Most boring costume drama since Marie Antoinette

Fair enough. Fanny was brazen , flamboyant and crass by all accounts .But her stitching was first class. I think this is all conveyed in the film. Please attribute her character thus.

wplains: They were bachelors, for crying out loud, in the early 19th century. And by the way, that wasn't dirt under Keats's/Whishaw's nails. Considering Keats spent an unusually large amount of time writing poetry and letters and was using pens that were considerably different from what most of us use to write with today (for example: KEYBOARDS that require no quill and inkwell!), I hazard a logical inference that what you mistook as dirt was most likely INK!!

Actually, the time span was from the summer of 1818 until the fall of 1820. And if we are going to split hairs and be petty about this whole costume thing, Keats was dirt poor and probably didn't have much of a wardrobe and maybe Brown had multiple sets of the same outfit (ha. . .![?]). ANYWAY, THE CLOTHING IS IRRELEVANT; THE POETRY AND PROSE IS NOT.

And Georgette Heyer??? Come on now . . .

I read "uncle" in several places. But now I read that her father was a cousin of the Beau. That would make her a 1st cousin, once removed. This would, of course, have been a tentative distinction as Beau Brummell had fled to France in 1816 in disgrace from a great burden of unpaid debts.

"I'd never ask you to trust me. It's the cry of a guilty soul."

You need to go find out what ad hominem means. It means resorting to personal attacks, as in YOUR personal attacks on another user, namely me. Ad hominem has nothing to do with my opinion regarding the presentation of the characters in the film. I, at least, don't try to stifle opinions I don't like by making a snarky drive-by remark about their posting history in order to derail their post or embarrass them into silence, so...I'm posting anyway.

I don't think Keats' emasculation was off topic at all. In fact, it was very central to the topic. Call it whatever you want, but it certainly showed a distinct lack of character on his part when he's so easily swayed this way and that by the two people who have the most influence in his life. I also believe that the filmmakers portrayed the dynamic between Brown and Keats in such a way as to intimate a love attraction between them. I didn't use the term homosexual--you did. I call'em like I see'em and that's the subtext that I saw. Brown's interactions with Fanny were more those of a jealous lover attempting to prevent the advances of a potential rival. The fact that this spiteful catfight plays out over and over and over again can indeed be considered supremely boring, and I said so in my previous post, since Keats doesn't seem to have any will of his own to determine his own mind and his own fate. He very passively allows the two of them to get on with it. In fact, he appears to goad their malice and competitiveness toward one another by spouting encouraging poetry to each whenever he's dragged too near one side or the other. How manly, honorable or attractive is that?? It's not pretty to watch, either.

Another aspect of the underlying sexual tension between Brown and Keats manifests with the Valentine's card Brown sends to Fanny. Brown very much seems to have a dual agenda with this gambit, especially since we've been given to understand these two despise one another and thus the card is not really to be taken at face value. First, it appears he wishes to 'neutralize' Fanny as a rival by coyly presenting himself to her as a suitor (if Brown courts her, perhaps she'll be diverted from her interest in Keats in a way that allows Brown's relationship with him to progress). Second, Fanny's curious acceptance of the Valentine's card can be (and indeed WAS) used by Brown to impress upon Keats the fickleness and inconstancy of Fanny's affections. Why did Fanny keep the Valentine's card rather than immediately returning it with disgust? Why didn't she vehemently reject the sentiments it expressed the moment she received it?? Brown even says as much to Keats in the woods: Fanny cannot be trusted; she's nothing but a wayward flirt.

This is not a normal man's interaction with his 'best mate' concerning the latter's girlfriend. Men just don't get involved that way because they know better. If your mate's GF is a tramp, you're better off letting him work it out by himself, because if you say anything against her, you're dooming your friendship with him. But Brown's actions only make sense if he's got a personal emotional stake in the issue: "Let her go, I won't misuse your affections like she will. Want proof...she kept the Valentine's card, didn't she?!" We could've had an end to this idiocy right there & then when Boy and Boy resolve their love for one another and go off arm in arm, while girl thanks her lucky stars for her reprieve and wanders home to make a better match with a suitable whelp from amongst the gentry. That, at least, could've been fun.

But no, the filmmakers seemed determined to wring every last snivel out of this dreary film. So, Keats' ambivalence and dithering back & forth between Brown and Fanny played out again and again. I was thinking, "they've painted themselves into a narrative corner; this seems set to go on forever." The same thought must've occurred to the director too, because just then, out of the blue, the decision was literally taken out of Keats' hands by the sudden revelation of Brown's offscreen dalliance with...the scullery maid!! Wow, talk about a lame-a$$ Deus Ex Machina to move this stalled horse-plop along! Brown seemed as put out about it as anyone, but as he can't support his unwelcome new family AND Keats, too, he's very unceremoniously shoved off the set. We don't hear from him again, after he's spent pretty much the whole picture being a total intrusive douche.

Well, Keats is finally set free (too bad we don't care). Unfortunately, Keats-as-autonomous decisionmaker is actually WORSE than Keats-as-puppet of more powerful personalities. You know it's a train wreck when Brown, the one character you spend the movie SO wishing he would just go away, would actually come back and take charge of these chimps! So, I'm not the one with the problem. This movie's the problem.

"I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit...it's the only way to be sure..."