Yeah, I was surprised as you to see Emmerich's name on this one – I'd never have thought of him for directing this – but I think he did a great job!

LOL, thanks for the props, good buddy.

If I'd been writing the script, there'd have been more boobs and explosions. So in a way, it IS too bad I wasn't writing it.

Too bad they didn't have *you* writing the script for this.
My recent post Booze Revooze: Mud

By my estimations, we'll find out about Shakespeare the day somebody comes out and proves who the gunman on the grassy knoll was…. 😉

He he he, sometimes it's better not to know too much about a film before watching it. I'd only ever heard rumors of what turned out to be Oxford theory with regards to Shakespeare, so this film was something of an eye opener. You make a good point too: folks who dissect the ideas of a film without regarding the film itself don't deserve to be called reviewers.

I doubt Oxford theory will ever really take hold (Shakespearean authorship is too ingrained in our education systems, to my mind) but it would be nice to see some balance come to the debate about the man. It's just a pity there's no definitive, smoking-gun proof.

I had the privilege of talking to John Orloff recently who was upset that the film lost money. I told him that in the long run, if the Oxfordian attribution ever really becomes accepted, his film will have been a turning point.

Thanks for popping in, Howard, good to have you along for this one. One of the key problems I find with films of a period setting, usually ones in which there's some kind of political or controversial intrigue, is that film-makers often struggle to make it relevant to modern audiences. I'm all for a Sherlock Holmsian action bent, but cinema such as Anonymous often struggles to keep things interesting for audiences who might only see this as "history" without context. Thankfully, Emmerich manages to avoid this pitfall and present a relatively compelling (if somewhat dense) film.

Although it helps to have a background in Elizabethan times, it is not necessary. Ultimately, the film is a breakthrough in bringing the name of Edward de Vere to public attention in spite of the fierce opposition of the entrenched academics in the Shakespeare industry.