Elizabeth: The Golden, Manless Age
I watched Elizabeth:The Golden Age tonight at the movies. While it was an excellent movie, I had some reservations on it as to the dialogue and the general cohesion of the story. In comparison,1998’s Elizabeth was an all-around fantastic, tightly woven picture which both impressed and educated. I thought it was better than Elizabeth:The Golden Age, but that’s perhaps typical in movies that have sequels.
At any rate, my reservations are as follows: I thought the dialogue fell short from conveying that “grandeur” I expected conversations of the period to hold. I noticed there were far too many “slangish” catch phrases that made me cringe at their corniness. Another issue I had with the movie was that some scenes seemed utterly disconnected. I was a pain in the ass due to this, I kept asking my sister questions like “why did he do that?,” “who is that?,” “why did that happen?,” and “what is going on?.” Needless to say, she is never going to a movie with me ever again. Thank you, your majesty.
The story itself was enjoyable. The movie related the story of Elizabeth’s reign over England in the late 1500s to the early 1600s, and in particular the war waged by King Philip of Spain in the name of the Catholic God against the bastard Queen of England. It had this dark, religious, imposing mood to it which I loved and which I always enjoy in movies.
The part of the story I did not enjoy very much was how much emphasis was put on the Queen’s romantic life (or the lack thereof). I felt it was a little too much for my taste and I felt overall bad for poor Elizabeth who was unlucky in this movie with Sir Walter Raleigh as she was in the previous movie with the Earl of Leicester. It was a golden, manless age for the Queen I guess.
I wanted more war fighting, more blood and gore, more torture, and more devilish scheming in the movie. I really like that stuff and although I did not see much of that tonight, I still think Elizabeth:The Golden Age is a great movie you should not miss if you like history and romance and beautiful costumes.
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
December 28th, 2007 at 6:43 am
you would like La Reine Margot, lot’s of sex, torture, blood, guts, religion, intrigue and Isabelle Adjani. And do you need more scheming than Catherine de Medici? Go for it. I’ve heard Dangerous Liasons is good, in this genre, but I haven’t seen it.<br /><br />cheers and thanks for the review.<br />
December 28th, 2007 at 6:53 am
"I wanted more war fighting, more blood and gore, more torture, and more
devilish scheming in the movie. I really like that stuff."<br /><br />Admit it. You are really a seventeen year old boy.<br />
December 28th, 2007 at 10:49 am
Dangerous Liaisons is a brilliant, brilliant movie. Euroarabe, you have to watch it! You will love it, it is one of my all-time fav movies.
Seventeen, maybe. A boy? never…
December 28th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I still would go with you, don’t worry ;)
December 28th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
<br />
<div style="margin-left: 40px;"><a href="http://imdb.com/title/tt0127536/">1998’s Elizabeth</a> was an all-around fantastic, tightly woven picture which both impressed and educated.<br /></div><br />I hope you didn’t receive too much of an education from the movie. It was widely panned for being historically inaccurate and for portraying Elizabeth I as a weak and indecisive leader. On the contrary, the real Elizabeth I was anything but weak. She was quite shrewd and ruthless. Here is a not so kind review from Udolpho:<br /><br />http://www.udolpho.com/weblog/?id=00140&title=Blanched-history<br />
December 28th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
I thought she was very strong in the first movie, and that the picture did a good job portraying her as a powerful leader who can hold her own. I actually thought she was weaker in <span style="font-style: italic;">this</span> movie. Hmm!