Rating: 
Summary: A worthy work of art as viewed by a strong Stratford fan.
Review: As a movie-goer, I was enthralled, moved, and entertained by _Shakespeare in Love_ as a whole. As an avid reader and researcher of Shakespeare and his contemporaries, the whole wonderful, intricate script delighted me from beginning to end. I also was relieved at the cast's/director's beautiful handling of the period and language. The costumes and streets were not only authentic, but they actually looked lived-in, which is a look rare to so-called historically correct movies about the time (which, BTW, are more or less as much guesswork about Shakespeare's life as this is, without as much fun!). I went to see this movie with a group of friends that had acted in Two Gentlemen of Verona, R&J, Twelfth Night, and many others. We had a blast catching all the subtle and not-so-subtle references. I'll venture to say, however, that you don't need to know anything more about Shakespeare than his name to enjoy this movie and acclaim it. One last note: I wish I could trade the simple and powerful glimpes of Romeo and Juliet in this movie for the whole two hour mess that Danes and DiCaprio gave us in the 1996 R&J. As I'm sure many of us would. *sigh*
Rating:
Summary: Best romantic-comedy Ever!
Review: "Shakespeare in Love" was a comical and witty look at a fictional romance occuring in the life of the Bard himself.The storyline was great.The acting was incredible.The costumes and sets looked so real.An excellent movie , worth all 7 Oscars and more..."Life is Beautiful" was funny,"Elizabeth" was dramatic,and "Saving Private Ryan" was exciting,but "Shakespeare in Love" is the grandest of all.
Rating: 
Summary: SHAKESPEARE FOR THE MASSES
Review: I suggest that this film appeals mainly to those who probably have not read much Shakespeare but have rightly told that he was a great man. It has enough Scmaltz to amuse and interest many , athough perhaps not too accurate historically (after all all it is a movie). To think it was selected over Saving Private Ryan suggests that the Academy is easily swayed by non-artisitc influences. Big surprise. It is a good film though, and I would recommend seeing it but not to expect too much
Rating:
Summary: This is the BEST movie I've ever seen!!!!!
Review: The first time I saw this film it was because the commercials on television looked hilarious and I love Gwyneth Paltrow. So, I went to see it Christmas Day (opening day) at the first show. I immediately loved it. That day I also went to see Prince of Egypt and Stepmom; bad and watchable, respectively. As I continued to think about Shakespeare in Love that day, the other movies got worse and worse and Shakespeare in Love got better and better. Four days later I returned to see this film with my friend, Erica. She loved it too. I kept dragging my mother and my friends to come with me over and over again. Eventually, I had brought all of my friends that hadn't seen it yet, so I continued to see it by mtself. I have seen it a total of thirteen times to date and I plan on seeing it one more time this weekend. This movie was especially funny to me because I had just re-read Romeo& Juliet and MacBeth and I am familiar with Shakespeare's work, though you don't need to be a scholar to see this film. Gwyneth Paltrow is truly amazing if you look at it as her playing four parts (Viola, Thomas, Romeo and Juliet). She is funny and stunning as Juliet. Joseph Fiennes is also perfection as Shakespere. He can switch from comedien (his eyebrows do a lot of acting) to dramatist instantly and amazingly. Ben Affleck is also in it as Ned Alleyn, and though his part is small, he gets huge laughs as the (non-operatic) prima donna of the group. Geoffery Rush and Judi Dench both fully deserved supporting acting Oscars (only Dench won), but such is life. These five bring the star-power, but the supporting cast (mostly British stage veterans) are hilarious as well and make this film a well-rounded dramedy. (Imelda Staunton, the nurse, and Tom Wilkinson, Mr. Fennyman, are especially good , in my opinion.) I thouroughly enjoyed this film (I still laugh at every joke and my eyes still tear at the end) and I believe anyone will, even if it's just because you can stare at Ben Affleck and Joseph Fiennes.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: A wonderful historical romp with great costumes, sets and performances. Joseph Fiennes was great (if anything HE deserved an Oscar nomination) and the supporting players were excellent too. Gwyneth Paltrow was totally believable as an English noblewoman, perfected the accent and had great chemistry with JF. Her performance was certainly creditable but definitely didn't deserve the Oscar over Cate Blanchett and anyone who thinks she does hasn't seen Elizabeth.
Rating: 
Summary: Cate Blanchett deserved Best Actress of the Year...
Review: Best Actress of the Year? As if giving *Shakespeare in Love* Best Picture of the Year wasn't ludicrous enough! Paltrow's performance consisted of crawling into bed with the character of Shakespeare and delivering one catch-line. ("It is a new world." Oddly enough, she was referring to sex.) I hate to tell you all this, but the Oscars ARE corrupted. The reason Gwyneth Paltrow won is (*duh*) because she has Hollywood parents. So obviously, the Academy voters cast their ballot for Paltrow, a Hollywood child. Now granted, you could say that Cate Blanchett of *Elizabeth* (who actually DESERVED Best Actress because of the merits of her performance, in my opinion) would win the major acting award in her home country, Australia. But am I the only one who finds it odd that, at the 51st Annual BAFTA (British Acadmey) Awards in London, where both Paltrow and Blanchett were on equal ground, the voters went with Cate Blanchett's role in *Elizabeth*?
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining
Review: I'm not a big Paltrow fan but she did a fine job in this light, entertaining little movie. Anyone who has ever been in a theatrical performance will appreciate the behind-the-scenes view. Still, the movie is all style and very little substance. Expect to a pleasant eperience and nothing more, and you won't be dissappointed.
Rating:
Summary: I LOVED this movie!
Review: This movie was one of the best movies I've seen all year! My boyfriend and I, after seeing the movie, both loved it so much that we argued over who was going to have the privelage of buying themselves a copy (we don't need two copies of the same movie!). He originally didn't want to go see a "Chick flick" but after I made him go with me we were both enormously delighted with the movie. It was both funny and romantic at the same time. I have loved movies based on Shakespeare's many plays in the past, and I was delighted to see a movie about the playwrite himself (even if it was mostly fictional!). I found Gwyneth Paltrow's character particularly endearing and made more so because of her great performance.
Rating:
Summary: The best of 1998
Review: This movie is excellent on all levels. Obviously it's not accurate, but that's part of the fun - to just imagine what if . . . (Besides, anyone check the outrageous revisionism of Elizabeth?) As for the continuing debate over who was better, Paltrow or Blanchett - how ridiculous! Both actresses were stunning in their parts. Blanchett's dramatic role was sure to turn heads. However, Paltrow was able to deliver the words of Shakespeare smoothly and keep a sense of comic timing. Both aspects are extremely subtle, and difficult to do well, and therefore deserving of the prize. Having said all that, this film was, without a doubt, the best of last year. Sentient, witty and clever. A breath of fresh air.
Rating:
Summary: Stoppard is brilliant
Review: I agree with everything you've said, Mandy. Tom Stoppard (and Marc Norman in this case, too) is brilliant. I just bought the SIL screenplay, after having seen the movie three times. It was almost as much fun to read as it was to watch onscreen, but I have to say the actors made it even BETTER. I can't imagine any other actors playing any of the roles. They were perfect! If you liked "Shakespeare in Love", definitely check out "Brazil", too, especially if you're a fan of futuristic, Big Brother type stuff. Tom Stoppard also had a hand in writing that screenplay, and the marriage of his words with Terry Gilliam's direction is a joy to behold.
|
