Not much fun

Rating: Null/10 (19 December 1998)

This seems to be a site where fans rave about their favorite movies so I hope no-one will mind if I say I didn't like this film very much at all and wonder what all the fuss is about. I laughed maybe three times during the screening, the film seemed too long and I didn't find it very romantic.
My problems with the film began with the two leads. Ms Paltrow is pretty but, unfortunately, not much of an actress (see "Elizabeth" if you want to see good acting). Consequently, I found it very hard to believe the character she played could ever "inspire" Shakespeare let alone fool him into thinking she was a man by just wearing a mustache. Joseph Finnes was OK but his Shakespeare seems more like a modern sitcom lead than a great playwright. I suppose the movie makers were trying to make the "great man" accessible to all us unsophisticated moderns but I found it uncomfortable and almost insulting to think that Shakespeare was so foolish a person and basically solved his writer's block by sleeping with a pretty girl. As "fun" a concept as this is, it begs the question: if all it takes is sex, why aren't there more great writers around?! If you've had a regular education it's not hard to follow the Shakespearean references but those jokes get old pretty fast. It's almost as if the writers are trying to make you feel smart by telling old jokes with fancy language. I guess that really was my bottom line feeling; that I was being manipulated by some clever writers and actors into thinking I was seeing something better, brilliant and more witty when, in fact, it was only trivial and ordinary. The best thing about this film was Judy Dench as the queen. She really did a great job and made most of the rest of the cast look like they were playing in a loud, unfunny, costumed high school play. I'm sorry to be so negative but the only intelligent, accurate review of this movie that I've read was in the Village Voice so I thought I'd add my own.