I want to make one thing clear from the start:

I'm FINE with historical fiction--in fact, one of my Top 3 movies is "Amadeus."

GREAT movie!

HOWEVER, THAT film was OPEN about it being historical FICTION...

THIS is a hack job written by people who, from this debate I jsut heard, got so much WRONG and contradicted themselves so many times that it's jsut amazing these people are employed...

Really--the director of "2012" is going to make a serious Shakespeare piece?!

MY biggest shock was that the great Sir Derek Jacobi supports and is in this...I'm at a loss for that...

But NOT as big a loss as when I heard they have Shakespeare murdering Marlowe and Elizabeth as, essentially, a whore of a queen and, to quote here, "a baby-making machine."

...

That's just flat out wrong AND insulting!

Saying Shakespeare murdered Marlowe is like accusing Byron of posioning Keats, or saying Jagger killed Lennon to put the Stones on top!

And she wasn't perfect...but that portrayal of Elizabeth...

I am NOT a fan of teh Monarchy overall today, I think I've been clear on that, it's not my country, so it's not my business, but just saying, I don't think they're really worth it...

And Elizabeth had flaws, yes...

But reducing her to barely more than a prostitute is just WRONG!

My favorite part might have been Emmerich actually comparing his film to "Richard III" itself in terms of accuracy and liberties...

Yes, it takes liberites...because "Richard III" is, and was known to be, really, even if no one said it aloud, PROPOGANDA!

Well-written propaganda, yeah, really the only one of the Histories I can sit through all the way and watch and be totally connected to....but Shakespeare KNEW he was writing a false story!

EMMERICH said he jsut read a few Shakespeare translations, and one day had the idea, "Hey, what if this guy DIDN'T write the plays?! WOW! This message MUST be shared, this hidden history!" and fucked Elizabethan history up the ass to get it done.

SHAKESPEARE. MURDERING. MARLOWE.
ELIZABETH. AS. A. WHORE-QUEEN.

...

Hamlet...pass the dagger...*I* won't hesistate...! >:(

@Mafi:

1. Because people keep BUGGING ME about it, every single last day, and once it comes out, it's only going to be MORE (EVERYONE at my college knows me, and most as the Shakespeare Guy...)

2. Because making this fringe debate mainstream just gives it credibility and detracts from it the REAL scholarship work to be done, and

3. MARLOWE BEING MURDERD BY SHAKESPEARE AND ELIZABETH BEING A WHORE-QUEEN IS JUST DOWNRIGHT INSULTING TO THREE OF THE TITANS OF THEIR AGE AND TO THE REAL READERS AND TO HISTORY ITSELF!

Really, it's like making a film "Holo-Laust" where the 6 million didn't DIE, but were just all moved to another country and denying the truth about history!

To call ANYONE a murderer or whore is a HORRIBLE slur...

But to say one of the greatest--if most Anti-Semitic--playwrights ever was murdered by the GREATEST playwright ever, and to call one of the most celebrated monarchs ever little more than a glorified whore...

And doing it ALL on next to no research...

THAT is just disgusting!

It's silly, and I agree completely without merit. It isn't seriously debated among people.

And yeah Elizabeth wasn't a prostitute. But if it were me, I'd be looking forward to the movie coming out, cause then people will stop caring when it flops and it's not like you have to watch it.

errr by people I mean Shakespearean scholars of course. That is what I meant to say. Wow not paying attention.

That's the thing--

The general, "2012"-watching public are NOT Shakespeare scholars.

They'll buy lies if it looks flashy and neat...even if it has no substance.

And if one phrase could be used to describe Roland Emmerich's films..."flashy and neat...with no substance..."

And se how much they rake in?

If this film's a success, the authorship question will become a mainstream debate...if there's one thing I've learned from debating religous folks in public and busses and wherever, it's that if the story is good and it sounds like something folks WANT to hear...they'll buy it, and not even questionthe logic.

Do they? I thought 2012 was a financial disaster.

769 million grossed from it, second-biggest payday for him behind Independence Day (which is stupid, but I like, because hey, it doesn't unsult anyone, really, and it's the President of the US, Will Smith, and a Jew vs. Aliens blowing up the White House...stupid, but a fun, like a roller coaster.)

2012 was a critical failure...

But it made money... :/

That's so depressing. Also I love roller coasters. I take exception to the comparison. A roller coaster is a physical thrill it's a totally different thing. It doesn't make you think, is I suppose the similarity, but then a roller coaster has no pretensions of being art. A roller coaster doesn't have actors or performances or art direction, etc.

"a roller coaster has no pretensions of being art."

I'd argue neither does "2012" or "Independence Day."

Sure, there are actors and art direction...but really--

You walk into that theatre NOT to hear great speeches or see great art...

You walk in there to see the white House get blown up or to see Los Angeles sink into the ocean in one big earthquake.

But at LEAST those films were open about what they were, ie, mindless eye candy.

This film is sort of like that kid from class who never reads anything or does any work, and yet, when the professor or someone makes a point, says "OH YEAH? Well, I read on Wikipedia that Newton DIDN'T actually come up with those Laws of Motion, but stole them from some guy in a bar that he knew and passed if off as his own...what about THAT?"

No reseach--or bad, ie, Wikipedia research--or undestanding of what the hell he's talking about...

And yet, he floats that out there, and someone ALWAYS latches onto the argument and keeps it going just because they ALSO haven't actually read anything and think it sounds like a cool explanation, and now there can't be progression in class as it devolves into going over the basic FACTS.

Lack of education is the biggest threat to society from within...

And films like this that do and WILL expllit that ignorance are proof--if they can do it with Shakespeare, they can do it with anything and make folks buy it.

And to be clear about one thing:

While I'm unapologetically a Stratfordian here, I WILL say I'm open to the idea someone else wrote the plays, as wel know at least some later ones were collaborations, and while I think any argument made is ultimately one of conjecture and "what ifs," if presented professionally, I'll listen...I probably won't agree, since again, tie goes to the runner, and this isn't even a "tie" really, it's Shakespeare vs. disperate that all grasp at different morsels of conflicting evidence and try and fashion their OWN alternative story...

But I'll listen.

HERE, however, it's just presented like "JFK," of Stone hadn't been clear about the fact his version was a sort of "counter-myth" and not to be taken as totally true, or if Schafer hadn't been clear "Amadeus" was historical fiction and REALLY set out to slam Salieri and accuse Mozart of not really working hard on his pieces.

After having the ASS to criticize Sicarius for cutting and pasting a meaningful thread, you follow it up with this pap.

"Lack of education is the biggest threat to society from within..."

This particular sentence coming from you, of all people, made me laugh out loud.

And the fact I knew ytou'd troll this thread makes me laugh out loud...

Ah mapleleaf...

In a wild and ever-changing world, you are constant as the Northern Star...

All else can change--but I can still expect the same style of crap from you each and every time I post, especially if it's about Shakespeare, and there is certainly some sort of assurance knowing that, whatever may come tomorrow, YOU will always troll my posts and remind me that, in fact, life could be worse.

So please--continue to trool this thread, like I know you will and know you so desperately want to...validate my point and display that fine consistency that is so very reassuring...

They're making a movie on Anonymous?

The Church of Scientology is going to be pissed.

Really obiwan, without actually reading your entire first post after the title post, I was extremely confused as to the topic. Just for future consideration.

@obi

I understand your frustration, but perhaps you're looking at this in the wrong way. Is it not possible, that this may expose new people to Shakespeare who had never bothered with him before?

I think you'll agree that the recent Sherlock Holmes movie was an absolute cluster-fuck. However, iirc, sales of Sherlock Holmes books significantly increased before the movie premiered. Is that not a good thing? I had never read a Holmes story until I saw previews for the movie, at which point I read an entire anthology. And then, of course, was severely disappointed by the movie...

@abgemacht - You had never read Sherlock Holmes? Wow! I rank him as tied for the greatest fictional "real-world" character (in multiple stories) with 007 and thre Saint in literature.

On a side note, I found my copy of the Complete Annotated Sherlock Homes which includes background, history, relevent facts regarding clues and much more more when I was moving. That is one big and heavy book.

@Draug

I'm not a huge mystery fan and my father was a fan of Hercule Poirot, so when I did read mystery, it was that.