Sorry, this movie sucks

Overrated

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

There are many films and dramatisations of the life of Queen Elizabeth I, and of the ones seen all of them range from good to outstanding. While not quite as great as 1998's 'Elizabeth' and 'Elizabeth R' with Glenda Jackson, though almost in the same class, 'Elizabeth I' is one of the outstanding ones.'Elizabeth I' has a couple of things that don't quite come off as well. Leicester's role is rather underwritten, and it does give Jeremy Irons (who is still very good in the role and makes a real effort to give him complexity) little to do. For such a big time span covered, dates and years are not always clear even to people familiar with the Tudor/Elizabethan period and a couple of events are depicted in a slightly confused manner.However, these are outweighed by the things that 'Elizabeth I' does incredibly well, these are a great many and done brilliantly. It's gorgeously made, with scenery, settings and costumes that will take the breath away and photography that makes one forget that it was made for TV. 'Elizabeth I' is strongly directed as well, the style is never cheapened and pacing and clarity of storytelling are rarely compromised. The music, with a mix of classical and medieval period which gives it authenticity, is dramatic yet sympathetic, giving scenes stirring power and nuanced pathos, always a good fit for every scene's atmosphere.With the script, it has a humorous edge, touching yet never mawkish romance and a lot of emotion beautifully balanced, while always provoking thought. The storytelling throughout is incredibly compelling, the romantic elements feature prominently but not at the expense of everything else, political commentary and dilemmas of the time are not neglected and the very graphic executions and torture wrench the gut (some may feel that the series overdoes it with the brutality, with the execution of Mary Queen of Scots being especially shocking, to me as decapitations, drawing and quartering and torture were gory and brutal it wasn't inappropriate). There are liberties taken with history to accommodate the story, but there are far worse and more insulting cases of films and series playing fast and loose with the facts.Great acting helps, and the performances are more than great across the board with all the characters well realised (with only underwritten Leicester being a reservation). A wonderful job is done with making Elizabeth a complex character and as a woman of many passions. Hugh Dancy is dashing, charming, loyal and passionate as Essex, while Irons, Toby Jones, Barbara Flynn (as a touching and dignified Mary Queen of Scots), Ian McDiarmid, Patrick Malahide et al are without fault. Reigning over them all is the always great Helen Mirren, whose Elizabeth is nothing short of a miracle.All in all, not devoid of flaws but a real joy to watch. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Perhaps the reason why 16th century queen attracts so many greatest actresses is the fact that Elizabeth I was actress herself - her whole life was a perpetual act where not only she had to balance all kinds of power games, but her life was a public stage with no privacy whatsoever and everybody from courtiers to assassins wanted something from her: what kind of curse this was to her I can't even imagine, but lady herself must have been aware that she can hardly trust anybody.If you can erase the memories of so many excellent actresses who preceded Helen Mirren, this is a very enjoyable two-part TV drama (advertised as mini-series, whatever) filmed in sensational locations built in Lithuania (Tudor court looks amazingly real - not glamorous but practical, decorated but still a labyrinth of crowded halls where people watch every step you make). To be honest, all the other memories fade away when I'm watching this - everything from the script, dialogs, costumes to acting in superb. First part has Elizabeth constantly fighting off marriage proposals and juggling one country for another, trusting only her chief advisers and her old favorite Earl of Leicester Jeremy Irons). "What is crown, when love's voice speaks to us?" she sighs when alone with Leicester, who is the only courtier brave enough to tell her things she don't want to hear.The second part has already aging queen falling for Leicester's stepson (Hugh Dancy) but she is no fool - the toy boy is only good as long as he plays her game, as soon as he steps out of line, the head goes off, she is true daughter of Henry VIII after all. This is hardly the only head chopped off here, there are many quite brutal scenes including historically accurate beheading of Mary Stewart. To all who criticize fictive meeting between Elizabeth and Mary Stewart, I would just say - this is too good scene to be missed. And the fact we have no surviving documents about it, don't mean it didn't happen. As always Mirren is magnetic - firm, stubborn, playful, coquettish, sentimental and cruel, she has it all. It is quite an achievement to make Elizabeth a believable, human person under all those elaborate costumes and wigs, but great actress she is, Mirren dominates the scene and she wears the clothes, not the other way around. Those closest to her are all excellent, including Jeremy Irons, Hugh Dancy, Toby Jones, Patrick Malahide and Ian McDiarmid - even Barbara Flynn as unlucky Mary Stewart completely fits to a description what she must have been like. Absorbing and absolutely recommended.

This may be a television mini-series but it has the quality, detail and acting superiority of an excellent motion picture. Elizabeth (Helen Mirren) has been on the throne for twenty years. It's 1579 and she is 45 years old. We meet her at the conclusion of a discrete but public examination to establish for all to know that she is capable of bearing a child. The need for her to marry, both to ensure an heir and to ensure her survival as Queen, obsesses her councilors. For Elizabeth, it's not so simple. She is not just a queen, but a sovereign ruler, anointed, in her words, by God. She has the same passionate need for love and intimacy as her subjects. She probably realizes that marriage, in her era, would most likely lead to her own inevitable subordination to her husband if he is English or the subordination of the country to another country if he is foreign. She most probably realizes that by not making a choice, she keeps all the choices on the bargaining table. And, of course, there is the question of her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots, now a prisoner but a continuing threat to her rule, whom her councilors want dead. There is her own passionate nature focused on Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (Jeremy Irons), and, later, on the young Robert Devereaux, Earl of Essex (Hugh Dancy). One will die in bed; one will lose his head. There are religious issues so deeply held they could, and have, split the nation. Before long, there will be the threat of Spanish invasion to deal with. Through it all, Elizabeth procrastinates, twists and turns, takes a step forward and then one back. If we didn't already know her story so well, we might be surprised when we realize that in time the religious question is finessed with little violence, that Mary is dealt with, that the Spanish fail, that her people come to love her (more or less), that she invariably chooses her councilors well and they become dedicated to her, that she will be the one to make the final decisions and that rebellion is a fatal choice for those who disagree with her, even if they are one of her favorites. She is, in fact, a ruler who makes mistakes, can be swayed by vanity and avoids choices, but who when it matters makes the right choices. Helen Mirren does a masterful job, taking Elizabeth from 45 to Elizabeth's death at 69. Elizabeth could be fickle and imperious, but she had a core of steel, particularly when it came to defending her realm and her prerogatives. Mirren is such a dynamic and skilled actor it is entirely believable that the young Earl of Essex just might find the aging Queen an agreeable and intimate companion. Mirren is equally believable in demonstrating the iron will of a Queen who moves against someone she may well have loved. Mirren is at her best in dealing with complex emotions. When Elizabeth at last is brought to sign the order of execution for Mary but then tells the clerk to keep her action secret and not to show the document to anyone until she tells him, Mirren gives us a subtle portrait of Elizabeth, a Queen who knows it's in her best interests to have Mary executed but who flinches from being the one to make the order happen. At some level, Elizabeth must know that her order will not be kept secret, that it will be given to her councilors and that Walsingham will see to it that the execution takes place immediately. As Walsingham says, the Queen wants Mary executed but doesn't want to be the one responsible. It's a complex set of motives and emotions that Mirren has to display; they range from her reluctant signing to her hysteria when she learns Mary has been executed. Equally impressive is Mirren demonstrating the ability of Elizabeth to rouse the rabble with a combination of patriotism and bravado. She does a bravura job with Elizabeth's famous words before her army awaiting the Spanish invasion: "Let tyrants fear; I have always so behaved myself that, under God, I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and good will of my subjects. And therefore I am come amongst you at this time, not as for my recreation or sport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of the battle, to live or die amongst you all; to lay down, for my God, and for my kingdom, and for my people, my honor and my blood, even the dust. I know I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king, and of a king of England, too!" While Mirren dominates the story, all the actors are excellent. In major roles, in addition to Irons and Dancy, there is Patrick Malahyde as Sir Francis Walsingham, Toby Jones as Robert Cecil, Barbara Flynn as Mary and Ian McDiarmid as William Cecil.

I'm a big fan of the film "Elizabeth", but this TV production is better, and I cannot rate it highly enough. Being for TV works to its advantage, as they could pick the best "actor" for each part instead of a "star". For example, Patrick Malahide is far far better than Geoffrey Rush as Walshingham (spelling?). The only slight let-down was the Duke of Anjou. The actor in the old Cointreau advert (that dates me) had far more Gallic charm to woo Elizabeth than the actor here. The gore of punishment was handled well, including the two strokes to kill Mary, Queen of Scots - but what about the three to kill Essex? Unfortunately Helen Mirren, who was a real tour de force, has already done the sequel (Elizabeth II), so we haven't got that to look forward to. However, what about the long-promised film about Mary, Queen of Scots?