Writing plays and poetry is the passion of the Edward, 17th Earl of Oxford but he can't share it with the world and is forced to let someone else take the credit. And there is Elizabeth I, strong as ever but in this movie with a very very interesting interpretation.
I always like it when a movie offers an interesting view. Historic events are always seen from "a" point of view and written by winners/powerful. Who says that some of these elements weren't true?
Note for this movie: don't leave your brain at home because there are lots of up and down flash backs. Don't get often confused but at a point I notices that I was trying to match scenes. Due to the plot, I didn't mind that much in the end. "It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves" ... who needs stars if there a queen to give destiny a hand.
I like to hear Shakespeare. Fair enough, makes "easier" script writing but better to steal well than create badly. Loved being in a Elizabethan theater, but wasn't so amazed due to previously seeing 'Shakespeare in love'. Still the interacting between public and players, so very different from a film experience in NL. In house scenes were beautifully dressed. The CGI for outdoor palace/tower were well done. Costumes were elegant but not elaborate; liked Vanessa's black dress that she wears at the end.
Rhys Ifans (Earl of Oxford) is brilliant, liked him in Notting Hill and can hardly believe it's the same man. Vanessa Redgrave was a good fragile older queen but not a good harsh one. Joely Richardson as the younger Bess was lovely and flirty enough. Jonson, David Thewlis and Edward Hogg (William & Robert Cecil) were solid, liked the "Henry V" player but not all actors. Not outstanding ... but Xavier Samuel (Southampton) looked delightful.
It's a 8,5 movie due to the time line multi-cut-up but still a 9 because of the interesting twist. Maybe a bit too ambitious but still strong enough movie that I will enjoy watching again.
I always like it when a movie offers an interesting view. Historic events are always seen from "a" point of view and written by winners/powerful. Who says that some of these elements weren't true?
Note for this movie: don't leave your brain at home because there are lots of up and down flash backs. Don't get often confused but at a point I notices that I was trying to match scenes. Due to the plot, I didn't mind that much in the end. "It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves" ... who needs stars if there a queen to give destiny a hand.
I like to hear Shakespeare. Fair enough, makes "easier" script writing but better to steal well than create badly. Loved being in a Elizabethan theater, but wasn't so amazed due to previously seeing 'Shakespeare in love'. Still the interacting between public and players, so very different from a film experience in NL. In house scenes were beautifully dressed. The CGI for outdoor palace/tower were well done. Costumes were elegant but not elaborate; liked Vanessa's black dress that she wears at the end.
Rhys Ifans (Earl of Oxford) is brilliant, liked him in Notting Hill and can hardly believe it's the same man. Vanessa Redgrave was a good fragile older queen but not a good harsh one. Joely Richardson as the younger Bess was lovely and flirty enough. Jonson, David Thewlis and Edward Hogg (William & Robert Cecil) were solid, liked the "Henry V" player but not all actors. Not outstanding ... but Xavier Samuel (Southampton) looked delightful.
It's a 8,5 movie due to the time line multi-cut-up but still a 9 because of the interesting twist. Maybe a bit too ambitious but still strong enough movie that I will enjoy watching again.