Romeo and Juliet: A Timeless Tragedy :: essays research papers

Romeo and Juliet A Timeless TragedyWilliam Shakespeare wrote his ever famous play, Romeo and Juliet, in 1595. Like many of Shakespeare&8217s plays, the story of Romeo and Juliet is timeless and has proven to remain maybe the most popular story of tragic love. In 1968, 373 years after the play was pilot lightly written, a bleak movie was released and hailed as a bare-ass and futuristic Romeo and Juliet. This film is say by Franco Zeffirelli and stars Leonard Whiting as Romeo and Olivia Hussey as Juliet. Then, in 1996, a mere 401 years after Shakespeare&8217s original production, Baz Luhrmann directed a new Romeo and Juliet that features Leonardo Dicaprio as Romeo and Claire Danes as Juliet. This film is extremely futuristic compared to any other reading material that has been produced. The two films differ from Shakespeare&8217s original play in some respects, but most viewers would agree that these films both follow Shakespeare&8217s story with adaptations to the time at which they were produced.Franco Zeffirelli&8217s version of the play follows Shakespeare&8217s version very closely. The buildings and costumes reveal that the setting in this film is old Verona during Shakespeare&8217s time. The plot is nearly exact when compared to the original play. to the highest degree viewers would agree that Zeffirelli&8217s movie would not surprise that audience of William Shakespeare. Aside from the this production being a movie on a cover instead of an actual, first hand play, the language, plot, setting, and costumes are very similar to what an audience 400 years ago might expect.Although both films have been named futuristic, more so is the version by Baz Luhrmann. Luhrmann took Romeo and Juliet in a different direction. The story takes place in the future where buildings, costumes, and weapons are all suggestive of the future, but the language and primary plot structure is extremely similar to Shakespeare&8217s original Romeo and Juliet. The movie opens wit h a prologue in the form of evening news on television, and it tells that this will be a story of &8220star cross&8217d lovers who will die for their love of each other. Each difference takes an element of the original play and adapts it to the new setting. Shakespeare&8217s play had servants of both the Capulet family and the Montague family starting a fight in a public square. Luhrmann introduced these characters as the &8220Capulet Boys and the &8220Montague Boys. The fight breaks out in a swash station and continues throughout a busy street.

The Ethics of Cloning :: Argumentative Persuasive Topics

The Ethical Questions of Cloning A couple that had been marry for only two years was in a unutterable car accident. The married woman walked away with a few cuts and bruises. The husband, however was unconscious when the paramedics arrived. He went into a coma shortly after arriving at the nearby hospital. He came out of the coma but was never to be the same again. It turns out that when he was in the accident he had severe head trauma, and would be a vegetable the rest of his life. He could not take part in the reproduction of children. The wife is now distraught because they entrust never have children together. She comprehend about the possibility of clone and believes that it is the only way that she will ever have children. Is it so? Introduction The ethics of gentle copy has become a great issue in the past few years. The advocates for both sides of the issue have legion(predicate) reasons to clone or not to clone. This is an attempt to explore the pros and cons of h uman cloning and to provide enough information of both sides of the arguments in order for the reader to play their own informed decision on whether human cloning is ethical or not. Cloning will first be defined. Then a apprize explanation of why questions concerning cloning humans have arisen will be presented. Some things cannot be known for sure unless it is tested, i.e., human cloning is allowed. Followed by that, a discussion of the facts and opinions that support cloning will be presented and therefore the same against cloning. Please remember that not all of this has proven true nor is able to be proven yet, but has simply been argued as a scientific hypothesis. Finally, my own personal opinion will be stated. Defining Human Cloning When talk of human cloning, what is meant? Different groups and organizations define it differently. To use a specific definition, the American Medical Association (AMA) defined cloning as the production of genetically analogous organisms via somatic cell nuclear transfer. Somatic cell nuclear transfer refers to the litigate which the nucleus of a somatic cell of an existing organism is transferred into an oocyte from which the nucleus has been removed (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 1). In other words, cloning is the method of produce a baby that has the same genes as its parent.The Ethics of Cloning Argumentative Persuasive TopicsThe Ethical Questions of Cloning A couple that had been married for only two years was in a terrible car accident. The wife walked away with a few cuts and bruises. The husband, however was unconscious when the paramedics arrived. He went into a coma shortly after arriving at the nearby hospital. He came out of the coma but was never to be the same again. It turns out that when he was in the accident he had severe head trauma, and would be a vegetable the rest of his life. He could not take part in the reproduction of children. The wife is now distraught because they will never have children together. She heard about the possibility of cloning and believes that it is the only way that she will ever have children. Is it so? Introduction The ethics of human cloning has become a great issue in the past few years. The advocates for both sides of the issue have many reasons to clone or not to clone. This is an attempt to explore the pros and cons of human cloning and to provide enough information of both sides of the arguments in order for the reader to make their own informed decision on whether human cloning is ethical or not. Cloning will first be defined. Then a brief explanation of why questions concerning cloning humans have arisen will be presented. Some things cannot be known for sure unless it is tested, i.e., human cloning is allowed. Followed by that, a discussion of the facts and opinions that support cloning will be presented and then the same against cloning. Please remember that not all of this has proven true nor is able to be proven yet, but has simply been argued as a scientific hypothesis. Finally, my own personal opinion will be stated. Defining Human Cloning When speaking of human cloning, what is meant? Different groups and organizations define it differently. To use a specific definition, the American Medical Association (AMA) defined cloning as the production of genetically identical organisms via somatic cell nuclear transfer. Somatic cell nuclear transfer refers to the process which the nucleus of a somatic cell of an existing organism is transferred into an oocyte from which the nucleus has been removed (Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs 1). In other words, cloning is the method of produce a baby that has the same genes as its parent.