Sir Ian McKellen, one of Britain’s most esteemed actors and a legendary interpreter of Shakespeare, has never been shy about voicing his opinions on the Bard. But in recent days, as the film Hamnet races toward Oscar glory, McKellen has made it clear he’s not on board with the movie’s bold take on Shakespeare’s life. In interviews with The Times and other outlets, McKellen has called the film’s central premise—namely, that Shakespeare’s creative genius sprang chiefly from his family tragedies—“improbable,” igniting a new round of debate about where art truly comes from and how far filmmakers should go in reimagining history.
Adapted from Maggie O’Farrell’s acclaimed 2020 novel and directed by Oscar-winner Chloe Zhao, Hamnet dramatizes the death of William Shakespeare’s only son, Hamnet, at age 11. The film suggests that this devastating loss inspired the creation of Hamlet, one of the greatest tragedies in English literature. According to Entertainment Weekly, the idea isn’t new—scholars have long debated the connection, noting that Hamnet was buried in 1596 and Hamlet premiered just four years later. But the film, like the novel before it, takes this speculation further, weaving a deeply personal narrative around the Bard’s family life.
For McKellen, who has played nearly every major Shakespearean role—from Richard III to King Lear, Hamlet, and Macbeth—this approach misses the mark. “I don’t quite get it,” he told The Times on February 15, 2026. “I’m not very interested in trying to work out where Shakespeare’s imagination came from, but it certainly didn’t just come from family life.” He went on to question the film’s depiction of Shakespeare’s wife, Anne Hathaway (called Agnes in both O’Farrell’s novel and the film). “The idea Anne Hathaway has never seen a play before? It’s improbable, considering what her husband did for a living. And she doesn’t seem to know what a play is! I think there are a few doubts of probability.”
It’s a critique rooted in McKellen’s lifelong immersion in Shakespeare’s work. He got his start on the London stage with the Royal Shakespeare Company, performing at the Royal National Theatre and quickly earning a reputation as one of the most insightful interpreters of the playwright’s characters. As The Independent notes, McKellen’s skepticism carries weight in the theater world, especially when it comes to the Bard’s legacy and the ways it’s reimagined for modern audiences.
Yet, for all his reservations, there’s no denying that Hamnet has struck a chord with critics and moviegoers alike. The film stars Jessie Buckley as Agnes and Paul Mescal as Shakespeare, with a supporting cast that includes Emily Watson, Joe Alwyn, and Noah Jupe. Buckley’s performance has already earned her the Golden Globe for Best Actress in a Motion Picture – Drama, and she is widely considered a frontrunner for the same Oscar. The film itself has racked up eight Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Director for Chloe Zhao, and Best Adapted Screenplay for Zhao and O’Farrell, according to The Independent.
Commercially, Hamnet has been a solid performer, grossing $74 million on a $35 million budget as of February 21, 2026. Its box office momentum is expected to continue as awards season reaches its peak, and the film is set to compete with other heavyweights like Paul Thomas Anderson’s One Battle After Another and Ryan Coogler’s Sinners in the fiercely contested Best Picture category.
But while Hamnet has been lauded for its emotional resonance and cinematic artistry, McKellen’s criticism highlights a persistent tension in how we approach historical fiction—especially when it comes to figures as iconic as Shakespeare. The actor drew a comparison to the earlier film Shakespeare in Love, which also courted controversy for its fanciful reimagining of the Bard’s creative process. “As Hamnet races towards the finishing line, as far as Oscars are concerned, it’s likely to repeat the success of Shakespeare in Love, which had odd views as to how plays get put on,” McKellen observed in his interview with The Times. “But then Shakespeare’s perhaps the most famous person who ever lived, so of course there is some interest in what he looked like, what his relationship with his family was. And we can’t know.”
That last point—“we can’t know”—may be the crux of the matter. The historical record on Shakespeare’s personal life is famously thin, leaving ample room for speculation and artistic license. As Entertainment Weekly points out, the connection between Hamnet’s death and the writing of Hamlet is a matter of ongoing scholarly debate, not settled fact. O’Farrell’s novel and Zhao’s film simply take one possible thread and spin it into a full narrative, much as previous generations have done with other enigmatic artists.
Still, McKellen’s concerns aren’t just about accuracy—they’re about plausibility and respect for the subject. He finds it hard to believe that Anne Hathaway, living in the heart of England’s theatrical golden age and married to the era’s most famous playwright, would be depicted as unfamiliar with the art form that defined her husband’s life. “It’s improbable,” he insisted, pointing to what he sees as a broader trend of filmmakers prioritizing dramatic effect over historical grounding.
For those who cherish Shakespeare’s legacy, McKellen’s words serve as both a caution and a challenge: How much creative freedom is too much when reimagining the lives of historical figures? Is it fair—or even necessary—to invent motives and relationships when so little is known? Or does the very mystery of Shakespeare’s life invite endless reinterpretation, with each generation finding its own meaning in the gaps?
The debate is likely to continue long after this year’s Oscars. Meanwhile, McKellen himself shows no signs of slowing down. He’s set to reprise his role as Magneto in Avengers: Doomsday this December, and in 2027, fans will see him once again as Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings: The Hunt for Gollum. Even as he challenges the latest cinematic visions of Shakespeare, McKellen remains a living link to the playwright’s enduring appeal—both on stage and on screen.
Whether or not Hamnet takes home the top prize, its success—and the controversy it’s sparked—remind us that Shakespeare’s life and work remain as compelling, and as contested, as ever. Artistic license and historical fact may never fully align, but the conversation between them is what keeps the Bard’s legacy alive for new generations.