February 14, 2012 Leave a comment
‘To be, or not to be, that is the question’… ‘Anonymous’ is a film set in the Elizabethan era and revolves around the idea that Shakespeare may not be the one who wrote his plays and poems. The theory here is that Shakespearean plays were written by 17th Earl of Oxford, Edward de Vere, and then passed on to the intermediary, by the name of Benjamin Johnson, who then passed it on to Shakespeare, who staged the plays, taking full credit for each of them.
The film, directed by Roland Emmerich and written by John Orloff, quite beautifully depicts the Shakespearian times. It puts emphasis on the politics of playwriting at that time, incorporating Queen Elizabeth’s younger memories, and like nearly all other films in this genre, involving the idea of a royal family feud over a legitimate heir to the throne.
The movie cast is predominantly British (surprise, surprise), with Rhys Ifans (‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I’ (2010)) in the role of Earl of Oxford, Vanessa Redgrave (‘Atonement ’(2007)) taking part of Queen Elizabeth, Rafe Spall (‘One Day’ (2011)), playing Shakespeare and Jamie Campbell Bower (‘Sweeney Todd’ (2007)) as young Earl of Oxford, among others. All actors here are very convincing, especially, Redgrave, whose Queen Elizabeth I, is probably a fair match to Judi Dench’s Queen Elizabeth I in ‘Shakespeare in Love’ (1998).
For those who already got excited, they should probably hold their horses as the movie’s overall standard is a far cry from the likes of ‘Elizabeth’ (1998) or ‘Shakespeare in Love’. Although the acting is very good, the film is actually one which is difficult to follow due to its muddy and confusing narrative. The problem is worsened by the fact that the film often leaps through the years and, especially in the beginning, it is hard to identity the characters as there are so many of them presented. Another problem is that ‘Anonymous’ is overly long as it desperately tries to incorporate everything possible. In that way, one inevitably has this feeling that there are at least three different stories running in parallel. For the movie makers, it would have made greater sense to focus primarily on the relationship between William Shakespeare, Earl of Oxford and Benjamin Johnson, and leave other sub-plots to be developed by other films in time.
While one is fully aware that ‘Anonymous’ is a work of fiction and bound to have historical inaccuracies, one can, nevertheless, be at the complete loss as to the implausibility of the theory the movie tries to put forward. The movie is not very convincing in that regard, and the hypothesis itself is not very plausible, lacking any realistic undertones or context. The idea that Earl of Oxford wrote all Shakespearian plays is an interesting one, but, it is also silly at best. What may be shocking here is not the attack by the film on greatness of Shakespeare as an English poet, but on Shakespeare as a person. While there can be evidence that Shakespeare has not written a word, e.g. some say he was just an illiterate actor, surely there must be insufficient evidence to say for certain that Shakespeare was also vain, frivolous, self-centred, arrogant person and a fraud. However, this is exactly how William Shakespeare is portrayed in this film. This undoubtedly false image of Shakespeare could have been avoided in the movie completely.
Overall, despite a badly executed film trailer, ‘Anonymous’, is, nevertheless, a better movie than, say, ‘Dorian Gray’ (2009), and indeed, was screened at the BFI London Film Festival 2011 and at the Toronto Film Festival 2011 with somewhat moderate success. It may be compared to ‘The Duchess’ (2008), which fancy costumes, decorations and grand settings saved the day for that film.
To sum up:
Pros: A brave, interesting and original idea proposed by the film, beautiful setting and decorations, good acting.
Cons: Confusing narrative, a badly written plot and incomplete characters.
The Verdict? Possibly, worth a watch, especially for Shakespearian times’ lovers. 5/5