Gnomeo and Juliet

Back in 1999, a computer generated search was underway for Woody’s hat and Hamm was using the window blinds in order to communicate with something outside. In response to Buzz Lightyear’s request to all the toys in Andy’s room for an update on the search, Hamm replies: “The lawn gnome next door says its not in the yard but he’ll keep looking.” Lee Unkrich (who would later direct “Toy Story 3”) joked on the “Toy Story 2” DVD audio commentary about an upcoming film staring lawn gnomes and then his fellow filmmakers in turn jokingly pretended that it was supposed to be a secret. While “Gnomeo and Juliet” has nothing to do with Pixar, it is funny to me that someone actually did come up with a film about lawn gnomes coming to life. I guess it goes to show how far ahead Pixar thinks compared to everyone else. Seriously speaking though, “Gnomeo and Juliet” unfortunately has nothing really special to offer the audience. The 3D wasn’t even noticeable, some of the characters were too cartoony and the adapted story did not fully resonate within the audience. The movie wasn’t a waste of my time but it is not worth the 3D price. Just rent it. The film has a lack of focus and center.

I have studied Shakespeare both in high school & university and I have also performed in “Romeo and Juliet” on stage. This adaptation did not really work for me because I felt the filmmakers had two goals with the story that ended up contradicting one another. They wanted to stay true to the original version of the tale but also make changes. These changes to the original tale of “Romeo and Juliet” clashed with the attempts to be true to Shakespeare. In more professional terms, it has self-referential problems. For example, Tybalt’s death was adapted quite well but then comes a big departure from Shakespeare’s play in that Gnomeo is presumed dead instead of being banished. I would have liked it better if Gnomeo was somehow expelled socially from his own garden. In the original tale, Romeo even says that he would rather have died than be banished. Because of this change, a lot of drama is eliminated from the movie. The opening lines of the film were good at first but then went too long. Also, it felt like the filmmakers in that opening “monologue” were discrediting their own adaptation. The last thing you want to say about your work of art is that it is cliché but despite that, you are reprising it once again. The audience has just been instilled with an attitude of “Let’s get this over with”. I thought you were supposed to be promotional about your own movie. The romance in the film was well created I feel because of setting and character animation. The feelings between Gnomeo and Juliet were genuine enough that it worked. I felt that the Featherstone’s back-story however did not work because it has no reference to the original tale. It is another example of a story alteration that doesn’t fit in what sometimes feels like an honest adaptation of Shakespeare. The inclusion of the Shakespeare statue was another mistake in the film. I understand the reason behind it, which is that the filmmakers wanted to create a sense of worry as to whether we will get the classic tragic ending or a new happy ending. The reason why I feel that it was a mistake is that our Romeo-type character is basically saying to his creator that the original ending of “Romeo and Juliet” is bad. The filmmakers here seem to be insulting their source material, which is centuries old. One thing I did love is the “Terrafirminator” commercial with Hulk Hogan. It was so hilarious. The ending, where it appears as though Gnomeo and Juliet have been smashed, had problems also. I could not understand exactly how they survived. Also, the filmmakers overly milked the apparent end of our heroes. I did like the moment where all the blue and red gnomes freeze in the alley and freak out the jogger. A lot of people fear lawn gnomes and so it was a perfect nod to that fact. This movie did use intertextuality quite well, meaning that they referenced other genres or other Shakespearean works. My favorites are 2B or not 2B, “Out Spot” and the Japanese samurai movie gags but these allusions were as funny as the movie got.

Some of the best humor comes from situations that the audience can relate to and this film had little situational humor. The biggest reason for this is that the characters were not very relatable. Either they were too cartoony or they lacked appeal. Other animated films have characters that feel like real people. They appear to authentically think and show emotion. “Gnomeo and Juliet” lacked this quality. Gnomeo was a good example of a character that lacked appeal. James McAvoy has played Romeo on the theater stage before but the screenplay in this movie did not give him enough to connect with the audience. On other hand, Juliet was a character that worked. Her “Wherefore art thou, Gnomeo” monologue had problems but other than that, she was the best-adapted character in the film. She was very cute in her design and Emily Blunt’s vocal acting was great. The screenplay also allowed to us feel for her predicament more so than Gnomeo’s. Jason Statham was a good choice for Tybalt. There are two characters in the film that ruined much of the movie for me because of energy that they exude. One was Nanette. She has her funny moments but her fast acting and speaking was distracting. The same goes for Featherstone. I could hardly understand what he was saying but I feel that it is not Jim Cummings fault. He was a Cajun firefly in “The Princess and the Frog” but his pace and energy was tempered in that film for the betterment of the story. He also gave a great dramatic performance in that film. He plays a similar character with a similar role in “Gnomeo and Juliet” so the problems with his character must have come from the direction of the filmmakers and from the story. Also, Nanette has a “Romeo and Juliet” counterpart where as Featherstone does not. He is too different from Friar Laurence in my opinion. On a more positive note, the character design of both Gnomeo and Juliet was well done not only in portraying romance but also in portraying the forbidden nature of their love. Because he is blue and she is red, you are constantly reminded that they are supposed to be enemies.

There are miscellaneous criticisms that should be mentioned at this time. Too many cooks spoil the broth and I believe that to be a major reason as to why the film doesn’t work all too well. Look at how many people wrote this movie. The original songs that Elton John wrote for “The Lion King” and “The Road to El Dorado” did great things for those films but it appears that “Gnomeo and Juliet” used classic Elton John songs instead. Also, Hans Zimmer was a big part of the musical success of those two films. The lack of originality in the music creates problems for me. This film at one point was going to star Ewan McGregor & Kate Winslet and I really would have liked that. Another important fact about production was that this film was going to be made by Walt Disney Feature Animation but then came the Pixar acquisition in 2006. John Lasseter shut the film down and I trust him too much to question his reasons. As further proof that he made the right decision, look at “The Princess and the Frog” & “Tangled” and how well they turned out. Lasseter seems in tune with what works on screen and what can be salvaged if things aren’t working out. This film appears to have had troubles from the start and Lasseter I bet could tell that things weren’t going to get any better later in production.

“Gnomeo and Juliet” has no center. Its focus can’t be on Shakespeare’s original tale because of all the important changes. It might be on the characters but there are some problems in that area of the film too. The film had some things working but those features don’t overshadow the problems with the film. I liked the movie but it has no lasting impact.

3 Stars