it's not necessarily a 'film analysis' post, but, in passing, and having watched, last night, the Roland Emmerich adaptation of the 'authorship question' concerning one William Shake-Speare, namely the film ANONYMOUS.
I mean, we're talking about the German film writer/director who brought us Stargate (which totally rewrote Ancient Egyptian History for consumerist mass market entertainment purposes) and Independence Day (which, five years prior to 9/11, showed a TOP DOWN (space beam) demolition of a New York skyscraper).
So, it was with a certain modicum of trepidation at the historical-butchery-about-to-ensue that I watched ANONYMOUS, last night. And it was only after I'd watched the Extras that I realised this is a much BIGGER subject than we hear about here in UK. Appears there's quite an American Oxfordian movement to have the 17th Earl of Oxford re-instated or attributed/identified as The Bard, you know rather than the Stratfordians or the Baconians or the Marlowethians.
Oxfordian movement and political playwright reminds this blogger of the 2nd Earl of Rochester, aka The Libertine, but that's another story.
Emmerich's film ANONYMOUS is basically based on a 1920's-released book SHAKESPEARE IDENTIFIED by an English schoolteacher J Thomas Looney claiming such; it was convincing but not well filmed, stilted; accented somehow.
Here's a playlist of a very interesting and in-depth speech from 1995 by a 'devout Oxfordian' i.e. one of those who are convinced that 'William Shake-Speare' had to have been 'nobility' not 'some actor from Stratford upon Avon', on the Edward de Vere subject.