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

Letters to Juliet (2010, U.S.)

I thought that this movie looked really cute, and I like Amanda Seyfried quite a bit. Needless to say, I was quite disappointed.

The whole thing felt way too contrived, with stilted dialogue that almost bordered on wooden at times (and had a false ring a majority of the time). Overall, the writing was terrible. Aside from the dialogue problems, a lot of the plot was just too much of a stretch when it could have been much smoother. Parts were too easy, convenient, and basically unrealistic. I think "oversimplified" is the best word I can come up with.

The actors weren't bad. Seyfriend wasn't her best, but still cute. Her fiance was a Mexican actor playing a goofy maybe-Italian, which was a very strange choice. They do get extra points for casting Vanessa Redgrave, who is an absolute film goddess. I did like the male lead, who had very good comedic timing. He had a very strong (and to my untrained ear, accurate) British accent, but every now and then it went a little weird—turns out he's Australian. He also had something in his face (though not his acting) that reminded me of Heath Ledger, which was odd.

Anyway, this was a sweet concept that was terribly executed. Very unfortunate.

Rating: 2.0

Girl, Interrupted (1999, U.S.)

It is a good thing that I didn't see this film back in the day, although I have been wanting to see it for years. (Angelina Jolie is one of my all time favorite actresses—why have I not seen her Oscar-winning performance yet?) The reason I say I shouldn't have seen it is because it was spot on. Winona Ryder's character is institutionalized, and rather than getting better, she gets crazier. Because she's surrounded by other people who are genuinely crazy and/or have become crazy there. Then she takes charge of herself and heals herself.

But enough of that. Acting. Was. Brilliant. Angelina Jolie was brilliant, of course. It's strange to see how much maturity she had as an actress even when she was a bit of a wreck of a person. Perhaps that helped her in roles like this one. In any case, she was perfect. As was Winona Ryder. I've gained more and more respect for her recently. She's more than just a shoplifter and Depp's ex!

I would recommend this to anyone, but especially any female who's found her sanity in question at sometime in her life. This film is beautifully sad. It's about the human experience from a point of view rarely taken. It's about women finding themselves and each other and getting through the tough times. It's about the unfairness of life and the things we do to make it through the day. It's about being alone. It's about friendship. It's about putting the pieces back together. Wonderful film.

Rating: 4.0

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