The Worst Film Ever

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Shakespeare in love in my opinion is easily one of the most overrated movies of all time. I know not ever one agrees with that statement, and sure I might just say that because it robbed Saving Private Ryan of the best picture at that years Oscars. But despite this, Shakespeare in Love is a chicle, boring and a historical mess of a film that feels like it was a film made to take advantage of history, but that history never happened. In this film Shakespeare during the making of Romeo and Juliet falls in love with a woman that inspires him to write the play in the first place. There is one positive in this entire movie and that is Judi Dench. Her performance was great and she only on screen for 10 minutes, but it wasn't really Oscar good, but that's in the past. As for the rest of the film it is easily one of the most boring and predictable movies ever made. Gwyneth Paltrow is stale and is mainly just eye candy for the main character and she doesn't do anything that great. As for the rest of the performances they are okay to good nothing that great. I have to give the movie credit, it looks fine and the sets and costumes are good, they just aren't that great. I don't understand what makes people love this movie I don't get it. I am not a big romance fan, but I love movies live Jerry Maguire and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and I'm excited for the upcoming film Song to Song, but the difference between the two of those films and this one is those films have great writing and depth in their characters. There isn't any of that here. In the end Shakespeare in Love is good looking, but boring, chicle and stall romance and I won't even get started about the historically inaccuracy in the film. Overall this is another boring love story that isn't worth your time.

The setting is 1593 London, in the glory days of the Elizabethan theater. The screen caption reads, "Two playhouses are fighting it out for writers and audiences: The Curtain Theater with Richard Burbage, England's most famous actor, and the Rose, built by Philip Henslowe." Plays are often closed because of plagues and bad debts. Because Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush) has a cash flow problem, he is literally being legally (?) tortured by Hugh Fennyman (Tom Wilkinson) at film's commencement. Henslowe saves further pain by explaining that as Will Shakespeare's patron, he is expecting the playwright's latest play within two weeks. The show should garner twenty pounds, or enough to pay off his debt. The working title of the play is "Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter," the precursor of "Romeo and Juliet." In reality, Will Shakespeare (Joseph Fiennes) cannot even get started as he has run out of ideas. Now Will needs inspiration. He tells therapist Dr. Moth (Antony Sher) that his quill is broken and that the organ of his imagination has dried up. The therapist advises Will to seek a new romance. Enter Viola de Lesseps (Gwyneth Paltrow). But there are complications, one of which is that Will has a wife in Stratford. Also, Viola has been promised by her rich father to another man, Lord Wessex (Colin Firth), a most disagreeable fellow. Wessex discusses his tobacco farms in Virginia, but he is several decades early! But Viola falls in love with Will, and they have an affair. When aging and sharp-tongued Queen Elizabeth (Judi Dench) seems to approve of the upcoming marriage, she quips to Wessex that "Have her, then, but you are a lordly fool. She's been plucked since I saw her last, and not by you. It takes a woman to know it." Viola loves poetry and wants to act, but she is not yet allowed on stage because of her gender ("the law of the land has our beauties played by pipsqueak boys"). She disguises herself as a mustachioed man, Thomas Kent.Meanwhile Kit Marlowe has been killed. Will blames himself, as he had misled Wessex into believing that Kit had plucked Viola. But Will soon learns that Kit did not perish at the hand of Wessex; rather he died in a quarrel over a bill at a tavern (In real life Marlowe died at age 32 at Deptford under mysterious circumstances.). There would be a later sword fight between Will and Wessex. When Viola is discovered to be a woman, the Rose is closed down. But then Burbage offers his Curtain Theater, and the play is on. It is successful as the Queen humorously pardons Viola (Thomas!). Of course, Will can never really marry Viola; he works on his next play, "Twelfth Night." While it takes a few liberties, this fictional story well captures the flavor of the late 16th century, and shows the difficulties in arranging for the plays, how they were often racked with financial problems, backstage politics, and court intrigue. The period sets and costumes are wonderfully done. John Madden created a film that is energetic and witty; it is a fine romantic comedy with tongue-in- cheek humor. For the most part, the casting works well. The statuesque Gwyneth Paltrow is quite appealing, speaks Shakespearean well, and artistically displays her "golden apples" for folks to admire. She shows great chemistry in her scenes with Fiennes, but in reality she is much too feminine to pass as a man on stage. Judi Dench was undoubtedly authoritarian as Queen Elizabeth. Ben Affleck (as Ned Alleyn), who speaks in modern English, is no Shakespearean actor. Geoffrey Rush has some nice comical lines, like "That's no one important, that's the author." Rupert Everett is uncredited as Christopher "Kit" Marlow. (At the time, the struggling Shakespeare was engaged in a rivalry with the already popular Kit as to who was the greater playwright. Nonetheless, both do show grace to each other in the film.) The feature certainly was one of the best of the 1998 year, and in fact won seven Academy Awards, including the Oscar for Best Picture.

The 1998 Best Picture Winner, Shakespeare in Love has suffered from the "didn't deserve it" curse. Sometimes, a movie is remembered not on its own merits, but on what it beat out for Oscar's top prize. I have been guilty of this before as well; it took me until I was 27 years old to see Forrest Gump because I was so distraught at the fact that it beat out Pulp Fiction and Network for Best Picture. I've tried not to put movies in this purgatory anymore, but it still happens. For instance, I hardly ever meet someone who has seen How Green Was My Valley, yet I meet a lot of people who scoff that John Ford's magical piece beat out Citizen Kane in the eyes of the Academy. John Madden's feature, starring Geoffrey Rush, Joseph Fiennes, and Gwyneth Paltrow is not immune to this phenomenon. Unfortunately, Shakespeare in Love, the story of the Bard finding his muse and writing his most revered play, is more remembered as the bandit that stole Best Picture from Saving Private Ryan. A struggling poet and amateur playwright, Will Shakespeare (Joseph Fiennes) is grappling with a severe case of writer's block. Having already sold a play to theater operator Philip Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush), he is racing against the deadline of opening night to have something to give to both the operator of the theater and the audience. He needs the love of a woman to inspire him to write the romance expected of him, but every attempt to find her has proved futile. Meanwhile, Viola De Lesseps (Gwyneth Paltrow) a beautiful admirer of theater and fan of Shakespeare's wants nothing more than to act. Since only men are allowed to act in theater, Viola takes on the identity of a fictitious Thomas Kent, dresses as a man, and auditions and is accepted for a part in Shakespeare's next play. Wil sees through her ruse and falls in love with the woman behind the mustache. The two begin a love affair tainted with the knowledge that Wil is married, and Viola has been promised to Lord Wessex. Eventually realizing their union will never endure, the two go on, promising to forever love the other. Viola enters her marriage to Lord Wessex; Wil, finally attaining his muse, goes on to write his next play. The true treat of this film is its screenplay. This clever, well- written script will have you roped in from the first scene. Marc Norman, Tom Stoppard deserve accolades and were totally deserving for their statuettes for Best Original Screenplay. Aside from how well it was written, the story is very interesting as well. Even though Shakespeare's works are read in high schools throughout the world, very little thought is put into the love life of the man behind the great romances. Costumes were another brilliant treat from this film. Granted, it seems as though period pieces always take home top prize from the Academy, there was the added pressure of also designing costumes to be used as costumes, as much of the scenes comprised of the actors rehearsing the play Shakespeare was writing. Every garment worn by the actors looked uniquely Victorian and produced a well-deserved gold statuette for costume designer Sandy Powell. This film, much like the English Patient, deserves to be viewed on its own merit, and accepted as a fine piece of filmmaking, regardless of the other films that came out the same year. Shakespeare in Love is a drama and a romance but never gets bogged down by either genre. There are playful moments abound within the film, making it all the more engaging for the audience. My favorite scene of this nature takes place in a bar; Wil is depressed over his writer's block and bumps into revered playwright Christopher Marlowe who gives Shakespeare advice for his play. The authorship of works credited to Shakespeare is heavily debated in some circles with many, myself included believing Marlowe to be the true author. It was a fun nod the film took to recognize this and incorporate it into the film. What was also fun was the repeated allusions throughout the film to other works of Shakespeare's, most notably Twelfth Night. Being a fan of works attributed to Shakespeare it was fun to see these nods within the film; these allusions also made it easier to forgive the historical inaccuracies wrought throughout the film as well. Shakespeare in Love is a fun look at the inner workings of possibly the most famous playwright to have ever lived. The film is beautiful to watch and captivating due to the exceptional screenplay and costumes. I urge audiences to view Shakespeare in Love, on its own merits; I wager you will be pleasantly surprised. Shakespeare in Love is so much more than "the film that beat Saving Private Ryan". If given the chance, audiences will fall in love with Shakespeare in Love.

Shakespeare in Love (1998): Dir: John Madden / Cast: Joseph Fiennes, Gwyneth Paltrow, Geoffrey Rush, Judi Dench, Colin Firth: Intriguing film presenting Shakespeare within Shakespeare by suggesting his love for a woman but it also depicts his devotion to his work. He is played by Joseph Fiennes and he is at work on his new play called Romeo and Ethyl. Gwyneth Paltrow enters as the Queen's daughter who loves his work to the point of disguising herself as a boy to play a part. Fiennes discovers the truth and they fall in love. Dazzling production and art direction that best describes the period. Director John Madden places great emphasis on humour for mood. Fiennes plays Shakespeare as energetic, resourceful and passionate. Paltrow is fetching and fresh but unfortunately the role is overturned by the fact that she isn't convincing in her male disguise. She is also being given over to a tyrant whom she doesn't love. She has fun with the role but fools more people than realistically plausible. In colorful supporting roles are Geoffrey Rush in hilarious form. He is under pressure to see that the play goes on. Judi Dench steals scenes in a brief appearance as the Queen. Colin Firth plays the suitor who is arranged to claim the girl but will face the challenge. It demonstrates someone falling in love within their work as well as presenting compelling look into Shakespeare and the world he creates. Score: 7 ½ / 10