...what
With all that's going on in the world, it feels almost unbearably petty to nitpick this upcoming film (called All Is True, ironically*) where Kenneth Branagh plays Shakespeare, but...who was in charge of the numbers for this thing?
Kenneth Branagh and Judi Dench to star as Shakespeare and wife in Oscar-tipped film
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/nov/01/kenneth-branagh-judi-dench-shakespeare-all-is-true-wife-oscar
I mean, there's an eight-year age gap between Shakespeare and his wife, and a...twenty-six-year age gap between Branagh and Judi Dench? Meanwhile Ian McKellen is playing Henry Wriothesley, third earl of Southampton; McKellen is twenty-two years older than Branagh, whereas Southampton was nine years younger than Shakespeare. (This seems especially bizarre because Southampton is so frequently suggested as a candidate for the "fair youth" of Shakespeare's sonnets; given McKellen's current age of 79 and the fact that the film is supposed to take place in 1613, McKellen's Southampton would have been 59 in 1593, the year I have somewhat arbitrarily chosen for ballparking the composition of the sonnets, and which also happens to be the publication year of Venus and Adonis, which was dedicated to Southampton. This is...not exactly Fair Youth territory.)
Finally, the film seems to have moved Hamnet's death up to 1613, according to this article, instead of placing it in 1596 when it actually happened. This would make Hamnet twenty-eight when he died, as opposed to eleven (unless they've correspondingly moved up his birth date as well). These are all things you can do, I guess - Shakespeare changed the ages of historical figures all the time - but I'm having a hard time imagining the dramatic relevance of any of these changes. And I'm miffed about the Anne Hathaway one, precisely because it chimes with the nasty way biographers so often write about her, with nothing resembling proof, as an old maid who trapped our baby genius Shakespeare in a loveless marriage.
*sigh*
Besides, the only Shakespeare family member I actually want a biopic of is Judith. :(
I guess this is of a piece with Branagh's inexplicable Elderly Mercutio casting a few years ago, but what even.
*Yes, I know this is the alternate title of Henry VIII, which is (as a history play) necessarily a fictionalized version of events, and that they've clearly decided on 1613 (when the Globe burns down during a performance of this play) as a good moment around which to build this story. But changing the ages of all the surrounding characters by so much suggests possible directions for the narrative that I'm just not thrilled by.
Kenneth Branagh and Judi Dench to star as Shakespeare and wife in Oscar-tipped film
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/nov/01/kenneth-branagh-judi-dench-shakespeare-all-is-true-wife-oscar
I mean, there's an eight-year age gap between Shakespeare and his wife, and a...twenty-six-year age gap between Branagh and Judi Dench? Meanwhile Ian McKellen is playing Henry Wriothesley, third earl of Southampton; McKellen is twenty-two years older than Branagh, whereas Southampton was nine years younger than Shakespeare. (This seems especially bizarre because Southampton is so frequently suggested as a candidate for the "fair youth" of Shakespeare's sonnets; given McKellen's current age of 79 and the fact that the film is supposed to take place in 1613, McKellen's Southampton would have been 59 in 1593, the year I have somewhat arbitrarily chosen for ballparking the composition of the sonnets, and which also happens to be the publication year of Venus and Adonis, which was dedicated to Southampton. This is...not exactly Fair Youth territory.)
Finally, the film seems to have moved Hamnet's death up to 1613, according to this article, instead of placing it in 1596 when it actually happened. This would make Hamnet twenty-eight when he died, as opposed to eleven (unless they've correspondingly moved up his birth date as well). These are all things you can do, I guess - Shakespeare changed the ages of historical figures all the time - but I'm having a hard time imagining the dramatic relevance of any of these changes. And I'm miffed about the Anne Hathaway one, precisely because it chimes with the nasty way biographers so often write about her, with nothing resembling proof, as an old maid who trapped our baby genius Shakespeare in a loveless marriage.
*sigh*
Besides, the only Shakespeare family member I actually want a biopic of is Judith. :(
I guess this is of a piece with Branagh's inexplicable Elderly Mercutio casting a few years ago, but what even.
*Yes, I know this is the alternate title of Henry VIII, which is (as a history play) necessarily a fictionalized version of events, and that they've clearly decided on 1613 (when the Globe burns down during a performance of this play) as a good moment around which to build this story. But changing the ages of all the surrounding characters by so much suggests possible directions for the narrative that I'm just not thrilled by.