A theory that I am very much interested in, The Oxfordian Theory proposes that the Earl of Oxford actually wrote the plays and penned Shakespeare to them. Being raised in a Puritan household, poetry and art was frowned upon but the Earl yearned to keep writing plays. Honestly if you have time, research on this theory...it's absolutely fascinating and definitely makes you question the legitimacy of Shakespeare. On top of this though we have political conspiracies within the Elizabethan court, illicit romantic affairs and plenty of back stabbing nobleman. Very ambitious, both in scale and it's subject...but unfortunately just exceeds Roland Emmerich's grasp. His desire for cinematic grandeur merely takes away from the plot focus and becomes messy. There is just too much. What I did admire though, was the portrayal of how the utilisation of words and art can convey ideologies. As the Earl looks down from his balcony in the Globe Theatre, you can see the power he holds through his plays and how the audience are manipulated through certain character portrayals. After all, words are the most powerful tool one can have. The Globe Theatre scenes were actually some of my favourite moments, watching Mark Rylance performing famed plays such as Henry V, Richard III and Twelfth Night. Rhys Ifans was excellent casting as the Earl of Oxford, his calm demeanour held much authority and power. Vanessa Redgrave and David Thewlis were also noteworthy. I wasn't too keen on Rafe Spall's portrayal of Shakespeare but in order to convey this theory it kind of made sense to make him a rather slimy character. The script and narrative is where the film falters. Exposition followed by backstory followed by politics followed by more exposition...just, turn it down a notch! Focus on the intrigue of Shakespeare being a fraud, would've been a far tighter plot. Also the ending was too...anti-climatic? Having said that, this film is full of ambition and I find it be rather watchable. Not bad from Emmerich I must say.

Well produced, extremely well acted, beautifully presented. Worth seeing. So,what else would you need to know about this film? It is deliciously entertaining and an interesting exploration of Shakespearian authenticity.I am neither a Stratfordian nor an Oxfordian but have a fairly open mind about exactly who, and what, Shakespeare really was. In that context, this was a very pleasant film.It did not resolve any issues for me (I am an Englishman and have never.exactly, worshipped the Shakespeare of my school days, 50+ years ago)but did enthrall me like a good detective story. If the purpose of a film is to entertain, to absorb me into the story, this film certainly meets that criteria. I bought the DVD cheap and had it sitting around for 12 days (there is no significance to watching it on the Twelfth Night). Frankly it didn't look as interesting as others I bought at the same time.Which just goes to show that not everything is as it seems at first glance. That, I guess, is the main thrust of the film.

I have seen this movie a dozen times and own it on DVD, and I still watch every moment in awe. Although the movie contains much speculation about many things, it is well designed, executed and the actors as well as the production should have mopped the Oscars the year that it was released. There are deep moments, joyful moments, humor etc etc...and you reach the end and only wish to watch it again. If you are looking for the usual story of Shakespeare, this movie is not for you. If you are looking to expand your concept of what could have been, have your perception of Shakespeare jarred with a deeper and more intricate account with historical truth, and are willing to watch this movie with an open mind, then you will agree that Anonymous is pure excellence, and it gives me hope as a movie viewer that talent lives.

Anonymous was about the myth that William Shakespeare did not in fact write any of his works, that he was just a front man for an Earl who, to respect his station in society, could not reveal that he was a playwright. I wouldn't venture as far as to say that I believe that myth, but I would say that it made for an extremely compelling film and I left feeling quite inspired to go read Shakespeare's complete works.Rhys Ifans played the Earl of Oxford, the "man behind the magic" in Anonymous. Having only seen him in a few minor roles in movies like Notting Hill and Elizabeth: The Golden Age, I was delighted to see him take a lead role by the reins and really own it. He was wonderfully pompous, dark and tormented. I was amused by the make-up artist's choice to have him wear black eye-shadow the entire movie, but somehow it worked. He was kind of like the "emo-kid" of his day, wearing all black and pouring his soul into his art, his writing.The rest of cast were quite excellent as well, with Vanessa Redgrave and Joely Richardson sharing the role of Queen Elizabeth I, and Rafe Spall as the ridiculous William Shakespeare. The Shakespeare in Anonymous was a self-centered, drunken buffoon, a depiction which I felt was both ballsy and amusing. It takes some nerve to write a pivotal literary and historical figure as a complete idiot. Never-the-less, it was essential to the story and I enjoyed the different take on history.The artistic elements were stunning. The drama was thrilling. The content was very thought-provoking. I highly recommend Anonymous, especially to those who love historical dramas/period films. I'm saddened it only showed in select theaters. It just goes to show what the general populous is drawn to and it's not historical dramas. If you are a hard-core traditionalist when it comes to history and Shakespeare, watch the movie with a grain of salt. The writers rewrote much of history.