'To be or not to be.......

Not to be!'

P.s. Extra brownie points of you know from which film I stole that quote.

P.s.s. This film makes the film I stole that quote from look like Albert Einstein.

P.s.s.s. This film sucketh balls like thou wouldst not believe.

P.s.s.s.s. When will someone finally revoke Emmerich's filmmaking license, it's long overdue.

P.s.s.s.s.s. Why the hell was this film ever made? It has no historical credibility nor entertainment value.

I can't say I've seen this. Basically what I've done today is what I've done with this film once before; attempted to sit down and watch it only to find I'm unable to get past the first 20 minutes.

Why?

The clunky cumbersome dialogue.

It's all 'Well, Sir Henry Cecil' and 'Oh Marlow, lend me some money' and 'Look Kit isn't that Edward De Vere sat over there next to the Earl of Oxford'

No one speaks like this! It's expositional introductions masquerading as dialogue and it's just CRINGEWORTHY!

I'll endeavour to try and watch it again at some stage and see if I can get beyond this. Perhaps one bored and booze filled day over Christmas? Maybe with drink I won't notice the rotten dialogue?

I saw Emmerich at Empire's Big Screen talking about Anonymous. He was extremely passionate in his belief that Shakespeare was a fraud and while I disagree, I'd hoped that passion would translate well in the film.

Oh. How. Wrong.

It's a mess. The narrative jumps all over the place. The performances lack credibility - only Rafe Spall's turn as Shakespeare was enjoyable - which is why I gave it half a star. There are various historical errors that I won't spend time listing as I've already wasted over 2 hours of my life on this film and that is far more than it deserves.

Utilizing the historical conspiracies/apocrypha regarding the true authorship of the works of William Shakespeare as its narrative engine, "Anonymous" is an effective and affecting costume drama. Richly designed and assembled, the film is good looking, engrossing, and shows the more interesting and less bombastic side of its director, Roland Emmerich. Whether or not you buy into the theory behind the film, the Elizabethan politics, the use of Shakespeare's most memorable works, and the themes dealing with the strength and dangerousness of words are more than enough to make "Anonymous" a satisfying and powerful experience.

Easily, the worst movie I've seen in a while. It's written like an essay of a 7 year old kid, directed so preposterously that is laughable, acted so, ugh, terrible. Seriously, not a single actor in this acts properly. But I blame the director. I guess this is how a movie looks when Roland Emmerich tries to make it serious.
I strongly dislike films that try so hard on being controversial and thought-provoking when they are everything but. This is just dumb.

A really terrific story idea, badly told. Although the acting performances are quite good, the direction and production design are awful. Disappointing. Yea, verily.

mocap

This review reportedly contains spoilers. I can handle the truth.

Thuis partizanska, niet afgekeken, te lang

"¿Y si William Shakespeare fue un fraude?"
Esa es la interesante premisa de 'Anonymous', película que resulta entretenida y puede que hasta polémica para los fans del aclamado escritor y poeta. Lo malo es que a veces la historia nos enreda por los saltos en el tiempo que incluye la trama y cuesta unir algunos cabos, pero aún así no perdemos el interés en ella.

Esta película demuestra que Roland Emmerich no es un mal director y más si el NO ha metido mano en el guión, tal cual sucedió con 'The Patriot' allá en el 2000, su mejor película hasta ahora.

History buffs and theater fans will find this conspiracy thriller about the man we call William Shakespeare engrossing, but most everybody else will just wind up confused by the non-stop parade of minor Elizabethan characters and convoluted plot. I was hooked on the story and performances, except for the 4th-wall onstage bookends which seemed unnecessary and contrived.

At the beginning of this film I had great expectations. I consider it to be quite clever to start it as a play on stage. But the expectations weren't fulfilled: Most of the time "Anonymous" is uninspired and heartless. Good actors Rhys Ifans and David Thewlis don't get much chance to show their talent. The flashbacks to the lovestories of young Edward de Vere are banal, overconstructed and unnecessary. Jamie Campbell Bower cannot convince in this role. The only satisfying performance I enjoyed gave Rafe Spall as always drunk filou William Shakespeare.
All in all the idea of "Anonymous" had much potential but Roland Emmerich seems to be just able to make a profit-focused film out of it.

If this were a serious attempt to suggest a viable alternative to the accepted history of William Shakespeare and Queen Elizabeth I, then it would be borderline offensive. However, I sensed a real tongue-in-cheek spirit that meant that I could lose myself in the fantasy they were suggesting. Emmerich's usual epic scale CGI would seem to be the wrong choice for a historical drama, but I thought it lended a much needed epic canvas on which to paint what essentially turns out to be almost a soap opera-esque melodrama. It's a guilty pleasure, but I loved it!