<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics Comments on Shakespeare in doubt</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005-2006 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:07:57 EST</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by James Russell on Shakespeare in doubt</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/01/02/061822.php#comment-2663</link>
<description>This is a fantastic film, though for my money the best way to see it is the way I did, i.e. at a screening set up by Mike Rubbo himself where you could discuss it with him afterwards. Since he couldn&#039;t get a conventional cinema or TV release for it (he made it for the ABC but they still haven&#039;t shown it), he went on the road with it himself, screening it wherever he could, and usually not at regular cinema-type places (I saw it in a small room in a National Trust gallery at Observatory Hill). I don&#039;t know if I was convinced that Marlowe was the real man behind the works of Shakespeare, but I did leave the screening and discussion session reasonably convinced that not only was the question &quot;did Shakespeare write Shakespeare&#039;s plays?&quot; an interesting one (I never gave it much time before) but that it had legs too. Remarkable what passions it stirs in people, too...</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">2663@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:07:57 EST</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>