In the 1996 movie version of Romeo and Juliet, do you think it has the essence of Shakespeare's original play?

The "essence," eh?  What an interesting question!  This is
my absolute favorite version of the play (which is actually called Romeo +
Juliet and stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes), but I've never quite
considered whether it has the "essence" of Shakespeare's original.  Let's explore the
evidence together.

In opposition, there's the issue of
setting.  If you consider the essence of Shakespeare to be rooted in the Elizabethan
time period, then you certainly would have trouble here.  Shakespeare's plays were meant
to be performed live on stage.  This presents real problems for a movie to surpass. 
Further, Shakespeare's play would have been set in Elizabethan times on the stage while
this movie is set in (what was then) the present with the "rapier" and the "dagger" both
being types of guns.  However, I do not think either of these issues get to the heart of
what makes Shakespearean plays "universal."

As my first bit
of evidence, I must mention the first moments that Romeo and Juliet first set eyes on
each other.  The view through the aquarium gives the whole love-at-first-sight idea such
a magical and even mystical appeal.  The entire exchange in the elevator and beyond with
the word play of the banter with the "holy palmer's kiss" is done so incredibly well and
a perfect rendition of the flirtation between the two.  (Although, yes, it's quite
ironic that Juliet is dressed as an angel and Romeo as a knight, but it is a costume
party, after all.)

Further, I want to mention the awesome
scene of Romeo's and Juliet's wedding night which is strewn with billowing sheets and
blissful smiles when the two are together consummating their marriage.  Juliet's
expression and deliverance of the lines when she realizes that she must be pulled away
from her love is priceless.  This is just one of the ways that I think the true love of
the two main characters is truly shown in this version.

In
my opinion, the complete desperation of the lovers exhibited in the final scene is
unmatched.  I find it hard to explain this in words, actually.  Everything from the
tears streaming down the cheeks of the actors to the wide-eyed and glassy look of Juliet
before she takes her own life.  The lines are read with such passion, it just takes my
breath away.  Then there is the setting of the candles and flowers and crosses that
bejewel the tomb that add to that same passion. 
Amazing!

Therefore, if one thinks that the "essence" of
Shakespeare's play is truly the actual love of the two main characters, then this is the
movie version that fits the bill perfectly.  However, if you want to delve into artistic
licence (with Queen Mab being drugs and Friar Lawrence being more of a strange botanist
and the weird relationships between the mothers and boyfriends) then, yes, one could
take issue with this rendition.  All in all, though, this is a play about "star-crossed
lovers," and it is the adaptation relevant to those lovers that I believe deserves
applause.