Well, DUH!!! Apparently the reviewer mistook Shakespeare in Love for a documentary on Shakespeare's life. Either that, or poor little old non-humanities major me didn't realize that SiL was a supposed to be careful history of the Bard's life and times. I must have been thrown off by that souvenir mug from Stratford-upon-Avon on Will's desk. I foolishly assumed it was an anachronism. Silly of me.
It looks like the reviewer has a huge axe to grind with SiL. Don't get me wrong. The reviewer is entitled to dislike SiL. Lots of people do. But it seems to me that reviewing a work of non-fiction by saying, in effect, that it's better than a fictional account is faint praise indeed.