Movies  •  Critics  •  About
Existimatum  >  Movies  >  Romeo and Juliet  >  Reviews  >  ScreenRant

Sandy Schaefers Lacks Pure Heat in “Romeo and Juliet”

In response to Sandy Schaefer’s 775‑word review of Romeo and Juliet on ScreenRant

By ,

Sandy Schaefer provides a traditional and well-written performance in “Romeo and Juliet Review,” however one will notice a lack of passion and analysis in the critic’s words.

Juliet Review is hypnotizing with its three fantastic images scattered throughout. The placement is pure drama, and one may be frightened by the face of Paul Giamatti in the final image.

The opening paragraphs of Juliet Review detail the main plot of the latest adaptation, however there is little style or energy in the words.  Schaefer could have used some sort of hook or opening statement to put a personal stamp on the review.

Schaefer eventually moves on to her argument, which focuses on the lack of emotional sizzle, and also looks at the changing of source material. The critic states that the scenes are “word-for-word from the Bard’s original play,” even though it is widely known that screenwriter changed quite a bit of the text.

The fatal flaw of Juliet Review is the one sentence devoted to analysis of the lead performances. In such a widely known story, one will expect to know what distinguishes the lead actors from the past, or what they are lacking. The critic sadly abandons the reader on the proverbial balcony.

There is little to learn or contemplate  in Juliet Review. Schaefer makes vague statements, rushes through the supporting cast and offers almost no insight at all on the leads. The lack of sizzle will send the poor reader to another review.    

Quality of Writing Quality of Argument Spoiler Avoidance Presentation