Rating: 
Summary: The Making of a Queen: tamed passion
Review: In a year overwhelmed with reminiscent films, Elizabeth rises above the rest to become one of few stunning manifestations of the Hollywood Renaissance. Certainly acknowledged by the Oscars garnering 7 nominations, Shekhar Kapur's intimate portrait of a young Elizabeth further expands the modern view on a distant monarch, whose maturing reign as well as taming nature continued to dazzle the 20th century viewers. Presented here by a superb cast led by Golden-Globe winner Cate Blanchett, early Elizabethean era turmoil and upheavel are captured brilliantly. The lush set itself is a feast for the eye as the audience is drawn to follow a passionate young Elizabeth's path. Against the dark setting of middleval stone castles, a blooming Golden Age approahces as England expands to take control in a world of great unrest after Catholic Queen Mary's death. Her Protestant half-sister, Elizabeth daughter of Anne Bolyne is placed on a throne of a kingdom torn between religion. Cate Blanchett does a fabulous job capturing the details of a frustrated young woman waking to the merciless reality of queenhood--surrounded by enemies such as Norfolk (Christopher Eccleston). Constantly by her side is her reverent adviser Sir William Cecil (Richard Attenborough) who advices Elizabeth to marry for convenience choosing a "pool" of ready political candidates--while Elizabeth herself is long set on her lover from the past Sir Robert Dudley (a charming Joseph Fiennes). Yet just as England learns to wake up from the mideval dream, Elizabeth learns the bittnerness of betrayal as she looks to Sir Francis Walsingham (Jeffrey Rush)'s counsel. Focusing on Elizabeth's subtle changes of phase from fire to ice at a distant in the midst of a grander panaroma beautifully shot, the audience gradually distinguishes her footsteps from the shedding of innocence to a tough ruler that dares to strike first agaisnt her enemies, to ultimately become the Virgin Queen to reign above all men.
Rating:
Summary: Thank you, Australia for Cate the Great!
Review: What a wonderful country Australia is to have given the world such cinematic wonders as Judy Davis, Geoffrey Rush, Gillian Armstrong, Babe the Pig, and Mel Gibson. And now they have really tipped the scale by presenting to the world the brilliant and beautiful young actress Cate Blanchett. Cate is miraculous in the role of Queen Elizabeth. She breathtakingly transforms the young, naive princess into the formidable monarch of England's past. She adds vulnerablity and frailty to her portrait. Hers is a nuanced and searingly intelligent portrayal of a remarkable woman who sacrificed her personal life for the good of her country. And the film itself is intriguing in its telling of conspiracies and religious and political turmoil. The stellar supporting cast as well as the cinematography, music score, sets, costumes, etc. are all first rate. I also agree that "Elizabeth" should have garnered more than the one Oscar it received. Cate especially deserved this award for her tour de force as Queen Elizabeth. The weight of this film was on her shoulders, and she carried it flawlessly.
Rating: 
Summary: Blanchett's Lost Oscar
Review: It is interesting to reflect on a situation where Paltrow wins a Best Actress Oscar (a concept in intself) over one of Australia's finest exports and most gifed actors, Cate Blanchett. God only knows why such a vapid, essentially boring performance as Paltrow's was rewarded over such an intricate dramatic study. Blanchett's performance is honestly powerful and often bewildering. Her acting technique is flawless and her careful choices reward her audience. Australia produces many of the world's leading actors, directors and designers, this fact is known, but Blanchett's lost Oscar is still a bit of a mystery.
Rating:
Summary: Elizabeth
Review: Director Shekar Kapur takes us on a beautiful and exhilarating biography of Elizabeth the Virgin Queen. Every last piece of this film is a work of artm from the editing to the acting. The cast of actors is extravagent, but the film itself without a doubt belongs to Cate Blanchett in the Title role. In virtually every scene, she makes us believe that she is Queen Elizabeth in flesh and blood, not herself potraying her. She undeservedly lost her Oscar to Gwyneth Paltrow, but in my opinion that was because of fame, not talent. To get further evidence of her talent, check out The Talented Mr. Ripley, and The Gift. She can effortlessly transform her Aussie accent into anything she wants, without fault. This film is not for the faint of heart, as it features some brutal and disturbing images, such as its opening sequence of burning three heretics at the stake. My grade: A+
Rating: 
Summary: Mannered, made up mishmash
Review: This movie tells the story of young Elizabeth Tudor, well, at least a girl bearing her name and dressing up in costumes. The movie is filled with errors, flaws and lies. Just the costumes alone are wrong btw. They're not from 1558, actually we see costumes from the 17th century here. A horrible mish mash, Elizabeth never wore gowns like this, the only right one is the last one. Then the "palaces" which are not Elizabethan but old CHURCHES! The story itself is so changed that anyone who knows Elizabeth Tudor's true story must be appalled. True, "Young Bess" also altered the young Queen's story but they didn't present a trashy, tacky, sex- and blood-ridden "thriller" that never took place like this. Elizabeth's true story was exciting enough. Buy "Elizabeth R." with Glenda Jackson instead, she portrays the cunning, ruthless and complex Elizabeth we know from history, not a weeping, silly cry-baby.
Rating:
Summary: This is the movie of all movies for women to admire.
Review: I loved this movie. Cate Blanchett played a marvelous Elizabeth, almost looked exactly like her as well. She has the right accent and even the right attitude to play the Virgin Queen. Strength was a bright aura around Cate throughout the entire film as well as the famous quick- thinking the Queen always was reported of having. Although there was a few places artistic license was stamped, it was almost the exact way things happened to the Virgin Queen, I know because I did a whole report on her a year ago in school. The only place they did a real doozy on was this passionate bond between the Duke and Elizabeth. See, back then, many believed that the Queen and the Duke had this affair going on, but it was never proven to be true. So I guess the movie took it as a good pathway for a little romance in the movie and made this a lovey- dovey part of the story. But really this is the only place they put heavy artistic license on.
This movie is passionate and bold, showing how a woman ruled England in the most harshest times for women to even own their own household much less an entire country. Cate illuminated the Virgin Queen perfectly in both her strong moments and in her unsure times, telling the story of a princess shut out of society and then ultimately being thrown into royalty after her sister dies. The main problem they show clearly in this film is not her being a woman, although that's what you would assume, but it's actually becuase of religion. Due to the fact Mary, her sister who ruled before her was Catholic, the England was ran through this religion. But now Elizabeth is Protestant, and like in real life, she refused as she ascended the throne to change her belief. She also refuses as in real life throughout the movie to get married, claiming at the end of the movie that she was married- to her country of England.
This film is above all a great biography of Elizabeth. It shows the passion, strength, courage, pride and tender heart of Elizabeth. This film is a must see and I rcommend it to all alike. I believe everyone must know the Virgin Queen, for she was no soul to be ignored.
Rating:
Summary: I Will Shout It Until I End Up in My Grave...
Review: ...Cate was robbed! If anyone anywhere was ever robbed of the Best Actress Oscar it was Cate Blanchett. Everytime I think of how Gwyneth Paltrow ( someone who couldn't act if you taped her mouth to Meryl Streep's face ), came up and stole the Oscar we all know belonged to Cate I'm reminded of why Hollywood is now in such a horrid mess. Since then I truly realized Hollywood didn't care about real talent but who was hot at the moment. Cate had a lot of things against her: she wasn't American and she wasn't the " conventional " beauty though I think she's ten times more beautiful than most of the women on the big screen now. All you need to know is this is the best Elizabeth film ever made! Since I saw it I became a Cate Blanchett fan and bent down to kiss the ground to show god how glad I was to finally find a truly great actress since the 80's. Cate Blanchett played Elizabeth with the right amount of sexuality, innocence, essence and power that could only describe the woman who led England through " The Golden Age ". I believe Elizabeth (I) would have been honored to have such a powerful presence portray her as Cate Blanchett did. Cate stripped the character of tasteless glamour and became the virgin queen right before our eyes. If there was ever a woman born to play a role it was Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth. If you don't see this film you are missing a wonderful version starring a mesmerizing, charming little lady who took acting to new heights. This proves once again that the Oscars has nothing to do with talent but personas. Cate will always be the Best Actress winner of 98-99 in my book. Get this film and I am sure you'll agree.
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful but mostly invention
Review: Elizabeth is a magnificent work of art. The casting is perfect and the cinematography is amazing. However, the movie is just a movie. Do not look to Kapur's Elizabeth as being an accurate representation of history. Mary of Guise was not murdered as she was in the movie, and Elizabeth certainly knew of Robert's marriage -- she ATTENDED HIS WEDDING!! But regardless, I give the movie 5 stars because it is so well done and very captivating. If you want a more accurate portrayal of history, read a book or buy the BBC's Elizabeth R.
Rating:
Summary: A Splendidly Subtle Triumph!
Review: This movie, aside from blowing me away with its delicacy and its poignant portrayal of Elizabeth I, Queen of England, did something many other books and movies about royalty forget to make clear: "Elizabeth" characterizes Elizabeth I in such a way that we, the viewers, are forced to remember that she was a human and not just a famous monarch.
I disagree with the comments of those who feel that this film delineated Elizabeth as a weak woman who followed the whims of men. The fact was that, for that time period, Elizabeth wielded a great amount of power. She was young, and one can just imagine how hard it must have been to assume the throne above many accusing one of heresy. Yes, the film shows the time it took Elizabeth to get used to her role as Queen of England. But even our modern rulers typically cannot bounce right into a prestigious political role without making mistakes or feeling unsure of their own abilities, especially not when despised by a portion of their own people.
Especially toward the end of the film, I felt that a case was made for the strength of Elizabeth's character, rather than the weakness.
I especially enjoyed the costumes and the poignant musical selections; both were quite realistic, vibrant, and strategically placed.
I even felt that the historical portion of the movie was as well-done as can be expected from Hollywood.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. I am of the opinion that the acting was absolutely superb, and that casting was perfect.
Through this film, history comes alive to tell the story of one woman's quest for self-validation in power.
Rating: 
Summary: Watery Lizzy
Review: How could England's greatest female survivor possibly be
the watering pot which this film depicts? Good grief!
Elizabeth survived murder, corruption - you name it; yet
she is depicted as being weak-willed and totally male
dependent -yuk!!
|
