Anonymous (2011, U.S.)

Wow. I am so glad that this film was finally released near me, because I loved it. It was absolutely absorbing from the first second, as we follow an actor who's running late into the play he's introducing. (That actor, incidentally, is Derek Jacobi, who I later found out from reading Bill Bryson's biography of Shakespeare is a very strong believer in the Shakespeare-didn't-write-Shakespeare school. He must have been thrilled to get this role!) Basically the story goes that the Earl of Oxford wanted his plays performed to influence the political climate, but he didn't want his name attached to them. He tried to get Ben Jonson to put his name to them, but Jonson didn't want to. Somehow Shakespeare, who is an absolutely ridiculous, full of himself, almost air-headed actor, ends up having the plays attributed to him.

I don't know if I have ever seen a more convincing alternate history. All of the "evidence" seemed entirely plausible (although how accurate it was and what was excluded for convenience's sake, I can't say). The plot lines that involved the queen having illegitimate babies without anyone knowing seemed a bit of a stretch, but once the babies were men it worked a lot better. Anyway, for the most part the plot was fascinating, and I liked how they framed the story as a play in modern New York. (It was especially neat at the end, when during the credits the screen shows the audience filing out of the theater, just as the audience in the movie theater was doing. Weird but cool!)

I can't say enough about this cast. Really, wow. A majority of the cast was composed of people who are good, strong actors (mostly British) who I am familiar with but who the average movie-goer wouldn't necessarily recognize. All of the young earls— Southampton (Xavier Samuel), Essex (Sam Reid), and young Oxford (Jamie Campbell Bower)—were so convincing as these godlike golden boys, beautiful warriors, sons of privilege. I was especially enraptured with Bower's performance. His range of emotion was really powerful. Of course, the two women who played Elizabeth, Vanessa Redgrave and Joely Richardson, were perfectly cast. (Has Redgrave ever played the queen before? She was great! It was weird to see Richardson as Elizabeth when I was first introduced to her as Catherine Parr in The Tudors.) David Thewlis and Edward Hogg as the Cecil men, elder and younger, were sharp and conniving, very snake-like. Sebastian Armesto was a serious Ben Jonson, passionate about his work, with dark eyes that looked like they'd been strained by candlelight one too many times. Rafe Spall as Shakespeare... I don't know what to say. He was definitely the comic relief. So funny, so self-centered, so obviously not a writer. He was good. Even with all of this fabulous talent, the real star of the show was Rhys Ifans. I have seen him in many different things (Rancid Aluminum, Vanity Fair, Enduring Love, Elizabeth: The Golden Age, The Deathly Hallows) and I'm always impressed by his range and skill. Enduring Love is an especially impressive performance from him. But this film might have been his best ever. I have never seen him perform such a commanding character before. I don't think it's necessarily that his acting has matured, because he's always been so good. It's more like this was the role he was always meant to play. His presence dominated every scene he was in. Amazing.

Okay, I've gone on about the cast forever, but they really were that good! Now I don't want to bore with descriptions of music and scenery and lighting and costumes, but suffice is to say that they too were simply incredible. I especially loved the panoramas of Elizabethan London, which just looked so realistic. I also had the same reaction that I had to The Conspirator—I felt like I could smell the smoke from flickering candles and smell the sewage in the gutter and taste the pints of ale in the pub. Really, really great work. One thing that bothered me about the music is that several of the period songs they used had been used before in Elizabeth, or Elizabeth: The Golden Age, or Shakespeare in Love, or some other Elizabethan drama. It's great music and it fits the time, but surely there must be more than five songs that have survived. I know, minor complaint, but when you're an avid watcher of every Elizabethan film you can get your hands on, these are the things you notice.

All in all, probably one of the best movies I've seen in ages. I would almost be tempted to give it a 5.0, except for a few plot details that didn't quite work for me. Still, as I said, it was an engaging, interesting plot with an unparalleled cast, stellar mis en scène, and fitting period music. Definitely a must for fans of the theater, Elizabethan England, and possibly Shakespeare too (unless you don't want to hear that he didn't write his work).

Rating: 4.5

Mary, Queen of Scots (1971, UK)

After I saw Anne of the Thousand Days and didn't fall in love, I didn't have high hopes for this one, which was also directed by Charles Jarrott. But it was great.

Of course Vanessa Redgrave is a wonderful actress, and I've seen her in several films, but this was the best role I've seen her in, I think. And Glenda Jackson might be my all-time favorite Queen Elizabeth. I love Cate Blanchett, and I loved Bette Davis, but Glenda Jackson's Elizabeth was the most "real" characterization. She seemed like a regular person, but grouchy and headstrong and not entirely likable. Probably how she really was. (Side note: Jackson is now an MP. How cool is that?)

I liked that this film spanned many decades of their relationship and took the opposite approach than the usual one. I wish that there could have been more of everything... But that seems to have been the trend recently.

The score was typical of all period pieces from the late 1960s and early 70s, but it was still good. And Ian Holm as a young man with black hair and beard... too strange.

So overall, this was pretty much what you would expect from a film of its type, but a bit better. If you like this kind of thing, you'll like Mary, Queen of Scots.

Rating: 4.0

Anne of the Thousand Days (1969, UK)

Here's another one of those movies that it seems like I should have seen by now. It's one of Jennifer's favorites and it's about Tudor England. My kind of movie.

As far as portrayals of Anne Boleyn go, I thought this one was pretty good. She was shown as a strong, self-willed woman who wasn't going to let anyone tell her what to do, be he king or kin. That's the norm for her character I guess, but I thought that Geneviève Bujold did an exceptional job with this facet. However, I thought her relationship with the Earl of Northumberland could have been significantly strengthened. They seemed to be in love, but she gave up quite easily. Her relationship with Mary was also non-existant, but I guess we come to expect otherwise with the recent release of The Other Boleyn Girl.

The casting of Richard Burton as Henry VIII seems so obvious. Don't get me wrong, he was okay, but I just don't think he pulled it off, charisma-wise. (Come to think of it, I can't say that anyone has done Henry justice; perhaps Burton does come the closest.) The chemistry between Bujold and Burton was weak, I thought, so that didn't help matters.

Otherwise, this film was exactly what you'd expect of such an undertaking. Often oversimplified and cliched, but still entertaining. The "thousand days" of the title were quickly glossed over too. Most of the film was the courtship, then Elizabeth was born, then she was 3 and Anne was executed. Those 1000 days just flew right by! Anne apprently sacrifices herself so that Elizabeth won't be a bastard; she's all nobility and craziness. (Oh, how historical aftersight can futher dramatize these things!) I thought it was overdone, though well done. Then there was the ending, where young Elizabeth hears the cannons signalling her mother's death, and she goes walking off into the garden, away from the camera. Quite corny, but still touching. I appreciated that this filmmaker didn't feel the need to put an awful caption beneath the image of the toddler.

One more note: The score to this film was composed by Georges Delerue, who I am very familiar with, since he composed a boatload of scores for François Truffaut. It was a bit over the top, as his scores often are, but it fit quite well.

Overall, entertaining if taken a bit too quickly and with less emotion than this story requires. (It was not the "passionate and shocking love story" of the tagline.)

Rating: 3.5