Reply to Topic
Here's my review of Elizabeth: The Golden Age. I gave it a fairly decent rating, but I was definitely disappointed, being a big fan of the first film. But I had to concede that it did enough things well to merit a slightly above-average rating. Enjoy.
Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Much ado is made about Hollywood's apparent addiction to sequels and remakes. Claims that creativity is running dry are rampant, and it's hard to disagree when the films in question are generally retreads of the originals.
Enter Elizabeth: The Golden Age, a film that is thankfully more continuation than carbon copy. It follows 1998's Elizabeth, which was nominated for seven Oscars, including Best Picture, and was to become Cate Blanchett's breakthrough role as the titular Elizabeth.
Her steely resolve is put to its greatest test here, as King Philip II of Spain has decided that her Protestantism is an abomination, and plots to invade England. As always, she faces domestic threats from other would-be rulers, though she is able to sense early on that the real danger is across the sea.
Blanchett's range is well-known, but it is most evident when comparing The Golden Age to its predecessor. Insecure and heavily reliant on her advisors in Elizabeth, her role here requires that she conveys the confidence befitting an established monarch. She does this easily, further cementing her place as one of the best actresses of her generation. Witness the way she first regards Sir Walter Raleigh, and the scolding she gives Sir Francis Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush), a man to whom she once relied on as if he were her parent.
Fans of the first Elizbeth may be disappointed with The Golden Age, which is a dramatically different film. Both Elizabeth and her circumstances have changed substantially, and the film is less a character study of Elizabeth, and more a tale about the sacrifices that leaders must make.
The film is considerably glitzier than its '98 forebear. The clothing is fancier, the sets are more lavish, and the film builds to a climactic sea battle that feels rushed and remarkably out-of-place. The Golden Age doesn't seem to know whether it wants to be a soap opera, a political thriller, or an historical epic. It compromises by alternating between the three, and the second half meanders as a result.
History buffs, too, will find plenty to gripe about, as considerable license is taken in speculating that The Virgin Queen was involved in romantic entanglements; this time, with the aforementioned Walter Raleigh, played by Clive Owen. In this way, at least, it does resemble the first Elizabeth, which also entertained the idea that the Queen may have had some covert relationships and infatuations during her reign.
Of course, little exists to support these ideas, but some truth-stretching is expected, even if it would be easier to forgive in a better, more focused film.
Still, Elizabeth: The Golden Age features impressive production values and stellar acting, and is a vivid (if wandering) account of one of history's most fascinating figures. It admirably follows her life, even as it drifts away from the mood of the first film. It avoids rehashing the things that made Elizabeth great, both to its credit, and to its detriment.
Much ado is made about Hollywood's apparent addiction to sequels and remakes. Claims that creativity is running dry are rampant, and it's hard to disagree when the films in question are generally retreads of the originals.
Enter Elizabeth: The Golden Age, a film that is thankfully more continuation than carbon copy. It follows 1998's Elizabeth, which was nominated for seven Oscars, including Best Picture, and was to become Cate Blanchett's breakthrough role as the titular Elizabeth.
Her steely resolve is put to its greatest test here, as King Philip II of Spain has decided that her Protestantism is an abomination, and plots to invade England. As always, she faces domestic threats from other would-be rulers, though she is able to sense early on that the real danger is across the sea.
Blanchett's range is well-known, but it is most evident when comparing The Golden Age to its predecessor. Insecure and heavily reliant on her advisors in Elizabeth, her role here requires that she conveys the confidence befitting an established monarch. She does this easily, further cementing her place as one of the best actresses of her generation. Witness the way she first regards Sir Walter Raleigh, and the scolding she gives Sir Francis Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush), a man to whom she once relied on as if he were her parent.
Fans of the first Elizbeth may be disappointed with The Golden Age, which is a dramatically different film. Both Elizabeth and her circumstances have changed substantially, and the film is less a character study of Elizabeth, and more a tale about the sacrifices that leaders must make.
The film is considerably glitzier than its '98 forebear. The clothing is fancier, the sets are more lavish, and the film builds to a climactic sea battle that feels rushed and remarkably out-of-place. The Golden Age doesn't seem to know whether it wants to be a soap opera, a political thriller, or an historical epic. It compromises by alternating between the three, and the second half meanders as a result.
History buffs, too, will find plenty to gripe about, as considerable license is taken in speculating that The Virgin Queen was involved in romantic entanglements; this time, with the aforementioned Walter Raleigh, played by Clive Owen. In this way, at least, it does resemble the first Elizabeth, which also entertained the idea that the Queen may have had some covert relationships and infatuations during her reign.
Of course, little exists to support these ideas, but some truth-stretching is expected, even if it would be easier to forgive in a better, more focused film.
Still, Elizabeth: The Golden Age features impressive production values and stellar acting, and is a vivid (if wandering) account of one of history's most fascinating figures. It admirably follows her life, even as it drifts away from the mood of the first film. It avoids rehashing the things that made Elizabeth great, both to its credit, and to its detriment.
Last edited by Yoda; 02-21-08 at 03:45 PM.
Reason: Fixed a small typo.
Trilogy?
