Elizabeth

The opening with an execution by burning already gives the impression of an extraordinary experience. The visual imagination of Indian director Shekhar Kapur is very much in evidence. My favourite actress Cate Blanchett gives a riveting performance as Queen Elizabeth, rightfully nominated for an Oscar. If, like me, you enjoy smart historical dramas, Elizabeth is an obvious choice. And on a side note, there’s something even for football fans. One of the bigger roles is played (and quite well, it has to be said) by the legendary Manchester United striker Eric Cantona :o) (20/04/2003)

Elizabeth: The Virgin Queen catapulted Cate Blanchett among the leading stars of the film world and the film itself won a decent number of awards and nominations and, as seen from the reviews, still maintains decent popularity. From my point of view, it is a very average costume historical drama with the usual offering of passions, intrigues, and beautiful women. It is not so much that historical accuracy is thrown out the window, because that is rather the rule for so-called historical films, and a professional historian or a stubborn history fan should either not watch these kinds of films or brace themselves with maximum tolerance. It is rather that the real Elizabeth and the events of her journey to the throne and reign were much more interesting than what the film presents to us. The film suffers from a lot of flaws typical for this genre, namely romantic motifs stolen from a romance novel, flat characters with black-and-white polarization, and a complete misunderstanding of the historical context. Elizabeth ascended the throne at the age of 25, which, given the average life expectancy at the time, meant a much more mature age than today. She was by no means inexperienced, as she had a good grasp of politics and could rely, to use today's terminology, on a team of professional advisors. She was actually very shrewd, a great intriguer who constantly brought her opponents to the brink of despair. She was a Renaissance woman full of contradictions, capable of great generosity, and at the same time incredibly petty and vengeful. The stylization into the role of an inexperienced naïve girl facing intrigues from a villainous environment, including a romantic disappointment, and later sacrificing her personal life for the good of the empire is ridiculous. In reality, she led a very active love life and gave up marriage primarily because it would weaken her power position. By the way, as for the much-praised performance of Cate Blanchett in the lead role, considering how talented she is, it is only average at best. It is all too often visible that she relies on her appearance and natural charisma. Out of the six films I have seen with her, this one unquestionably shows her weakest acting. The screenplay seems to me only average and the direction does not stand out significantly from the genre average. Overall impression: 55%. (20/01/2010)

A film that may be historically faithful and elaborate in terms of costumes, but getting into the story through Shekhar Kapur's directorial style is rather challenging. There are few historical films that don’t have a great battle or fatal love as their central theme, and Elizabeth is one of those. It describes the golden age of England in a "documentary" style, and if it weren't for the phenomenal Cate Blanchett, there wouldn’t be any emotional connection to the story's substance and characterization. In other words, it is an uninteresting reconstruction of an important piece of European history, without a bigger budget, i.e. without a proper visual signature, with characters that, with the exception of the Cate and Daniel Craig in an atypical role, doesn’t deliver much entertainment for those two hours, nor does it offer the feast for the eyes you’d expect in an historical drama. So maybe a must for a film journal. (26/09/2017)

A great historical film that could have easily been longer and could have dissected some of the events more, because I could definitely stand to see it. Cate Blanchett is the best Elizabeth I that I have ever seen in a film, Geoffrey Rush is the perfect choice for the Walsingham as this film shows us, and Richard Attenborough or Joseph Fiennes as well. I really liked the pleasant direction, the eye-pleasing cinematography, the music playing nicely in my ears and above all the absolutely flawless costumes. Thanks to all this, I was able to rise above many of the mistakes that hit me on the nose (William Cecil, R. Attenborough's character, was not even 40 years old when Elizabeth came to the throne, the Queen knew about Dudley's wife, the fact that Walsingham was involved in the death of Marie de Guise is probably complete fiction... etc.) and enjoy the film. Four and a half. (22/11/2011)

If I had seen this movie at the time it was made, it probably would have made a bigger impression on me. The way it is now, it's just a good period drama that adheres to historical elements, but it primarily tries to show one of the most distinctive queens in British history. Strength literally radiates from Cate Blanchett, which has been transferred to the character. This was definitely successful, but historical movies just aren't really my cup of tea. (25/02/2014)