movie even takes this a bit further I think, making him visibly giddy as he runs from Tamora to Saturninus to deliver their food, and the faces he makes while they're eating.

Another thing that came to mind when considering all this was when you had mentioned something in class about how the story felt to you like something some 14 year old boys had come up with. A "Dude, wouldn't it be cool if this happened" scenario. I think this exact thought was illustrated in the movie, with the little boy that opens the movie and then makes appearances throughout. To me that opening felt like we were looking at some boy using his imagination and just playing, having fun. Then from there we go straight to the play. It felt to me like we were experiencing the play through this kids mind, like some scenario he is making up in his mind while he plays with his soldier toys. This explains the over the top feeling of the play, and the seamless integration of motorcycles and tank looking things in the beginning. The kid isn't considering anachronisms, he's just imagining something "cool" to have fun. I believe that's how the movie presents the story, and I think that's exactly how Shakespeare wrote it. As something he thought was cool, funny, over the top, and most importantly, entertaining.

Parody, Pastiche, Camp

While reading the first act of Titus Andronicus, I actually got the impression that the play was written to be a parody. Even before I had read the section of the introduction that we read in class, which seemed to solidify my thought even more. The reason I felt this is because it seemed humorous and over the top (such as burying the 21 sons that we mentioned in class), but it didn't feel campy as I read it. It didn't seem to me as though Shakespeare was really taking the play seriously. For example, Act I Scene I around lines 145 to 160 is where Lucius reports back to Titus that they sacrificed Alarbus. When reading this I just got the feeling that Shakespeare was having fun with it. The way it came across to me was more like: "See how we've done our jobs, and chopped him up?" "Yes look how you did do your job" It didn't read like a normal conversation, but more like Shakespeare was poking fun with the dialogue, and going a little over the top. I think examples of such dialogue appear throughout the first act as well, and help to illustrate how Shakespeare intended this to be a fun, over the top parody.

Direction and Blocking

Our group made a few special decisions when considering directing the scene, and the blocking of the scene. We chose to inact all of scenes 2 and 3 from act 4. Personally I figured that the servingman should be enthusiastic when talking to Mr. Capulet. I thought he would want to serve the man that hired him well, and would then be willing to help find his master great cooks. So I tried to play the part accordingly. Then for Juliets soliloquy we decided that she should be distraught. She is asking herself all of these rhetorical questions and worrying about the future. So we figured she should be pacing about the stage, or looking nervous. We also figured she should have the dagger out and look at it, as if briefly considering it, before rejecting the possibility and placing it down. Other than these situations most of the rest of the blocking of the play was self explanatory. The conversations had the parents, nurse, or servingmen leaving after brief conversations, so movement on the play was easy. Other things like the nurse holding up clothes for Juliet, or Juliet drinking a vial of poison were also easy. Having those actions on stage were either already in the directions, or just made sense. This left most of the focus on Juliets soliloquy, as I mentioned. Thats why we chose to perform her soliloquy as we did.

Romeo and Juliet: The Film Adaptation

I think we left out an important scene in the movie, that also demonstrates Leonardo DiCaprio's choices as an actor, and how he portrays Romeo. The scene in which Tybalt chooses to confront Romeo shows some things we didn't mention in class. At first Tybalt confronts him, and Romeo wishes not to get involved, he tells Tybalt how he has no quarrel with him. Romeo even mentions cherishing the Capulet name. However Mercutio believes romeo to be letting Tybalt get away with insult. The ensuing argument results in Mercutio's death, Romeo then fights with Tybalt and ultimately kills him. In the reading it doesn't come alive quite as well as in the movie. DiCaprio makes Romeo seems truely happy, with his smiling and disposition. He even seems satisfied in telling Tybalt that he doesn't really know him. Another line that really stood out, was how DiCaprio presented the "Either Thou or I, or both, must go with him." from line 128 or Act 3 Scene 1. He really portrays Romeo as desperate with that line. As if he didn't what else to do, as if he really believed that he had to fight Tybalt, and one or both had to join Mercutio in death. That sentiment doesn't really come across to me in the writting, and I think DiCaprio was really able to show it to me in the movie, with his facial expressions and body language in that scene. You just got the feeling that he was really hurting, and desperate, and angry.