I don't think the problem is saying that
West Side Story
is based on Shakespeare. (Telling them something about it taking place against the backdrop of a street gang war would also set up problematic false expectations.)
I think that the problem is how kids are introduced to Shakespeare. They're plays. They're not meant to be read. They're meant to be seen enacted. Most kids wouldn't be too thrilled with modern movies either, if they were allowed only to read the scripts.
When you see Shakespeare's plays performed well, the bits of unfamiliar language aren't much of a problem. When you can see what the characters are doing and hear the intonation of their line delivery, the meaning is clear even if you don't catch some words or understand the reference of some metaphors. After the kids have the connection of having seen the story and understanding the relationships and actions, then you can go back through the script with them to explain some of the archaic language and less-well-known-than-they-used-to-be metaphorical references.
In my high school, all freshman English classes had "Romeo and Juliet" on the syllabus. I was lucky that during my freshman year of high school a local second run movie theater was showing the 1968 Zeffirelli movie version of
Romeo and Juliet
. So the high school's entire freshman class got loaded onto buses one day for a matinee showing field trip. It really did help engage a much higher percentage of those 9th graders with that play. When I took the Shakespeare semester as one of my junior / senior elective English classes (after the 9th & 10th grade standard English classes that everybody took, my school had a bunch of different optional one semester English classes of which you had to take at least 2), we saw on videotape in class a couple of the plays that we read (I remember a "Shakespeare in the Park" production of "King Lear" starring James Earl Jones). Those, too, helped make the plays feel more immediately accessible.

Not possible.
The moment you mention 'Shakespeare' I don't care what technique you use it automatically colours their expectations. It's the same anytime you do -any- setup for -any- work of art. It's like giving kids a sandwich and telling them BEFORE they take a bite that "it's got broccoli in it.. but you'll like it!". Game over, dude.
My point is this: it's completely unnecessary to do a setup. Why explain it if you don't have to? Just let 'em watch it and THEN do the whole Shakespeare talk if you feel the need to 'broaden their minds'. Why do 50 year old adults always feel the necessity to explain to kids 'THE WONDERS OF CULTURE!'?
Why? I came into this game for the action, the excitement Listen, kid, we're all in it together.

It is true, however, that
West Side Story
is
based on
Romeo & Juliet
. I wonder if that could be explained to kids in a way that is more subtle, so that they won't be so turned off by it.

Solid 9.
One thing I think that downgrades it nowadays: it is -always- introduced to kids now as a Romeo/Juliet knockoff. Which annoys me deeply. I -wish- they would let kids watch and judge it on its own. The moment kids hear 'based on Shakespeare' it immediately colours their perspective.

You're right on the money, jackjom. Most of the older classic films, even the ones that I've liked well enough to see more than once, seem to be a little bit frayed around the edges, despite still being enjoyable, but
West Side Story
has aged the most gracefully of all, at least in part because of the very story behind it, if one gets the drift.

I agree, it's a beautiful movie.
I have been enjoying it for forty years now, and one thing I've noticed in recent years is that quite a number of movies don't stand up to earlier opinions I've had. 'West Side Story' is one that easily impresses my as much as it did way back when, partly for different reasons.

Frankly,
I
think that the film
West Side Story
should've gotten at least an 8 or 9 rating from imdb.com.
That
, to me, would've been satisfactory, even though I gave
West Side Story
a ten rating, for my own personal rating.
But, different people have different opinions. What can we say?

@peter_joshua (Original OP)
I agree that a score of 7.6 is an insult to this great movie. When I try to guess as to why, I think of "Gigi." It is rated at only 6.9 on IMDB; yet, I think it is the best movie musical of all time. Looking at the Gigi board, many people did not like it because they thought Maurice Chevalier was a pedophile. Also, many people thought Leslie Caron was a prostitute. So, bearing that in mind, is there anything like that in West Side Story that upsets people. If there are things people hate about this movie and therefore rate it low, I don't know that they might be.

I second this:
Never get tired of this.
without thinking twice!
West Side Story
is a film that I never tire of seeing over and over and over again, especially when it comes to a great big, wide screen, in a
real
movie theatre, with the lights down low. I first got introduced to
West Side Story
, as a whole, through the music to the
original
Broadway
stage
version, back in the summer of 1962, to be exact, prior to entering the sixth grade, while attending day camp out west. One girl in my group, who'd received a copy of the LP version of the soundtrack to the original Broadway stage production of
West Side Story
as a birthday present, brought it to camp soon afterwards, and played it for the rest of our group. My love for this musical took off instantly. Since my parents also had the same LP version of the original Broadway stage production of
West Side Story
, I played it on their Hi-Fi system whenever I could, and also liked to bang around with the WSS story songs on the piano, as well.
I have not stopped loving the film
West Side Story
since, and am hoping for another screening of this great classic to come into my area. (I always keep my eyes and ears peeled for any possibility!

Agree. It's also the best live musical ever, imho.
Never get tired of this. I used to love the soundtrack and would ask my older sister to play it all the time that and her Beatle Albums.

I don't know, atomicgirl24-136281. This:
The problem with West Side Story is that it hasn't aged well.
is something that I disagree with. I first saw the film
West Side Story
, during a big national re-release of it, when I was a high school Senior, at around Christmastime of 1968, at a now-defunct movie theatre north of Boston, and fell in love with this film on the spot. Since I was still a high school teenager when I first saw
West Side Story
in the movies, on a big, wide movie theatre screen, I identified with the Jets, the Sharks and their girls regarding kids being kids, and so on, but when I got a little older, and began seeing it in independent movie theatres in and around Boston, I had a different view. I still love this movie, and appreciate it dearly, not only for the music, but for the story, and as a real work of art of a movie, and a real classic that's in a class all by itself, to boot. I personally think that West Side Story should've gotten at least an 8-10 rating here on imdb.com.

The problem with West Side Story is that it hasn't aged well. I used to love this movie as a kid but I sort of cringe watching it now. Seeing a bunch of Hell's Kitchen 1960s-era thugs prancing and dancing is as ridiculous as having the Bloods and Crips dancing the ballet. The way some of the songs pranced around censorship is also cringeworthy, like having the kids sing "ever loving" or "mother loving." (Oh, come on).
Natalie Wood lived up to her namesake. She was wooden in the role, had a horrible accent and spoke bad Spanglish. (What was that line again she says in the third act? "Please no let it be true.") Her casting was offensive and hypocritical, too. Here you have a movie about the evils of prejudice, but the studio didn't think any Latino actress was good enough to play the lead; all the hispanics had to be happy to play the supporting roles.
So I can see the movie being rated as low as it it. I think it's a solid 8.0 but I don't think it deserves much higher than that. The dancing sequences involving the gang members are just too campy and Wooden wasn't the best choice for the role.
Emojis=
Emoticons=

Everything was good but not the performances, they are so bad, really bad. Wood and Beymer were not good enough. Now I know why Rita Moreno won her Oscar, she is the only worthy performance in this film.

Agreed, thee classic amongst cinematic musicals. Problem is, not enough people on IMDB have a clue (age) so it's up to the generation of the Black and White Zenith plier turner to give it it's due props.
I rated it a ten.
"Only a numbskull thinks he knows things about things he knows nothing about."

This message has been deleted.

Watching West Side Story was like watching Kiss in concert.
With a Kiss concert - the music is mediocre at best but the stage sights make it seem like a good concert.
To me the problems with West Side Story was the main romance didn't seem real, the two main characters had weak performances, and the gangs seemed wimpy so there was no fear or danger felt before the killings.
I didn't feel a connect to the characters throughout like I did watching movies that deserve a 9 or a 10. The only connect I felt was in the last 10 minutes (the last scene was a really good scene)
So the movie (as a movie) was mediocre, maybe a 6 only because the songs / dancing carried it.

To each their own, scorpion-52, but I have to disagree here. Imho,
West Side Story
is one of the few Broadway musicals that has been really successful, on screen, as well as on stage, and I think that this movie has withstood the test of time beautifully and aged quite gracefully. It's one film that I never, ever get tired of seeing over and over again. I think that West Side Story deserved at least a nine, if not a ten for an imdb.com rating.

This message has been deleted.

Not me, I thought it was a total beep awful musical numbers and lousy story.

This message has been deleted.