Through many generations, we’ve had the great privilege of the profound and remarkable words of William Shakespeare. He’s been a historian of sorts. A poet destined for humanity. And a writer rightfully touted as masterful. However, Roland Emmerich’s newest endeavor, Anonymous, is the theory that Shakespeare was a peasant, a mere illiterate and incompetent actor who took the credit for Edward De Vere’s work.

While the premise is intriguing, the plot is construed in the most insulting demeanor. Screenwriter John Orloff contrives every plotline to swiftly shift his view in a more appealing and compelling light. His fallacies include bending history to make statements on infidelity and loyalties appear more significant – characters suffered to prove some lofty theory that can be disproved within minutes.

The actors do what they can with the material, all-turning in competent performances. Among the golden British cast, Rhys Ifans delivers a heartbreaking performance as De Vere and Vanessa Redgrave is excellent as Queen Elizabeth. Sebastian Armesto, a newcomer in Hollywood, is also quite good. He plays Ben Jonson, the writer of the preface of the anthology of Shakespeare’s work and (in the film at least) the man who brought all the plays De Vere wrote to the incompetent William Shakespeare.

For those in need of explanation of why De Vere gave his work to Jonson to ultimately hand down to William, it is because De Vere was the Earl of Oxford and his place in society did not permit him to indulge in literary arts. Beyond the tour-de-force of acting the only detail that could be considered of high “quality” would be the film’s cinematography. Completed by Anna Foerster it encapsulates the time period imminently and authentically.

Albeit its attributes, Anonymous comes off as a long-winded, dreary, and deplorable little picture – juxtaposed with unrelated anecdotes, history that requires a perquisite before heading in, and some twisty incest plotline that’s equal measures baffling and discomforting.

To no surprise, Emmerich has directed subsequent dreadful films – 2012, Independence Day, and The Day After Tomorrow. All of which are ludicrous pictures in massive proportions. Anonymous, over the straggling test of time, will fit right in.

The storyteller, supposedly there to assist and guide you on a journey, does nothing but perplex each and every situation. The only problem is, it’s not all that entertaining. The rollercoaster ride ultimately morphs into one big, sparse slog, jumbled into an incoherent and pervasive mess. If the director’s object is to represent an outlandish injustice that occurred, he fails… quite miserably.

What I took away is that though the Edward De Vere was frowned upon by the Kingdom for neglecting his prosperous property and his prosperous wife, we were left with a man who, unlike any other in the history of mankind, brought insight into an entire generation (I come about this by just going with the film’s theory).

William Shakespeare’s fables, poems, sonnets, and all things literary, withstand today due to the contemporary relevance of his stories. Love is an ageless and endless struggle. Loyalty is always scarce. And hardships between families – from the wealthy to the poor – will never cease to exist. Shakespeare, whoever it may be, brought us more than words. He brought life. We will forever be thankful in that regard.

Still, it’s a shame the agenda of the director overrides the pictures artistic integrity. What should dwell into a theory about a man who wrote beautiful plays, but had to hand it down to one less renowned in society, merely thrives on distasteful and pompous tones.

The final product comes off as something along the lines of the British don’t want to accept that William Shakespeare was not some grand aristocrat but was in fact a standard, humane citizen (gasp!). At the end of the day, there’s no real upside to Anonymous. Those who are unfamiliar with Shakespeare will be repetitively bored and those who are adequate with the subject will be repulsed by the obnoxious theory at hand.

Just a bit of a disclaimer, a recent article by James Shapiro of The New York Times reminisces over just a few of the gaping, historical flaws in the film. One most importantly, Edwards De Vere (the Earl of Oxford) died in 1604 – years before 10 to 15 plays of Shakespeare were ever written.

✭✭/✭✭✭✭

C

You can follow me on twitter @DukeSensation