SiL; The best movie 1998?

Rating: 8/10 (28 September 1999)

First and foremost, I would like to point out that "Shakespeare in Love" got 5 Academy Awards, including "Best Movie". This resulted, naturally, in an enormous hype connected with the movie. Therefore, I had great expectations, when I went to the theatre to see it. Luckily, I was not too much disappointed. The movie was a beautifully controlled comedy, with excellent cast, astounding costumes and a sweet and delightful screenplay. In a movie a well-considered cast is of greatest importance. In my opinion, Joseph Fiennes, who is the leading actor, shows a great depth in his role as Will Shakespeare. He does not overplay and his accent and charisma is outstanding. It is definitely his breakthrough-role, and I think that he, in time, will be an accepted artist. The character, William Shakespeare, is well made, even though he does not develop much throughout the story. Nevertheless, it is great to see how Viola De Lesseps affects his competence of writing. Shakespeare is not capable of making any progress with his life on his own. He needs help from his lover and his friends. Among his friends it is significant to mention Ned Alleyn, who is played by Ben Affleck. Ned is the leader of a small theatre company, as travels around England to get jobs where available. This, alongside with many other things, tells a lot about the theatre line of business at the end of the 16th century. I can also mention that only male actors where allowed to perform at that time, which the film also points out. Finally, the film tells about for instance a priest's point of view. It is clearly that the priest finds the two theatres in London as a profanation. The above-mentioned examples indicate that Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard had done their homework, the description of the theatres and actors is very similar to the way it really happened in those days. Gwyneth Paltrow, who got an Oscar for best actress in a leading role, is playing a double role. She is both playing the noble Viola De Lesseps and the actor (!) Thomas Kent. As Viola De Lesseps, she is, besides being gorgeous, very convincing. You cannot help but sympathise with her all the way through the movie. Viola is a strong character, and she is not the typical, noble snob. She has a great heart, and her feelings about Will are true. Unfortunately, her destiny is already decided for her. She knows that she cannot prevent it. Therefore, I think the ending of the movie is excellent. It would be too much Hollywood, if Will and Viola had each other at the end. In the 16th century such marriages could not take place, and this is being told in a simple but heartbreaking way in the movie. The last character I will mention is Queen Elizabeth played by Judi Dench. Dench got an Oscar for the "Best Actress in a supporting Role" for this role. This is, in my opinion, also understandable. She acts very "solemnly" in the movie, and when she speaks, she really shows her huge authority. Elizabeth, as a character, seems to be a good queen and also very generous. She sees that Viola will not be happy with her fiancé, Lord Wessex, and she understands Viola's affair with Shakespeare. Maybe the queen is a bit too nice; I do not think that a "real" queen would act like she does in the ending. Nevertheless, there is something about the queen, as you cannot put a finger on, which is - of course - the costumes! On the contrary, the script is not that good. It is filled with clichés and small laughs, where some of them seem unnecessary. It is a romantic comedy, I know, but why is it not possible to write a script that really takes the viewers breath away. I have seen quite a few love comedies, and I have very seldom been positively surprised by the plotline. "Shakespeare in Love" is a wonderful film, but all in all, it does, due to the script, fall in to the category of "mainstream" movies. It will never be a classic, as for instance "Shawshank Redemption" and "Shindler's List" or if I should mention a love story: "Casablanca" and "Good Will Hunting". The themes as the film tries to point out are easily interpreted. One of the themes is, as mentioned before, the life of an actor or playwright in London in the 16th century. Another theme is the romance between a poor, no-good playwright and the noble countess; such relationship is of course a taboo. It is an overused theme, which we last saw in James Cameron's "epic" lovestory "Titanic". In fact "Shakespeare in Love" can be compared to "Titanic" in many ways, as the two films have many things in common. The small jokes, the differences between rich and poor, the hype surrounding the movies and of course the Academy Award for the "Best Movie", which certainly shows what way Hollywood are going these years. I do not think that "Shakespeare in Love" or "Titanic" deserved that Oscar. In 1997 it should have been "L.A. Confidential", which is a crime movie with several plot turns; a "real" movie, or "Good Will Hunting", which has maybe one of the best scripts ever written. In 1998 there can not be much doubt that "Saving Private Ryan" was the absolutely best movie, maybe together with "Life is Beautiful". "Life is Beautiful" is, as "Shakespeare in Love", a romantic comedy, it is just that "Life is Beautiful" is funnier, has a more interesting plot and, maybe mostly important for a lovestory, it is much more touching!
When this has been said, I think it is time to make my conclusion. First of all, I think it is a very good movie. The acting is almost perfect, and the costumes, photography and music are of very high standards. The script is okay, but could certainly have been better, not to mention the dialogues that are somewhat naive, mainly because of the small jokes and clichés. Altogether, "Shakespeare in Love" has scenes as form a synthesis. You cannot help but be amazed, when you see the love scene, where Viola and Shakespeare, has a narrative dialogue from "Romeo and Juliet", while the camera moves softly around the bed and the most beautiful music flights towards your ear as carried by wings of angels! At the end of the 16th century Shakespeare wrote a beautiful play. At the end of the 20th century John Madden made a film about it, but - alas - it was not as good as the work of the true master - not as good as the never forgettable William Shakespeare.
Rating: 8/10