About a month or so ago, I borrowed the first two seasons of The Tudors on DVD from a friend and checked out that show (The short review: it took it while to get going, but by the second season had become fairly compelling.) It sparked a bit more interest in that historical place and time for me, so I decided to check out the movie Elizabeth.
Though I wasn't aware of this going in, the movie was actually written by Michael Hirst, the same man who created and runs that Showtime series. It even has one or two of the same actors in it (though playing different roles). It seems the man has a deep fascination with the time period.
In a way, watching Elizabeth made me appreciate The Tudors even more. It's not that it wasn't good, but rather that the production values of the television series, made just a decade later, appear to be as great as or greater than this feature film. The scenery is equally breathtaking, the sets are just as convincing, and the costumes -- hell, if anything, they're actually superior in the television show. It's all actually quite impressive here in this film, making it even more so in the television series.
But enough digression. To the movie. Elizabeth is the tale of the queen's rise to the throne, and the very early days of her reign. In focusing just on this period of the actual Elizabeth's long time on the throne, the film attempts to tighten into a narrative that makes sense. It's mostly successful in this, though there are still times where the story feels like it's a bit untethered, moving from minor "episode" to "episode."
There are two major threads -- romantic and political. The political material is more what I was interested in seeing when I decided to watch the movie, but it is for good or ill the weaker of the two stories. No intricate webs, no wheels within wheels, just fairly straight-forward plotting not even really worthy of being called "scheming." But the romantic thread is surprisingly stronger. This is an account of the events that ultimately led the real Elizabeth to forswear marriage, and is interesting enough to hold the movie.
But what really sells it all is the acting. Cate Blanchett is extraordinary in the title role. Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes, and Richard Attenborough all play important roles, and do it well. John Gielgud plays a brief but strong part as the Pope, and throughout the rest of film, a few "before they were stars" faces pop up to add a little more spice to the proceedings. It's a fine cast.
In the end, there is a lot to like here, but I think that watching The Tudors unfold over multiple episodes (and benefiting from all that extra time in which to tell the story) made me wish for more here. I'd give Elizabeth a B-. It's not required viewing, but I'd suspect that if you think you want to watch it, you'll probably like it.
1 comment:
I remember being slightly bored by that movie (although I agree with all the good parts you mention here). There was something mechanical about it that didn't quite click with me.
FKL
Post a Comment