Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007)

one of her magnificent performances. and a great story, wise script, superb cinematography and fascinating manner to give not exactly the perfect second part but a subtle, smart and seductive history lesson. because it is one of films who seems changing theories, information, doubts. and the basic motif is the impeccable performance of Cate Blanchett. and the inspiration of director to give one of films who do not gives explanations but only the reflection, in large mirror, of scenes from a reign defined by the force of nuances of vulnerability. the purpose, in this case, has not to build a magnificent monument. but to use a great cast, the traces of others adaptations, the flavor of a period, for a realistic drawing of an unique woman. the result - honestly, impressive.

"Elizabeth" is an enjoyable film, though much of it was supposition and fiction. The intrigues and personal lives of folks of that time are really unknown in many ways and so the filmmakers too liberties with history--embellishing it here and there to make it seem more exciting. Here with the follow-up film, however, "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" is less about intrigues and persons and more about grand events--and as such is much more factual and better history.This film has three main plot themes. First is the ultimate execution of Mary Queen of Scots. This is covered superficially--perhaps because the film was about her cousin, Elizabeth. Regardless, what sort of woman she was isn't really alluded to (she was a rather awful person). Second, her relationship with Sir Walter Raleigh. Exactly how close it was is open to conjecture, but the film sure got it right that the Queen did not respond well to his secret marriage to another. Third, the climactic battle with the Spanish Armada. This is very grand, though exactly how the Spanish lost and how the weather did far more damage than the English navy isn't really discussed. Of course, me being a retired history teacher, I look for these things and assume the average viewer will not.The film is beautiful to look at, is a bit sterile when it comes to much of the acting and is engaging--though I assume not to a large percentage of the folks out there. If you like historical bio-pics, you'll enjoy this. Otherwise, you might find it a bit confusing and occasionally ponderous. As for me, I slightly preferred it to the prequel.

This movie has pretty much the same Controlling Idea as the previous Elizabeth movie: that devotion and inner strength is required to protect one's country. But this movie does a way better job of proving the idea. Even though as queen, Elizabeth is far removed from the physical battle and spy vs spy action, her actions (and inactions) drive every turning point forward. When she wavers, England suffers, when she is strong, England triumphs. This makes for a very satisfying ending where she rallies her troops to defeat the Spanish armada in one of England's greatest naval victories in history. Great movie.My Story Chart of the movie is at storycharts.ca

I love a good Elizabeth movie as much as anyone else. In fact, just a few days before I saw this film, I had seen a 1939 film (Private Lives of Elizabeth & Essex) starting Bette Davis and Errol Flynn. It was fascinating to be able to compare these two movies from two different eras, to see how modern cinematography has developed in its depiction of Elizabeth and the late 16th century.Perhaps unsurprisingly not much has changed with regard to Elizabeth's appearance and clothing. At least in modern movies Elizabeth is allowed to take her make-up and dress off once in a while. Even take baths.In the 1939 movie, the theme was the love affair between Elizabeth and the Earl of Essex. This 2007 movie is set somewhat earlier, but it also shows the emotional life of Elizabeth, including her feelings for Walter Raleigh.I thought that the performances in the movie were excellent. Cate Blanchett was marvellous. So was Samantha Morton and Geoffrey Rush. Clive Owen too was really good, especially at the start where he is trying to catch the queen's eye. His tale of making the crossing and reaching the new world was as gripping for the viewer as for Elizabeth. Say what you want about Clive Owen, he's good.In this movie many of the scenes were achingly beautiful. At times it was like looking at a collection of Old Masters in a museum. The lighting, colour, costumes and rich settings were all used to their best advantage.The beauty of the scenes became so striking at times, however, that the artifice kept leaping out at me. At times it was so obviously beautiful, so clearly romantic, that it seemed staged and posed.I really didn't mind this aspect though. I can't get enough of modern attempts to display medieval and renaissance life. Seriously. There must be many fascinating aspects of the period that have yet to be shown on film.OK, perhaps there was a bit too much jingoism in there. I understand that Elizabeth is a patriotic figure to the English (or at least to English filmmakers), but Elizabeth the virgin guardian angel of England? Elizabeth the warrior queen? Elizabeth the mother of her people? This is wishful thinking on the part of the director and themes that don't work for me. I suspect that English people however swell with patriotism when they see Elizabeth portrayed as a virgin-mother-warrior-angel-queen in full Renaissance finery. Even in the 1939 film the Americans did this in an old-Hollywood sort of way.The highlight of the movie for me was the execution of Mary and Elizabeth's anguish at what had happened. Morton played this brilliantly. Blanchett brought to life the doubts about it and the horror of it all. Walsingham did what he had to do, but what a mess this conflict between Protestant and Catholic really was. What did bloody Mary do to deserve this? After the movie I looked it all up on Wikipedia. Mary was actually married to Philip II of Spain. I had forgotten that fascinating detail. History could easily have gone the other way. This movie did not portray the Spanish in a way that I would consider realistic. I'm sure they were not all crazed religious zealots. No more so than English Protestants like Walsingham.There was somehow a problem with the plot or writing. The film seemed a little disjointed, jumping from one grand, beautiful, melodramatic scene to the next. I was on the director's side right up until the scene where Elizabeth exhorts her troops on horseback. That went too far. Even Cate Blanchett was unable to pull that one off.Still I enjoyed the film. It's under-rated on IMDb. I'm not sure why.