Rating: 
Summary: SUPERB!
Review: Cate Blanchett did a SUPERB job in this movie--how in the world she missed out on winning ALL awards for her performance is beyond me. As usual, I'm going to remain non-specific because I don't want to give away the plot, key scenes, etc., because if you're thinking of buying this one, I don't want to ruin it by telling everything. I *LOVED* this movie, & know I will watch it many more times in the future. I also bought this movie for my DVD collection, & have no regrets. The movie is spellbinding, artsy, & will definitely hold your attention if you're a history buff. I'm still scratching my head as to why "Shakespeare in Love" beat this movie out at the awards ceremonies--IT DOESN'T EVEN COMPARE TO THIS ONE! I highly recommend: EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT, EXCELLENT!
Rating:
Summary: Cate Blanchet is spell binding!
Review: Elizabeth is a movie about personal transformation and ultimate sacrifice. Cate Blanchet is wonderful in the role as Elizabeth and brings life to a character that is far from easy to play. The most fascinating scene is when she has been transformed into the virgin queen and when she walks into the throne room. To select Mozart's requiem to accompany this procession was a stroke of genius.
Rating:
Summary: A wonderful history lesson!
Review: After seeing this film, I became fascinated with the life and legacy of Elizabeth Tudor. ELIZABETH shows the trial and error of a young queen-truly unique. Although her reign was in the 1500s this movie gives us suspense, romance, and emotional drama. Cate Blanchett did a wonderful job playing Queen Elizabeth, and I personally think she should have won the Oscar, rather than Paltrow. Shekhar Kapur also did great directing, and I hope to see more works by him. "I am my father's daughter...and I am not afraid of anything!" :)
Rating:
Summary: Great Drama about a Great Woman
Review: This is a great examination of life in 16th century England, and the circumstances that made Elizabeth I one of the greatest monarchs in World History. The best part is that we see the young Elizabeth: passionate, vulnerable, and most of all, human. Under threat of death by her own sister, caught up in the English Counter-Reformation of the mid-1500's, and facing love and marriage issues that would challenge man or woman, Elizabeth at the end of the film chooses the only path open to her to secure her throne: to transcend humanity and become an icon...or as to paraphrase Elizabeth herself, "to be a reborn Virgin". The last scene in the film encapsulates it, as Elizabeth transforms herself with chalk-white makeup, a bright red wig, and a spectacular out-of-this-world costume. I do have some minor quibbles with the implied dates: the film gives you the impression that Mary Tudor, Elizabeth's sister, dies in the mid-1550s, when in reality it was 1558; also, the film doesn't emphasize her intellectual brilliance as much as it should (and was historically mentioned by everyone who met her). But all in all, there's no better film to illustrate this era in England in an understandable way and put a human face on a woman most people only know as "The Virgin Queen".
Rating:
Summary: Great work of Fiction...
Review: This is a great film, and has about as much connection to reality as "Shakespeare in Love" also starring Joseph Fiennes. However embellished, the story line is compelling, the action thrilling, and the scenery -- English. The cinematography is lucious. The cast is superb. The thing I find unforgiveable about this film is the rewriting of role of the Earl of Leicester (Fiennes). Leicester was Elizabeth's close friend, and maybe even her lover. Their relationship did not end until he died. He was her most loyal subject. The truth is more compelling than the fiction in his case. Elizabeth relied on Leicester all of his life. She made him 'Master of the Horse' and he was her closest confidente. Many believe his early death was partly owing to her overworking her good friend. He never betrayed her, he only wanted to marry her. But Elizabeth did not trust marriage, and why should she. Her own mother (Anne) and her cousin (Catherine Howard), were both executed by a jealous husband --Elizabeth's father, Henry the VIII. Much of the story line in this film is drawn from real events surrounding Elizabeth's accendancy to the throne. As a protestant in a catholic world, Elizabeth had many enemies. Some of the extreme dangers she faced are chillingly shown in this film, although I do believe Mary of Guise, so wonderfully played by the French actress Fanny Ardant lived a bit before Elizbeth's time. Cate Blanchett deserved every accolade she received for her portrayal of the young Elizabeth. As nearly as I can tell from the historical material I have read, Elizabeth was a great deal like Blanchett's screen portrayal. Elizabeth became the "Virgin Queen" to her subjects, not so much because of her celibacy (which may or may not have been a fiction) but because her people were "Mary Worshippers" and needed a diversion away from their affinity for the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Roman Catholic church (who some historians believe was used to divert "pagans" from The Goddess of the Celtic religion.) The most visually stunning scenes in the film take place near the end when Elizabeth dons the white face paint and jewels seen in the Armada portrait. It is clear this queen has become a Goddess.
Rating: 
Summary: Apart from FANTASTIC Cate Blancett, I didn't like much of it
Review: I was very disappointed with this film. I love historical dramas and I love British films (by content or production), so I was really looking forward to finally seeing it. Then, I was bored for two hours, watching it. I must say that Cate Blancett has done a brilliant job in portraying such a difficult historical figure, but then again, she always does a good job. I loved Geoffrey Rush in his role. I also found Joseph Fieness more annoying than ever...I thought one film a year would be enough to see him as a "passionate medieval lover in tights" (see "Shakespeare in Love"), but no.... This film gave me neither good entertaiment nor any valuable historical perspective. It is simply dull...
Rating: 
Summary: Kapur brings life to those stuffy historical figures
Review: It appears that there are a number of aspects about this film which is not historically accurate, inspite of the fact that the director Shekar Kapur constantly points out that this and that as seen in the film actually happened. For those who watch Hollywood films expecting every last detail to be historically correct are deluding themselves. I doubt that such a film exists, since everything is in hindsight and re-interpreted. That aside it is still a remarkable film. The visuals are absolutely stunning -- in particular the coronation scene. Kapur, brings to life historical personages and gives them real human personalities and not text- book-cardboard-cutouts. Furthermore, I appreciated Kapur's effort in conveying all the politics, conspiracies, alliances etc that a mononarch has to tend to in his/her daily life. This aspect is very well illustrated by Cate Blanchette in the scene where Elizabeth addresses parliament and the religious leaders. Okay, it's not 100 percent accurate, but can we not allow the director some artistic and dramatic license?
Rating:
Summary: Paltrow best actress! GIVE ME A BREAK!
Review: Cannot yet understand how come Ms Blanchet did not get the award for best actress instead of Paltrow! Such a same! It has been well known about the film Elizabeth is not "historically accurated", actually I don't care! I would read a history book if I needed an "acurate view" (it it exists). But what it is accurate is Cate Blanchett rules in this film and over many others, WHAT A PERFORMANCE!
Rating:
Summary: My girl Cate rules!
Review: Honestly, she did a better job than Gwyneth. How she made herself the vulnerable woman at the beginning of the movie to the monarch at the end was fascinating to watch. The rest of the cast is superb; Geoffrey Rush (just compare him to the manic character in Shakespear in Love), Chris Eccleston, Kathy Burke (she used to be in AbFab), Sir Richard, they're all part and parcel one this masterpiece.
Rating:
Summary: Let this Be the Beginning and Not the End of the Discussion
Review: By now, everyone is cognizant of the fact that this movie is not historically accurate. However, since this movie is clearly intended as a character study and not a documentary, the "dramatic license" taken by director Shekhar Kapur is not as heinous as the purists would lead you to believe. Most of the critics of this film seem to think that this lack of historical accuracy will deter people from learning more about Elizabeth I. However, I believe that the complete opposite is true. In fact, I think that any high school or even college professor teaching Elizabethean History should use this movie as a springboard for discussion about the monarch and her era. For those who are not as concerned about attention to historical detail, this movie is a must-see because of Cate Blanchett's riveting performance . . .count me among the reviewers who think she was robbed of the Academy award. In addition, the cinematography and art direction are splendid. All in all, a movie worth adding to your collection.
|
