Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Romeo and Juliet  >  Reviews  >  Christian Science Monitor

Peter Rainer’s “‘Romeo and Juliet’ Lacks Heat and Romance (+Video)” Bores

In response to Peter Rainer’s 88‑word review of Romeo and Juliet on Christian Science Monitor

By ,

What can you say about Peter Rainer ‘Romeo and Juliet’ lacks heat and romance (+video)”? In 88 words, traveling at the speed of snide, it lacks depth, critical thinking, and was probably originally written as a half-formed tweet as soon as the movie was over.

What is amazing in such a brief encounter with content, however, is what is left out. And it’s the absence of Baz Luhrman! A rare gift, that. Rainer also fails to mention the 1968 classic of Romeo and Juliet, which also makes him stand out. It’s with what remains that sullies an otherwise fine effort.

For Rainer, this version is weaksauce in the hotpants department. No romance, no erotic moments, or lyricism. Much like his speedy review.

While not as insistent as some of his ilk that the leads are either too pretty or not pretty enough, Rainer dodges the usual by doing a half and half job. Juliet is pretty and boring, and Romeo is a cover model on Renaissance Faire Drag. The common motif in all these darts thrown at the cast is that the reviewers are mostly male. It begs the question on what they need from their Juliet and Romeo to make their loins sing. What can possibly satisfy the unsatisified reviewer who decries beauty and yet wants it, too?

Rainer has the good sense to be short, and it is just a shame that the greatest value of his review is what he leaves out.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation