Shaken Up

[MovieBob]

Shaken Up

Is Shakespeare really as anonymous as Anonymous claims.

Read Full Article

 

[Sylocat]

One would think that you, of all people, would jump on the most insulting facet of the conspiracy theory: It is entirely based on the malicious lie that only the born-wealthy and private-school-educated can create great works of art, and individual achievement potential is determined by social class.

That is literally the ONLY "evidence" offered by most proponents of the theory.

It's a travesty that the one movie that portrays the Elizabethan theatre as the Mos Eisley-esque realm of hedonism and dirty secrets that it was has to be a movie that further trumps up this question... and one that will doubtlessly be pointed to as gospel by the new crop of nutcases.

Now I want to make a historical drama about Delia Bacon (the sad, insane woman who started this whole thing) and the historical fallout, documenting the true idiocy of the theory, and how it has been selfishly motivated all the way. We know more about Shakespeare's biography and history than pretty much any other non-royal figure of the era.

 

[Cousin_IT]

While I think the theory is crap & got tired of listening to the actors/director talking about how convinced they were by it in the promo stuff; I don't see any reason to get too worked up about it. That said, if it's big hit it will probably result in the Da Vinci Code effect of a slew of "serious" historical books being published & annoying tourists swamping Stratford Upon Avon to pooh pooh Shakespeare with their new found superior knowledge.

 

[rayen020]

honestly i think i want to see this. it sounds awesome. also the version of the conspiracy i heard was that Shakespeare wasn't a front for just one man, but a bunch of nobles all submitting plays to him for the same reason De Vere would've. but anywa sounds like something i need to see whenever it shows up around here.

 

[Scrustle]

But does this film actually try to back up the conspiracy theory or is it just using it as a "what if" premise to write a fictional story from? I can't really work it out from the trailers. To me it sounds more like the latter. I hope that's true.

 

[Dorkmaster Flek]

But does this film actually try to back up the conspiracy theory or is it just using it as a "what if" premise to write a fictional story from? I can't really work it out from the trailers. To me it sounds more like the latter. I hope that's true.

Definitely sounds more like the latter, in which case, I suddenly like this movie a whole lot more.

 

[Sabrestar]

I've always been fascinated by the Oxfordian theory, ever since a high-school friend of mine presented it in a (quite convincing at the time) report in 11th-grade English class. I realise now there isn't any real evidence to support it, but it's a fun fantasy nonetheless. This sounds like an interesting take on the idea, and my wife loves Elizabethan period dramas, so this might actually get a couple of movie tickets from us. Which is a big deal, as I literally can't remember the last movie I went to see in theatres. (Might have been Peter Jackson's King Kong, actually.)

 

[Sylocat]

But does this film actually try to back up the conspiracy theory or is it just using it as a "what if" premise to write a fictional story from? I can't really work it out from the trailers. To me it sounds more like the latter. I hope that's true.

Given that the creators of the film are also distributing a documentary about the theory promoting the notion that Shakespeare didn't write the plays, and they're actually trying to distribute teaching materials to schools, I'd say it's the former.

 

[Pipotchi]

But does this film actually try to back up the conspiracy theory or is it just using it as a "what if" premise to write a fictional story from? I can't really work it out from the trailers. To me it sounds more like the latter. I hope that's true.

It is more of the latter, the proponents of the theory have no real evidence to back to it up. A lot of the theory is based on the predjudice that a middle class man from Stratford could write plays of such quality and worldliness. They also rely on facts such as their is no record of Shakespeare going to the local grammar school. they omit to mention there is almost no record of anybody attending that grammar school. This is Elizibethan england there are hardly any records of anything.

The most telling fact that flys in the face of Oxford theory is that Oxford died in 1604 whilst the Tempest refers to a shipwreck that didnt happen until 1609. I dont mind an entertaining movie but the theory is utter Bunkum

 

[Giest4life]

I like movies make me suspend my beliefs, not conspiracies.

 

[RJ Dalton]

That doesn't sound like Roland Emmerich at all. I've never seen something he's done that could even be remotely described as "intelligently written" by even the farthest stretch of the word.
Are you lying to me Bob?

 

[Yojoo]

There isn't much evidence to support any given writer of these plays, be it Oxford, Shakespeare (Or Shaksper, as his name seems to have truly been), or anyone else at that time. Don't lump it in with other conspiracy theories, because there are a lot of things that don't make sense about the Bard's life.

One would think that you, of all people, would jump on the most insulting facet of the conspiracy theory: It is entirely based on the malicious lie that only the born-wealthy and private-school-educated can create great works of art, and individual achievement potential is determined by social class.

Except that one would have to be literate to actually write plays, no? There is compelling evidence to suggest that William Shaksper was illiterate. Combine that with the fact that we have no original manuscripts of his plays (and no mention of anything involving theater in his will, which if memory serves is the only piece of writing ever signed by Shaksper), and it becomes hard to attribute the plays to ol' William.

Calling the idea that Shakespeare isn't who we thought he was isn't a conspiracy theory. It's looking under the skin of history and seeing things that don't make sense, and that don't find their way into the history books.

 

[Kinguendo]

What a terrible shame it is that people would attempt to sully the name of a truly inspired individual such as William Shakespeare, especially with such weak evidence as "Well, she said...".

 

[FIZGARDler]

"A country bumpkin like Shakespeare could not have possibly written such magnificent works"
-Mark Twain.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I think the reviewer in the New Yorker said it best when he described this phenomenon as 'literary birtherism'.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

One would think that you, of all people, would jump on the most insulting facet of the conspiracy theory: It is entirely based on the malicious lie that only the born-wealthy and private-school-educated can create great works of art, and individual achievement potential is determined by social class.

That is literally the ONLY "evidence" offered by most proponents of the theory.

It's a travesty that the one movie that portrays the Elizabethan theatre as the Mos Eisley-esque realm of hedonism and dirty secrets that it was has to be a movie that further trumps up this question... and one that will doubtlessly be pointed to as gospel by the new crop of nutcases.

Now I want to make a historical drama about Delia Bacon (the sad, insane woman who started this whole thing) and the historical fallout, documenting the true idiocy of the theory, and how it has been selfishly motivated all the way. We know more about Shakespeare's biography and history than pretty much any other non-royal figure of the era.

I think it's more using it as a "What-if?" then actually trying to prove a conspiracy. Like how Indiana Jones has the Nazis finding crazy artifacts, it's not saying they did, it's using it as a premise. That said, I haven't seen it, so maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Thaius]

Wait... the same guy who directed 2012 also made The Patriot? ...How is that possible? I haven't seen quality dissonance that great since Shyamalan went from The Sixth Sense to The Happening. What the heck?

Anyway... the existence of this theory annoys me, but as an interesting "what if" story this could be a worthwhile film. Hmm.

 

[Pipotchi]

There isn't much evidence to support any given writer of these plays, be it Oxford, Shakespeare (Or Shaksper, as his name seems to have truly been), or anyone else at that time. Don't lump it in with other conspiracy theories, because there are a lot of things that don't make sense about the Bard's life.

One would think that you, of all people, would jump on the most insulting facet of the conspiracy theory: It is entirely based on the malicious lie that only the born-wealthy and private-school-educated can create great works of art, and individual achievement potential is determined by social class.

Except that one would have to be literate to actually write plays, no? There is compelling evidence to suggest that William Shaksper was illiterate. Combine that with the fact that we have no original manuscripts of his plays (and no mention of anything involving theater in his will, which if memory serves is the only piece of writing ever signed by Shaksper), and it becomes hard to attribute the plays to ol' William.

Calling the idea that Shakespeare isn't who we thought he was isn't a conspiracy theory. It's looking under the skin of history and seeing things that don't make sense, and that don't find their way into the history books.

As I mentioned there is no evidence that Shakepeare was illiterate, there is little evidence that he was literate granted but as his dad was the town mayor (or nearest modern) equivilent and his town had a very reputable grammar school Logic would dictate that he was there.

Also your memory is incorrect that his will was the only thing he signed, he wasnt prolific but he pops up on legal documents, there a writ and his marriage certificate. There not much but it does roughly tell us where he was

The most telling evidence that Shakespeare wrote his plays and sonnets was that if is it a conspiracy no-one knew about it during his entire life. Heminges and Condell from his acting troupe put his folio together and attributed it to him. Greene mocked him as a young upstart while attributing on of the Henry Plays to him and Ben Jonson talked about him in his private diaries 10 years after his death.

Only 220-250 plays from the entire era survive and precious little documentation of any kind, the remarkable thing about Shakespeare is that we have as much info as we do not that we have so little.

 

[Alakaizer]

So...does anybody else now wonder if Kathleen De Vere is any relation? It would mean that writing is in the family...

 

[Arcanist]

"A country bumpkin like Shakespeare could not have possibly written such magnificent works"
-Mark Twain.

Yea, this is pretty much my reaction to the insinuation that he couldn't have possibly written those plays because he was uneducated. Shine on, Mark Twain, you clever bastard.