Shakespeare in Love (1998)

People are voting emotionally.

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

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

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

I think what offends most students and teachers of the Bard is that this film is highly fictionalized and historically inaccurate, but starts with a written prologue to suggest it really happened. Shakespeare's real wife, Anne Hathaway is only mentioned 2 times. not even her name, and it isn't quite explained why he lives completely separate from her to write plays in London or why he never wrote or visited her. Humor is crude, vulgar and violence exaggerated. Yet somehow knives press throats and sword battles happen without anyone getting hurt with a scratch. The cliches of follow that boat, or to suggest Shakespeare's apothecary had a shrink couch for him to lie back and talk to by appointment were also ridiculous.

Does anyone remember this? I do, but only because its what turned me off of the Oscars. Haven't watched them since. It was the rude awakening that they were fixed, the quality of the film didn't matter as much as the bribes.It beat Saving Private Ryan for best picture.And then it beat Bulworth for best screen play.That was sort of enough to turn my head. Both of them? Bulworth was far from best picture worthy, but best original screenplay seemed as much as a shoe in as Ryan for Best Picture.And then it went on to win Best score over Mulan, A Bug's Life, and Prince of Egypt which is curious because it didn't really fit the criteria for Musical or Comedy Score as much as it's competition.And then now, looking back, who remembers it? If it's remembered at all, it's remembered for beating Saving Private Ryan, which has become a classic.Shakespeare in Love is just remembered for it's sweep of the awards, both at the Oscars and beyond, but not for its quality.

Young Will Shakespeare, suffering a bout of writer's block, happens across an intense love and draws inspiration for new material from the whirlwind romance. For a best picture winner, this is awfully mediocre stuff. The plot is simplistic and over-familiar, the acting merely acceptable, and the constant nods and winks to the budding auteur's work quickly grows excessive and wearying. Gwyneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes are attractive people and make convincing googly eyes at one another, but their relationship is so swift and passion-fueled that it never feels like more than a fiery seasonal fling. Judi Dench took home a best supporting actress statue for her work as Queen Elizabeth I, though she barely makes a cameo appearance and most of her work seems done by the wardrobe department. Irritatingly blunt at times, particularly when it tries its hand at comedy, I appreciate the freshness of the concept if not its flimsy, dated execution.

a nice film. funny, amusing, charming, romantic, full of all small tricks who gives to it a large target, mixture of historical details and pink details, secret side of a fake story but the truth is not the most important thing. after its end, two performances remains interesting- Elisabeth by Judy Dench and Marlowe by Rupert Everett. each as presence to gives roots to a lovely adventure in which Shakespeare seems be only good basic idea for rediscover original version of one from his plays. pure entertainment, the film is far to be good or bad. it is only a firework. seductive for story, atmosphere and costumes, old for well known clichés, new for the need of romantic fairy tales.short, nice at whole.