Rating: 
Summary: For The TRUE Romantic
Review: I LOVED this movie and was fortunate to have Santa bring it to me for Christmas. Gwyneth Paltrow was excellent, but it was Joseph Fiennes who stole the spotlight as the passionate Shakespeare who leaves his wandering ways to spend a few days with the love of his life. I wish it had a happier ending, but love sometimes happens like that. The humor was excellent as long as you understand it... I like when a movie makes you think about how funny it is. Overall I'd have to say this is one of my top ten favorites of the nineties!
Rating: 
Summary: Worst Movie Of The Year
Review: One of the worst, most contrived movies of the year. Could Gywneth Paltrow look into the camera for approval any more often? Predictable and lacking any originality I am ashamed of the academy for even considering the farce as a legitimate movie. Considering the comic appeal (or lack of) this movie is no better than the Bruce Willis farce "Armageddon." Once the absurdity of the juvenile humor settled in, the pedantic plot drags the view from one tiring scene to the next. In the history of film this piece of trash will be long forgotten while "Saving Private Ryan" (a film that should have won) will live on as true cinematic art.
Rating:
Summary: The Bard's Tale Ignites Passion
Review: Any writer will tell you that the creative process is a fickle one, and inspiration can come from the most unlikely places. In Shakespeare in Love, co-writers Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard have created an enchanting and humorous look at one of the greatest -- and most enigmatic -- writers of all time, as the Bard tries to revive his missing muse. When considering the collected work of Shakespeare, no one takes into account the passion and sweat that he poured into his words. While so little is known about his life, even less is known about his creative process. So in Shakespeare in Love, audiences get to see how the Bard's life influences his work, and his work influences his life.Joseph Fiennes portrays young Will Shakespeare, a man whose career as a writer is hanging by a proverbial thread. Mr. Henslowe (Oscar winner Geoffery Rush, Shine and Les Misérables), the owner of the Rose theater, is in financial difficulties and has commissioned Will to write a new comedy. The new play, "Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter," will be the salvation of the theater -- if only Will can get his pen moving. To complicate Will's life, he finds himself under the shadow of his rival playwright Christopher Marlow (Rupert Everett, My Best Friend's Wedding), and simultaneously falling for a beautiful young lady, Viola (Gwyneth Paltrow, Sliding Doors). But events are set into motion that will soon bring his professional and private lives crashing into each other. Like a Shakespearean play within a play, the line between the real world and the written one becomes blurred. Roles are switched (as are genders) and the maddening pace keeps it all snowballing. Shakespeare in Love is a film for lovers of the Bard. With so many references lifted from his works, it would be hard for anyone not familiar with Shakespeare to appreciate the number of small jokes and plays on words that appear throughout the story. The story itself revolves primarily around Romeo and Juliet, so those familiar with only that one work may still enjoy many subtleties of the film. In addition, Norman and Stoppard have created a mythical late 16th Century London that in many ways mirrors contemporary society. For example, when one ferryman realizes that his passenger across the river is the poet and playwright Will Shakespeare, he yanks out a script that he has been working on and tries to solicit the Bard's advice. The cast of Shakespeare in Love is superb, from Fiennes portrayal of the love-sick poet, to the soft intensity and beauty of Paltrow's Viola. Two surprising performances, one by Ben Affleck (Armageddon) and one by Judi Dench (M from the James Bond series), provide wonderful additions to an already amazing cast. Affleck portrays a vain young actor, Ned, who is hired to play Mercutio. (And yes, Affleck is actually good!) Dench gives a frightening turn as Elizabeth I, carrying her with a strength that could make grown men cower. My only concern is the sheer volume of story packed into this whirlwind film. One can't help but feel that some things were missed, and desire to see it again. In this case, a second viewing was a delight.
Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare In Love...Literally
Review: This movie is excellent, very passionate and loving, focusing on Shakespeare's rise to fame and a little too passionate love for a girl who loves the theater and poetry.
Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare would love it
Review: Obviously the writers and director had their collective tongues firmly in their cheeks when they produced this thoroughly rollicking comedy. Paltrow is great as Julia, although her moustache could have done with a little development. Colin Firth makes a marvellously insufferable Wessex, and Judi Dench is a brilliant Queen Elizabeth. Having worked with a descendant of the great Will Kempe, whose sense of humour quite matches his great, late relative's, it was a joy to sit through the movie. It's one I will use to introduce students to Shakespeare, because it removes the threat most teenagers seem to feel when the Bard's name is mentioned. It also give an excellent feel of the theatre as Shakespeare might have known it.
Rating: 
Summary: Drab, Dry, Overall the Worst Film Associated w/Shakespeare
Review: I don't feel it was clever or witty. In fact, the humor was a little off base for me, personally. I often drifted off in thought during dialogue. The only joy I recieved from watching the film was the direct words of Shakespeare's poetry (aka. Romeo and Juliet). The characters were plain, the plot slow and lacking clarity. Also, the character Rosaline was irritating and grotesque. Sexuality in female characters has been polluted enough with poor and ugly symbolism. Why continue to keep it so unnecessarily crude? Gwen is sweet and Shakespeare comes across as a naive, weak, confused and uninspired character. Purely heterosexual, ofcourse. I was expecting more depth and originality. But, it is nothing but plain, old mainstream entertainment in the end.
Rating:
Summary: Pretentious and arty
Review: This movie will certainly be popular and rate with critics. However, it is pretentious and arty in the anticipated Hollywood manner. Furthermore, it takes too many liberties with a historical personality. We know little about the life of Shakespeare, and we certainly should not read his plays autobiographically. But one thing we do know from his writings is that he valued marital fidelity. If he ever violated this standard, he was certainly shamed by his own conscience. He would never have celebrated his lawless love. It is too bad that millions of folk, forgetting that this oh-so-serious production is fiction, will get their lasting impression of England's prime cultural hero here.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best I've ever seen
Review: I love this movie. All the little plays on words and the like. Judi Dench does a phenomnal job as Queen Elizabeth and Gwenyth and Joseph don't do too shabby either. This story so astronomically sad. I never cry at movies, but I cried during this one! If you're at all into Shakespeare, this is a must!
Rating:
Summary: WOW I HAVE NEVER SEEN A WORSE MOVIE
Review: WHAT WAS THAT AT THE END, YOU KNOW, GWENETH PALTROW, I DON'T GIVE A DARN. HOW WAS SHE WALKING IN SOME DESERT. THIS MOVIE DOES NOT DESERVE THE OSCARS IT WON, IF YOU WANT TO SEE A GOOD MOVIE, YOU CAN CHECK OUT SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. THANKS.
Rating: 
Summary: too green
Review: Okay, so I am not one to criticize the works of Shakespeare, however I do not think that this film deserved the Oscar for Best Picture. The content was wonderful but the acting was not very believable. Fiennes was an adequate representation of a love thirsty playright, but somehow, I did not believe him to be good old Billy. His actions were far too two dimensional for a person of great depth: his facial expressions were meek...if you flipped throught the DVD chapters, Fiennes' affect was only one of dispair and pure elation...sarcasm was lacking or too few. This movie also lacked a great musical score: the theme dragged and had nothing, besides being played on western instruments, to do with the Shakespearean era. As for buying this DVD, I would do it with some reservation because it is no better when watched for the second time. It lacked depth.
|
