Shakespeare in Love-Smugness is Not Acting
In 1998, football coaching legend John Madden took a break from covering games to make his directorial debut with the highly regarded Shakespeare in Love. The film would go on to win seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Actress for Gwyneth Paltrow, Best Supporting Actress for Dame Judi Dench and the list goes on and on. Oh, I started thinking, you know Madden has the bus he rides around in from city to city when covering football games, because he is afraid to fly, so I thought it was kind of odd that he would have directed a film in the UK. At first I considered that, perhaps, he put his bus on some sort of ship and hauled his way over to the UK, but that didn't seem very practical as the trip can last weeks. Upon doing a bit more research, I discovered that it is a different John Madden that directed Shakespeare in Love, go figure. I guess that makes sense, as I couldn't see the coaching legend John Madden directing a film like Shakespeare in Love any old way. Plus Madden is an American and having him direct this type of film might actually be illegal.
Shakespeare in Love is an impressive film in many ways. The art design, sets, cinematography and costuming are all truly fantastic, no doubt. Much of the acting is quite good, as Paltrow is believable and enjoyable and, of course, Judi Dench probably a better actress in her sleep than most actresses in Hollywood. Judi Dench as Queen Elizabeth I, makes a large impression to be sure. There are many other find performances as well, as Geoffrey Rush, Rupert Everett and Colin Firth all do fine jobs. Yet, my friends, there is a stench most foul, as Joseph Fiennes as William Shakespeare is a no-go. And, if you are not a fan of the ultimate Hollywood bad-penny Ben Affleck, then you my friend will suffer mightily, for the Affleck is all over this film. Fiennes, isn't dreadful, he's just flat and simply should have not been given the part, end of story. He is in over his head, too much of his real personality peaks through and your left wondering what behind the scenes politicking resulting in one of the worst casting decisions of all time. Some might think this is harsh, however, when a film has this level of detail to every aspect of production and there is obviously great care and concern being placed by so many why would anyone cast someone like Fiennes in this pivotal role? It doesn't make a lick of sense, none. Fiennes, has, for the most part, vanished since Shakespeare in Love for a good reason, he really can't act. The film won the Academy Award for Best Picture, despite him.
At the risk of sounding like a savage, Shakespeare in Love is not my kind of film. I think that the story isn't really that impressive, despite its Academy Award for Screenplay, as I feel it lacks originality. In short, it is the Secret Adventures of Young William Shakespeare, and we get to see Shakespeare fall in love. Okay, big deal. Now, where the film does excel is in terms of other aspects of production. It is a beautiful film, with many very fine acting performances, just not the one by Finnes. Sure Shakespeare in Love is overrated but it does hit many of its marks.
Story B- (Generally, Shakespeare in Love is well-crafted but lacks originality. It should not have won the Academy Award for Screenplay.)
Acting B (Numerous good performances are hampered by Finnes, who while not a horrible actor, is no where near the actor he believes himself to be. Smugness is not acting, its just smugness. And to make matters worse we are forced to suffer through Affleck.)
Visuals A
Originality/Innovation C
Enjoyability Grade C+
Home Theater/HD Factor A
Overall Grade B- (Shakespeare in Love is one of those overrated films that most will not dare to call out at the risk of seeming like a barbarian at the gate. A different lead actor would have helped tremendously. Bottom line, while there is much about the film that is admirable, it is, in the end much ado about nothing.)
|
