Shakespeare in Love 1998, Rated R

Buy it from

Starring Gwyneth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes. Released to DVD on August 10, 1999.

Fiennes stars in Shakespeare in Love as the Bard himself, William Shakespeare. Shakespeare has been commissioned to write a play for the owner of one of the two feuding theatre companies in London. However, suffering from writer's block, Shakespeare's latest play, tentatively titled Romeo and Ethyl the Fisherman's Daughter, has all but come to a staggering halt. Then he meets Paltrow's Viola De Lesseps, falls in love, and suddenly and miraculously becomes unblocked. And thusly the fictional tale of how Shakespeare may have written Romeo and Juliet unfolds before our very eyes.

Despite the enormous amount of positive publicity this film has been receiving of late, I, for one, just wasn't that impressed. Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard's script was relatively decent, and the production design of the period piece was good, but no one single element of Shakespeare in Love truly reached out from the silver screen and grabbed hold of me, as did several differing traits from Saving Private Ryan and Elizabeth. This was due, in no small measure, to the rather strange relationship that developed between Fiennes and Paltrow.

In a nutshell, Fiennes and Paltrow's relationship is based on sex. Apparently during the 16^th century, two people could know simply by looking at one another from across a crowded room that they were in love and meant for each other, or so Stoppard and Norman would have us believe. Being in my twenties, I have no problem believing, and understanding, that two adults could carry on a relationship based on sexóespecially when said couple looks like Fiennes and Paltrowóor that they could both be attracted to one another on a physical level, but this is not the essence of the on-screen relationship in Shakespeare in Love. Both parties insist that their love for one another will overcome all obstacles and that their lives have been undeniably changed by one another's presence, my only question was: how?

Fiennes, Paltrow, and the multi-talented Geoffrey Rush deliver solid acting performances in Shakespeare in Love, but only Rush seemed truly deserving of his Oscar nomination. Paltrow plays a 16^th century version of Gwyneth Paltrowóher characterizations of differing personas from Seven to Sliding Doors to Shakespeare in Love have all come across in much the similar veinóand Fiennes uses his bulging, Rodney Dangerfield-like eyes to convey the majority of his emotions ranging from surprise to disgust. It was Rupert Everett however, in what amounted to nothing more than an extended cameo as Shakespeare's chief play writing nemesis, Christopher Marlowe, who stole this film. With less than 10 minutes of actual screentime, Everett did what none of the other actors managed to accomplish: he had me wanting his character to return on-screen.

Stepping aside from his Ace Hardware ads for the time being, director John Madden directed Shakespeare in Love with a light, British comedy touch that worked especially well given the material at hand, but the overall feeling of this production was at times confusing. It seemed as though this film was to be a romantic comedy first and foremost, but the genuine loving nature based on mutual respect and admiration between Fiennes and Paltrow was missing, as were the movies moments of hilarity. The personalities of some of the minor characters suspiciously and inexplicably changed throughout the course of the film, and the ending both too pompous and self-righteous for its own good.

Shakespeare in Love was entertaining, but as a contender for the best picture of the year, this film pales in comparison to Elizabeth and Saving Private Ryan.