Can a film about Shakespeare’s wife and the tragic loss of their son truly do justice to their story? Hamnet, the Golden Globe-winning drama, certainly tries—but does it succeed? Let’s dive in.
The tale of Anne Hathaway, Shakespeare’s wife, has long been shrouded in mystery and misconception. But here’s where it gets controversial: while some scholars have painted her as an illiterate opportunist who trapped the young playwright into marriage, others, like Germaine Greer, argue she was a woman of substance, capable of reading, writing, and even outranking Shakespeare socially. Greer’s 2007 biography, Shakespeare’s Wife, was a bold feminist reinterpretation, backed by extensive research into Elizabethan customs. Yet, it was Maggie O’Farrell’s 2020 novel, Hamnet, that took this narrative to a new level, weaving a lyrically heartfelt story around Shakespeare’s most personal tragedy—the death of his 11-year-old son, Hamnet, during the plague.
The film adaptation, co-written by O’Farrell and directed by Chloé Zhao (Nomadland), has just snagged Golden Globes for Best Drama and Best Actress. But is it any good? And this is the part most people miss: while the film simplifies the novel’s intricate plot, it amplifies its emotional core, particularly in its exploration of grief. The story centers on Agnes (Anne’s reimagined name), a healer deeply connected to nature, whose intuitions foreshadow the looming plague. Her brother, Bartholomew (Joe Alwyn), is the only one who truly understands her, until Will Shakespeare (Paul Mescal) enters her life, upending everything.
Mescal, fresh from his breakout role in Normal People, delivers a restrained yet compelling performance as Shakespeare, avoiding the clichés of the brooding artist. Jessie Buckley, meanwhile, steals the show as Agnes, portraying her as a fiercely intelligent, protective mother whose world crumbles after Hamnet’s death. Their marriage is tested, not just by loss, but by the inability to share their grief openly—a theme that resonates deeply in the film’s second half.
Here’s the bold question: Does Hamnet reinvent Anne Hathaway’s legacy, or does it romanticize her story? While the film’s ending offers a poignant reconciliation and a tribute to art’s healing power, it also raises questions about how we remember historical figures. Shakespeare himself is portrayed not just as a genius, but as a grieving father—a refreshing take, but one that might spark debate among purists.
The film’s design beautifully captures the natural world of Stratford, contrasting the grandeur of its houses with the untamed wilderness nearby—a visual metaphor for the unpredictability of life. Yet, for all its strengths, the plot’s straightforwardness might leave book lovers yearning for the novel’s subtlety. Still, the emotional impact of its ending is undeniable.
So, is Hamnet worth the hype? Absolutely. It’s a desperately sad yet ultimately hopeful film that challenges our perceptions of Shakespeare’s family. But what do you think? Does it do justice to Anne Hathaway’s story, or does it take too many liberties? Let’s discuss in the comments!
