Every film that has ever been nominated for an Academy Award in any category. Enjoy!
Was Shakespeare a Fraud?
A political thriller advancing the theory that it was in fact Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford who penned Shakespeare's plays; set against the backdrop of the succession of Queen Elizabeth I, and the Essex Rebellion against her.
'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.
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?
It is hardly surprising the director of Independence Day would be so loose with history, although in fairness to Roland Emmerich the film never purports to be historically accurate, but I was disappointed there was no sign of an alien invasion and/or natural disaster. No doubt their presence would have livened things up considerably.
The myth of Shakespeare is almost as fascinating as the plays he left behind. Even ignoring the question of genuine authorship (a debate that rears its head every few years), the man was somewhat of an enigma with great periods of his life unaccounted for. It is this mystery that makes his own life ripe for dramatisation with Anonymous supporting the theory that it was the…
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.
I love the works of William Shakespeare. I guess you can call me a Shakespeare buff. I love Shakespeare as much as I love movies; which is a lot. I do truly believe he was a genuis. The idea behind this film is that Shakespeare never wrote any of his plays and while I don't agree with that theory, I think it's interesting subject matter and in the right hands it could make a fascinating film. Unfortunately, even if Roland Emmerich is passionate about what he believes, he does'nt know what to do with.
Emmerich is one of those people I cannot stand...the type of people who would argue with you about something by stating his own far fetched theories…
Exige muchos conocimientos por parte del espectador para contar algo insostenible históricamente.
Entre efectos especiales y explosiones, Roland Emmerich sorprendió a propios y extraños con este drama isabelino. Derek Jacobi, que cree en la vida real en la tesis sobre Shakespeare que defiende la película, nos introduce en un filme que incluso, cosa rara en su director, peca de sobrio.
Buena factura e interpretaciones. Todo muy correcto. Pero se echa de menos algo de garra.
Considering the ludicrous subject matter, this could so easily have been a batshit crazy Elizabethan romp ... except it takes itself seriously. The one actor who doesn't (Rafe Spall as a grasping, venal, semi-literate Shakespeare) steals the show whenever he's on screen. The rest is lost in a mush of silly moustaches, sillier collars, and utter disrespect. Seriously, they've got the young Earl of Oxford writing 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' when he's, like, ten years old! For fuck's sake ...
A conspiracy theory about Shakespeare. Not bad even though I never did see the big appeal in any of his writings.
If you try not to think about historical accuracy, this is quite enjoyable. Rhys Ifans in his role of Earl of Oxford is superb.
This quote sums it up... "praising its performances and visual achievements, but criticizing the film's time-jumping format, its pile up of factual errors."
Tomarse como algo real la historia de Anonymous es algo bastante arriesgado y casi estúpido, pero eso no quiere decir que su historia deje de ser interesante. Cierto, existen teorías sobre la veracidad de la obra de Shakespeare, pero no creo que fuera tan absolutamente rocambolesco; claro que eso nos da la posibilidad de disfrutar de una entretenida trama de intrigas palaciegas.
Por otro lado, visualmente la película es soberbia y sí bien su abuso de los chromas para los fondos puede ser excesivo, acompañan a la ficcionalidad de la propia historia.
Una película entretenida y visualmente agradable a la vista sin duda.
I'm not too well versed on the historical aspects of this story but I hear there are a lot of inaccuracies thus while I enjoyed the movie and its theory, I plan to do some more research of my own before making any sort of assumption about Shakespeare. I will say one thing, this film is most likely extremely offensive to all Shakespeare fans due to how imbecilic he is in this movie. The set designs and costumes are pretty great and even the acting is quite good. It's the script that isn't so good as while it has some genuinely poignant scenes and is very well edited at times, it is also the opposite at times and mostly gives us very basic character development focusing heavily on twists and turns that got lost on me by the time it ended. I liked it though. I am curious to see a present day drama from Emmerich.
Ah, the beloved bard. I had heard that he didn’t actually write his wondrous plays, but this is this the first time I have seen the theory explained and it makes great sense. Regardless, the mass of work accredited to Shakespeare is great and this is a tribute to his craft. Great acting, wonderful interpretations, stories of love and incest… yes, a film well worth watching.
- The Racket
- 7th Heaven
- Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans
- Chang: A Drama of the Wilderness
- The Secret World of Arrietty
- Take Shelter
- Elite Squad: The Enemy Within
- Project Nim
This list will be of no real interest to anybody else but it helps me keep an easier track of…
- Margin Call
- The Ides of March
- Rise of the Planet of the Apes
- Real Steel
Algunas de las películas nominadas de este año( menos los cortos animados y cortometrajes que no aparecen en la base…