Saturday, April 16, 2011
Anonymous - Coming September 30 (US)
Director - Roland Emmerich
Main Characters
Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford - Rhys Ifans
Princess Elizabeth Tudor - Joely Richardson
Queen Elizabeth I - Vanessa Redgrave
William Shakespere - Rafe Spall
I have a very special weakness for period movies, especially those set during the formative decades of Tudor England, and Anonomyous will be just such a movie.
It was a surprise to me several years ago to learn that there was a strong suspcion that William Shakespere may have in fact been illiterate, either having had someone else write down his ideas, or more likely, letting someone else use his name to publish his plays so that the real writer could remain anonymous. This movie is based around the latter theory, which in recent years seems to have been accepted as truth.
The works of William Shakespere, according to Anonymous were really written by one Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, (Rhys Ifans) and a favourite of Queen Elizabeth I (Vanessa Redgrave). Eventually, after losing the Queen's favour due to an unauthorized treaty negotiation while on a campaign in Irelad, he plotted to start a rebellion against the Queen.
So what does all this have to do with the plays and sonets he wrote that were attributed to William Shakespere (Rafe Spall)? Supporters of Oxford arranged for Richard II to be played at The Globe the day before the rebellion. Richard II tells the story of how Richard II was overthrown by Henry IV and how Richard, like Queen Elizabeth I had abdicated much of her power in favour of her advisers Cecil and Raleigh. For more information on that part of Queen Elizabeth's reign, check out Elizabeth and Elizabeth: The Golden Age starring Cate Blanchette.
Anyways, back to the movie at hand, the intention of having this play performed was to try and stir up support from Londoners for the Oxford rebellion. Through history, the people of London have often been reluctant to take up arms against their Kings and Queens. Possibly because they got so much of the benefits of having the royal family immediately in their midst so much of the time?
So, now we see the political repercussions that the performance of a simple play could create, and a very good reason why if Edward de Vere was indeed the author of the works that William Shakespere was given credit for, he had every reason to want to remain Anonymous.
Usually go into who the actors are, what's they've been in and how I think they'll do in their roles, but this time to be honest, I don't recognize a lot of the names, and with the storyline being what it is, I don't really care. I'm very excited to see this movie!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What a fun follow-up to twelfth grade British Literature lessons on the authorship controversy.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the history went past you too quickly. Edward de Vere was recognized in his own time as the founding genius of the English Renaissance, which he mainly paid for out of his own estate. He was involved with Elizabeth I, who may or may not have been his mother seducing him to maintain power over him--akin to Venus and Adonis by 'Shakespeare'. She likely had a son by him, farmed out as a bastard to be kept for future eventualities--Southampton, who later was touted as the successor to Elizabeth briefly but being headstrong, the political powers did not agree and assist. He aligned with Sussex, who wished to eliminate Robert Cecil as Principal Secretary, they were sucked into a losing campaign in Ireland, and when Sussex came home to protest, he was declared a traitor. de Vere's and Elizabeth's son, Southampton, was not beheaded with Sussex. He was saved when Jame I succeeded Elizabeth. de Vere himself never rebelled against either monarchy. We don't see a good outcome for rebels in 'Shakespeare', nor are Machiavels extolled--the Cecil's of the world. As for the movie, it serves a good educational purpose--to bring this hidden side of history into the light, as Academia will not do, since it bought the hoax of an illiterate commoner writing the Shakespeare canon. The English state could have fallen if those works were known as being written by the highest noble in the land.
ReplyDeleteThe leader of the campaign in Ireland and the rebellion against Robert Cecil was neither Oxford nor Sussex. He was Robert Devereux, the 2nd Earl of Essex.
ReplyDeleteWilliam Ray.... on the off chance that you were not sarcastic...
ReplyDeleteWhat is the evidence for any of your claims??
What is the evidence for DeVere being involved in the 'Renaissance'
Where is the proof that Elizabeth had an affair with DeVere or that she ever had any children??
DeVere was saved 3 years after the Essex treason?? Did he spend all that time in prison? Well no, he was one of the people, better yet the top billed one to pass judgement on the rebellion...
So if the movie hints at DeVere being in prison for it it has committed historical fraud...
So the biggest hack to make movies in years, Roland Emmerich, is making a movie claiming that the greatest writer in history was an impostor....Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...
ReplyDeleteThe main plot devices is that Elizabeth the First had sex with her illigitimate son, DeVere, and they had a baby boy, who should have had 2 heads and 12 fingers, (incest , EWWW!)who was Southampton? What a load of bull !
ReplyDeleteOh, and Shakespeare murdered Marlowe!
WOW!
There are many well researched works that consider deVere not only the real genius and author, but also call into question his parents and any children he may have fathered.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, history is written by the literate and by "the victors." Thus, there is much to history that will remain lost to those of us in present day with an interest in the subject.