It doesn't
need to be modernized, that is just what (im assuming) Baz Luhrmann is trying to do. He is taking creative liberties with the original story which is what everyone seems to disagree with, even though it happens in film all the time. When he first sat down to figure out how he wanted to direct the movie, he had to make a choice. He could focus on making a classic and accurate retelling (which has already been done twice, 1974 and 1949), or he could offer his own interpretation of the book as it applies to the society we live in today. It could be a great film either way, but from what it looks like he chose the second option.
Film is meant to be a social commentary that makes you think about the world we live in. Most people are close-minded and don't like to think, so they leave the theater bitching about how bad movies are when they don'tt stick to the original story, or fail to live up to any of their other preset expectations. Maybe Luhrmann is trying to use the film to criticize the American upperclass for being motivated by greed and power, or perhaps he has some other political agenda. Then again, I'm not too familiar with Luhrmann's work and I havent seen the film yet. For all I know, it could be more hollywood trash with a soundtrack by popular artists to get a bunch of media coverage and make more money.
And to the other dude, yes we read the abridged version in high school haha. I read the unabridged version last summer though and thoroughly enjoyed it. It was really slow at times and took me forever to get through it, but i liked the characters and enjoyed how intricate the Count's revenge plot was.]]
