Die in a Gunfight Parent Guide

Two families, the Rathcarts and the Gibbons, have been in a blood feud since a duel between their ancestors in 1864. In the 21^st century, both families control massive media empires, and spend most of their time and column inches trying to sabotage one another.

The younger generation is breaking with their families’ traditions. Ben Gibbon (Diego Boneta) and Mary Rathcart (Alexandra Daddario) have fallen in love. But Ben isn’t the only person vying for Mary’s affections – Terrence (Justin Chatwin), an employee of Mary’s father, has decided that he deserves her hand, and is willing to do just about anything to get it. Now, all Ben and Mary have to do is get married…without becoming the latest victims in their families’ blood feud.

Two households, both alike in dignity, in fair…Toronto? I’m not sure if this is supposed to be some big American city, but it’s pretty clearly Toronto. Either way, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, Toronto or Verona, this is a modernized take on Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. So what has director Colin Schiffli done differently in this adaptation?

Well, a lot. Die in a Gunfight only has loose structural ties to the play, and a whole lot less teenage angst and misunderstanding. There are also far fewer characters: Benvolio and Mercutio have been loosely combined in Mukul (Wade Allain-Marcus), a friend of Ben’s. Terrence is a weird cross between Count Paris and Tybalt. There’s no sign of Friar Laurence, Rosaline, or Nurse. Honestly, the trimmed down dramatis personae helps in a 90-minute movie. When you don’t have two and a half hours to lay your scene, you’ve gotta make cuts somewhere.

Die in a Gunfight isn’t a terrible film, but it’s not a particularly good one either. It’s been very heavily stylized, complete with a narrator, animated flashbacks, and over-the-top film grain effects on some scenes. Sometimes this makes the film feel a little more indie, other times it just makes it feel sloppy. The writing isn’t anything to write home about, and the performances are unremarkable. This is the dry toast of adaptations. It’s not awful, but it sure could have used something a little more interesting to top it up.

As you may have noticed, the movie carries an R-rating from the MPAA, meaning it’s a poor study guide for high-school students looking for a shortcut on their Romeo and Juliet assignment. Differences from the play which may concern parents include extensive drug use and some swearing. To the film’s credit, there’s less profanity than I would have expected –21 sexual expletives are a relatively small complement for a crime film. That may sound like a lot to you, but trust me, it gets a whole lot worse than that in quirky thrillers these days. There are also some scenes of brief, bloody violence, but as Shakespeare himself wrote “These violent delights have violent ends.” Whether or not you find it “delightful” is a matter of taste. I’m not making any promises.