Shakespeare in Love

Name: Shakespeare in Love
Genre: Drama, Comedy, Romance
Released: December 11, 1998
Duration: 123 min
Rating: 87
Cast: Geoffrey Rush, Joseph Fiennes

1998

METASCORE

Universal acclaim based on 33 Critics

See All

USER SCORE

Generally favorable reviews based on 155 Ratings

See All

7.2

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

7.2	Your Score
7.2	User Score Generally favorable reviews based on 155 Ratings

Would you like to write a review?

There is a 75 character minimum for reviews. If your review contains spoilers, please check the Spoiler box. Please do not use ALL CAPS. There is no linking or other HTML allowed. Your review may be edited for content. 0/5000

Check box if your review contains spoilers

Please enter your birth date to watch this video:

You are not allowed to view this material at this time.

SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE

Movie Details & Credits

Buena Vista Television | Release Date: December 11, 1998

Starring: Geoffrey Rush, Joseph Fiennes

Summary: Shakespeare in Love is a romantic comedy for the 1990s set in the 1590s. It imaginatively unfolds the witty, sexy and timeless tale behind the creation of the greatest love story ever told. (Miramax Films)

Director: John Madden

Genre(s): Drama, Comedy, Romance

Rating: R

Runtime: 123 min

See All Details and Credits

Awards & Rankings

3	#3 Best Movie of 1998
18	#18 Most Discussed Movie of 1998
20	#20 Most Shared Movie of 1998

Watch Now

Stream On

Buy On

Stream On

Metascore

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Critic Reviews

100

New York Post - Rod Dreher

If she (Paltrow) were the only good thing about Shakespeare in Love, it still would have been worth seeing; that she is the crown jewel in a glittering tiara of a film studded with writing and acting gems testifies to the deep pleasures to be found in this remarkable movie. Read full review

100

The New York Times - Elvis Mitchell

Shakespeare meets Sherlock, and makes for pure enchantment in the inspired conjecture behind Shakespeare in Love. Read full review

100

Chicago Sun-Times - Roger Ebert

I was carried along by the wit, the energy and a surprising sweetness. Read full review

Newsweek - David Ansen

The beauty of this extremely clever movie, directed with fleet, robust theatricality by John Madden, is how deftly it manages to work on multiple levels. Read full review

Austin Chronicle - Marjorie Baumgarten

The end result is a delightful, though a smidge too long, reminder of one of the reasons we so enjoy going to the movies: perchance to dream. Read full review

San Francisco Examiner - Walter Addiego

Its brazen mixture of the comic and dramatic, the high and low and the emotional and intellectual is positively Shakespearean. Read full review

Village Voice - Amy Taubin

It soon becomes evident just how inane a film this is. Read full review

SEE ALL 33 REVIEWS

Write a Review

User Reviews

bcool

Jan 29, 2012

wonderful film.terribly underrated just because it's romantic comedy that won an Oscar instead of WWII epic. forget Oscars and enjoy in one of the most original and witty romantic comedies. though I wish it was less romantic and more wacky. but still the idea to use Shakespeare as awonderful film.terribly underrated just because it's romantic comedy that won an Oscar instead of WWII epic. forget Oscars and enjoy in one of the most original and witty romantic comedies. though I wish it was less romantic and more wacky. but still the idea to use Shakespeare as a character in Shakespearean comedy makes this one the most original romantic comedies ever. Maybe Saving Private Ryan was better (it's the matter of taste, and they cannot be compared cause they are so different) but this is still one of the best Oscar winning films in the last 30 years (especially comparing to the subsequent ones).… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

smiyamot

Nov 29, 2015

This is a love story written around the staging of Romeo & Juliet in old London town. We don't know the details about everyday life then but somethings never change. I'm sure the goings on with the money lenders, the city bureaucrats, even which actor is chosen still happens on Broadway.This is a love story written around the staging of Romeo & Juliet in old London town. We don't know the details about everyday life then but somethings never change. I'm sure the goings on with the money lenders, the city bureaucrats, even which actor is chosen still happens on Broadway. A rich man's daughter being married to a poor man who has a title; seen many a movie about that. But the dropping of famous Shakespearean quotes throughout the movie make this more enjoyable if you know a little. I own this DVD in my collection.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

XavierBlaq

Dec 28, 2013

Though I agree with many other reviewers that the historical inaccuracies of Shakespeare in Love are extremely bad, Shakespeare in Love is not really about historical accuracy. It is instead a beautiful story of romance with more than its fair share of laughs that makes it a perfect exampleThough I agree with many other reviewers that the historical inaccuracies of Shakespeare in Love are extremely bad, Shakespeare in Love is not really about historical accuracy. It is instead a beautiful story of romance with more than its fair share of laughs that makes it a perfect example of how to do a great romantic comedy. Having never seen Saving Private Ryan, I cannot say whether this movie deserved the Best Picture Oscar or not. However, having seen Shakespeare in Love, I can say that its suburb acting and beautiful plot make it a great film regardless.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

ourtimehascome

Jul 19, 2017

You don't have to be a Shakespeare scholar to enjoy this film. There are enough cursory details to be well-informed of the plot, considering its simplicity. In fact, that was my biggest problem with Shakespeare in Love. Without the setting and unique characters, it becomes a boring plot.You don't have to be a Shakespeare scholar to enjoy this film. There are enough cursory details to be well-informed of the plot, considering its simplicity. In fact, that was my biggest problem with Shakespeare in Love. Without the setting and unique characters, it becomes a boring plot. However, with these details, the cleverness stands out. The cast is excellent and for once Gwenyth Paltrow is likable.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

JennetP

Mar 20, 2011

I'm not usually one to fault a film for historical inaccuracy, but this one went too far--and then failed to compensate with a decent story. I disagree with those who say knowing Shakespeare adds to a viewer's enjoyment, unless what is known is a play or two and some half-remembered factsI'm not usually one to fault a film for historical inaccuracy, but this one went too far--and then failed to compensate with a decent story. I disagree with those who say knowing Shakespeare adds to a viewer's enjoyment, unless what is known is a play or two and some half-remembered facts about Elizabethan London. Knowing a lot about Renaissance drama just makes the film galling, as real historical figures are wrenched from their actual lives and made to serve a contrived and fantastical plot. I almost walked out when John Webster, who would soon be writing complex, intellectual plays, was depicted as a child torturing rats and informing on Shakespeare's company, but that was just one of many instances. As for the love story and its theatrical issue, both were the height of silliness. I'm not saying it wasn't possible for a woman to cross-dress in early modern England; it happened. But Gwyneth Paltrow in a tiny fake moustache is about as masculine as a troupe of ballerinas at a quilting bee, so believing that everyone was fooled requires some serious IQ-shaving. I normally like Paltrow, but this film lowered my opinion of her acting chops. Then there's the idea that Shakespeare was blocked and needed experience to write from. Leaving aside the ample evidence that the playwright may have been the least blocked writer who ever lived, he always used other texts as the basis for his plays. I hope we don't get a sequel called "Shakespeare in a Jealous Rage" that shows him killing his wife so he can write Othello. On the plus side, the supporting cast, sets, and costumes are excellent. The film gets most of the little stuff right, oddly enough; would it had lavished the same care on the big stuff.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

BobJ.

May 13, 2007

I found that the movie was not very good at all and was quite boring to say the least. The thing that makes me the most mad was the fact that it got Best Picture over SAVING PRIVATE RYAN!!! Saving private Ryan was a definite 9.0-10.0 rated film (out of 10). The other thing is (as T.M. I found that the movie was not very good at all and was quite boring to say the least. The thing that makes me the most mad was the fact that it got Best Picture over SAVING PRIVATE RYAN!!! Saving private Ryan was a definite 9.0-10.0 rated film (out of 10). The other thing is (as T.M. mentioned) was the whole girl dressed as a guy to fool the other actors but still looks like a girl. This makes the film even worse (if that is possible). I would not recommend it at all.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful

csw12

Apr 2, 2012

Shakespeare in Love flat out sucks, sucks, sucks. Who would want to watch this overperformed, over dramatic and overdone movie. It deserves to have a special place in hell right next to the Devil, also while your at it add the director.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

SEE ALL 24 REVIEWS