Episode 256. We Review ‘Anonymous’

Published by austin on

During a break from our successful run of The Complete World of Sports (abridged) at the New Victory Theatre in New York City, we aim our satirical guns at the much-debated film “Anonymous” and the theories that underlie it. Joined by theatrical pundit and raconteur Howard Sherman, the members of the RSC (Reed Martin, Matt Rippy, Austin Tichenor, and office manager Alli Bostedt) improvised their review and analysis in the offices of the New Victory Theater immediately after the film. Featuring differing opinions, much benefit of the doubt, unabridged wig appreciation, a very funny performance from Rafe Spall (pictured above) as Shakespeare, a perfect critical response from NPR’s Bob Mondello — and zero convincing. For a definitive rebuttal to the so-called Authorship Question, download the entirely free PDF “Shakespeare Bites Back: Not So Anonymous,” by Rev. Dr. Paul Edmondson and Prof. Stanley Wells, CBE of the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust. (Length 26:53)


5 Comments

Bonnie W. Carlson · November 19, 2011 at 5:29 pm

I agree! I completely buy the implausibility. It is absolutely implausible. Very easy to buy that. Well said. And love the Happy Days allusion. Jumping the shark should hereby be the phrase to sum up the utter self-destruction of any artistic endeavor. B is an appropriate grade as this film should be seen with a buzz. I too loved Christopher Guest as Anne Boleyn. And the epiphany that Tom Hulce wrote Shakespeare’s plays? Priceless! I laughed, I cried, it was the feel-good review of the year!

Patricia · November 5, 2011 at 4:26 pm

I too could not really wait to see the movie, so I saw it the Saturday that it opened. I agree that the costuming was outstanding; I rather liked the acting. But the STORY – Yikes! Any relation between history and this really was coincidental! I mean, the Essex rebellion did do a Shakespeare play beforehand, but it was Richard II, and Robert Cecil had a bad leg, he wasn’t a hunchback. The whole plot, I think, set back the cause of the DeVere afficionados back about 200 years. Not that I mind. I think the whole DeVere theory is elitist. Thanks for your review. It was good to be able to listen you all your opinions!

Dan O. · November 3, 2011 at 1:43 pm

I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this and how Emmerich kept the story moving well enough to keep me glued, even if it does feel a tad over-dramatic to an extent. Good review. Check out mine when you get the chance.

Nick · October 28, 2011 at 4:22 pm

William Shakespeare did NOT write the plays. Rather, they were written by another author of the same name.

Jess Winfield · October 28, 2011 at 2:35 pm

A very well-balanced review, guys. Personally I can’t wait to see the movie, because it will be an opportunity for me to take many Xanax beforehand. Your listeners may be interested in this former Reducer’s dissection of the whole authorship controversy a couple of years ago.

http://infinitejess.blogspot.com/2007/10/shakespeare-authorship.html

FYI, Howard’s concern about the order of scenes in Hamlet: Emmerich seems to have used the order from the First Quarto of 1603… to his credit.

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder