Even if you haven't even passed outside a theater in your life, you will still know William Shakespeare, the author of the most famous and diachronical theater plays in history of entertainment.
The movie by Ronald Emmerich, is from the one side complicating and from the other side propagandical. The screenplay jumps from the New York of today to England of Queen Elizabeth in the 16th century, in England the period is stigmatized by the rebellion of Essex. In the period the theater plays a big part in social life of people. The ruling class can easily control the masses by a theatrical screenplay. Although the play is not much connecting with the life of Shakespeare and it even doesn't show him as the main idea of the film. Shakespeare at the end is the fraud who just wonderfully and luck fully took the plays which today are connected to him. Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford, is presented as the real author of Shakespeare's works. Edward's life is followed through flashbacks from a young child, through to the end of his life. He is portrayed as a child prodigy who writes and performs A Midsummer Night's Dream for a young Elizabeth I. A series of events sees his plays being performed by a front man, Shakespeare.
The movie was difficult and left a feeling of chaos in the end, the flashback of De Veres life, front and back all the time, doesn't let the critic take a central opinion. I saw the movie with another three friends and the result was the same, the expectations of the film, fell apart. For me the rating of the movie is 5 out of 10 and personally, Shakespeare has left to be one of the most amazing writers and nobody with the name Edward De Vere has been left in history.
The movie by Ronald Emmerich, is from the one side complicating and from the other side propagandical. The screenplay jumps from the New York of today to England of Queen Elizabeth in the 16th century, in England the period is stigmatized by the rebellion of Essex. In the period the theater plays a big part in social life of people. The ruling class can easily control the masses by a theatrical screenplay. Although the play is not much connecting with the life of Shakespeare and it even doesn't show him as the main idea of the film. Shakespeare at the end is the fraud who just wonderfully and luck fully took the plays which today are connected to him. Edward De Vere, Earl of Oxford, is presented as the real author of Shakespeare's works. Edward's life is followed through flashbacks from a young child, through to the end of his life. He is portrayed as a child prodigy who writes and performs A Midsummer Night's Dream for a young Elizabeth I. A series of events sees his plays being performed by a front man, Shakespeare.
The movie was difficult and left a feeling of chaos in the end, the flashback of De Veres life, front and back all the time, doesn't let the critic take a central opinion. I saw the movie with another three friends and the result was the same, the expectations of the film, fell apart. For me the rating of the movie is 5 out of 10 and personally, Shakespeare has left to be one of the most amazing writers and nobody with the name Edward De Vere has been left in history.
FAIR!
ОтветитьУдалитьFree style rules!
Slips:
... in THE history of entertainment.
The movie by Ronald Emmerich, is , ON THE ONE HAND, complicating, BUT, ON THE OTHER HAND, propagandical.
... in THE social life of people.
Although the play is not much connectED with the life of Shakespeare and it doesn't EVEN show him as the main idea of the film.
Shakespeare at the end is PRESENTED AS the fraud who just wonderfully and luckILY took the plays which today are ATTRIBUTED to him.
ETC