Tumgik
#also like...juliet has been praised as a compelling and well-rounded theatrical heroine with clear goals by literary scholars for a LONG
musical-chick-13 · 2 years
Text
The existence of this Rosaline movie makes me so MAD, because SHE WAS NEVER IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH ROMEO. SHE TOOK A VOW OF CHASTITY, AND SAID THAT SHE WAS JUST GONNA NOT BE IN LOVE.
SHE. REJECTED. HIM.
SHE WAS NEVER INTERESTED IN BEING WITH HIM AT ALL.
And then they just...make a whole movie from her supposed perspective (which is loosely based on a book which...hoo boy we’ll get to that in a second), where the premise is that she’s jealous and wants to break him and Juliet up? That she’s so in love that she has to win him over again? (Also, how do they justify her knowing that they’re together? The entire point is that no one knows Romeo and Juliet are in love?? I know this is an adaptation, but Jesus Christ.)
WHY DID YOU PICK THIS CHARACTER. TO HAVE THIS STORY WITH. THE WHOLE POINT OF HER CHARACTER IS THAT SHE CHOOSES NOT TO BE WITH HIM. THAT’S WHAT OPENS THE DOOR TO HIM MEETING JULIET. IF ROSALINE IS DEEPLY INTO ROMEO, THE ENTIRE PLAY DOESN’T WORK.
Are we saying that she was just “““playing hard to get”””? That she was toying with his heart for fun? That when she told him no, she really meant “yes”?? I THOUGHT WE LEFT THAT BEHIND OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST DECADE, I THOUGHT WE DECIDED THAT WAS BAD???!!?
Don’t even get me started on the book this is based on, where that general premise is that Rosaline is just an Innocent Average Girl, and her cousin who is Beautiful™ and vOLaTiLeLY uNsTAbLe and cRaZy comes and “takes” her poor unsuspecting boyfriend who is completely blameless for his own terrible behavior away from her while being called a “slut” the whole time. (I doubt much of this carried over into the actual movie, because that’s being billed as an ironic rom-com, and I highly doubt ANYONE would try to make that genre work while keeping this premise 100% intact.)
WHY WOULD YOU EXPAND THIS CHARACTER LIKE THIS. WHY. WE STUDY THIS PLAY IN SCHOOL AS AN EXAMPLE OF LITERARY STRUCTURE AND POETIC LANGUAGE AND FORESHADOWING AND HOW TO WRITE A TRAGIC NARRATIVE AND FOR WHAT. FOR PEOPLE TO NOT TAKE AWAY ANY OF THE INTENDED MEANING FROM THIS PLAY???!?!?!? I AM SCREAMING SO HARD I WILL BREAK THE EARTH’S CRUST UNTIL I AM SUBSUMED INTO HELL.
If you’re going to adapt something, you’ve gotta make it clear that you have some significant understanding of the original work. Retellings are fine! They can even have different functions or deconstruct tropes or be unexpectedly edgy! But it’s 1000% obvious when you don’t have any knowledge or engagement with the source material, and that is a problem. It’s ignorant, it’s lazy, and everyone involved deserves better.
29 notes · View notes