Customer Reviews

Elizabeth I

5 star:		(103)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

One of the things I love about owning a DVD player is that I get to watch movies pretty much as they were intended to be seen: in widescreen format, brilliant colour and sound, and the ability to pause them and have the frame actually stay still. This is especially nice when it's the sort of film I adore -- a costume drama with plenty of details and good looking actors.

Thus is the case with Elizabeth I, a miniseries originally aired on HBO and now available as a two-disc set. Directed by Tom Hooper and written by Nigel Williams, this is a sumptuous treat of a film, full of glittering costumes, period sets and actors who speak and sound right for the time. Instead of showing the usual cradle-to-grave life of Elizabeth I of England, a different tactic is taken, showing her coping with several pivotal times in her reign, and how she dealt with the problem and moved on.

The story opens after Elizabeth has been on the throne of England for about twenty years. She's now in her mid-forties, and her council of advisors are worried that because she has not married and given the country an heir, England stands a good chance of sliding back into civil war. Worse still, there's now the problem of religion -- most of England is Protestant, and most of the rest of Europe is Catholic, two factions that disagree with each other violently, and the only likely heir is the fanatically catholic Mary, Queen of Scots.

Elizabeth (Helen Mirren) isn't about to marry, as we quickly see. She's got exactly what she wants in her relationship with Robert, the Earl of Leicester (Jeremy Irons), down to the point where she has him alone in her private quarters, snuggling and cannoolding with a kiss and tickle or two. It's with her dear Robin that she can be who she wants to be, an animated, sexual woman, but she's also being pressured to marry and on the horizon is a visiting French prince, the Duc d'Anjou (Jérémie Covillault), a young charmer who is also a Catholic, and so, not quite suitable. Most of the first hour is taken up with sorting out this relationship, and we get to see how Elizabeth played the marriage game with such skill and ability.

In fact, the viewer ought to resolve themselves to seeing what Elizabeth I did so well -- Elizabeth the Tease. She plays the game of flirtation, and love, and especially, the 'maybe, maybe' card. It doesn't matter if they are courtiers, her ladies in waiting, or the members of parliment. As we see so vividly, she doesn't quite trust anyone, not even her Secretary, Lord Burghley (Ian McDiarmid) or her spymaster, Walsingham (Patrick Malahide). In fact, Elizabeth wasn't above slapping and throwing tantrums when the mood took her, as we get to see. And in a court where she was the center of attention, anyone who tried to outshine her would be in for a world of hurt -- two examples are when a young lady is wearing a splendid gown, and another when a secret marriage comes to light.

The next big problem in Elizabeth's life is the growing tension with the Spanish, and their backing of the exiled Mary of Scotland (Barbara Flynn), who has taken refuge in England after a successful rebellion in her native Scotland has thrown her out, and replaced her with her infant son. Elizabeth knows that if she Mary 'disposed' of, it will plunge England into war with a far more powerful Spain, and that's something that she can't afford. But she also is aware that Mary is more than eager to see Elizabeth die, and isn't above arranging it to happen. Even her trusted advisor, Walsingham wants her gone, and finally, Elizabeth gives in -- but doesn't want to know how it is done, or even when.

It's this little bit that shows Elizabeth in all of her conniving, canny glory. It might seem particularly repellent in a leader, but the sixteenth century wasn't a nice, mannerly time -- it was the time of the smart and the strong, and a ruler had better be both in order to survive. But Mary isn't entirely stupid either, and her execution occurs pretty much as it had happened, with some pretty gory bits.

Mary of Scotland's death leads into war with Spain and the Spanish Armada. Unfortunately, most of this happens off-screen, but we do get the famous speech at Tilburn, and I have to say that Mirren does it spectacularly well, and in a very convincing fashion. But triumph also has bitterness, as she loses her lover, Leicester to illness.

Ten years pass, and a new generation has come to the queen's court. Among them is Leicester's stepson, the Earl of Essex (Hugh Dancy), another Robin, who isn't quite as smart as his predescessor was, but soon becomes Elizabeth's favorite. He charms, he seduces, and not everyone likes him. In fact, we see that Burghley's son, Cecil (Toby Jones) certainly is not. Cecil is smart, but is a misshapen dwarf that Elizabeth fondly calls "Pygmy." She too, has changed, her clothing becoming more sumptuous, hiding the ravages of time behind ever more layers of makeup and wigs.

Essex is more of a toy than a companion, as we see, and Elizabeth can't seem to say no, even as things start to spiral out of control and Elizabeth discovers that there is one thing that she can't stop -- time and her own mortality.

This is one amazing film. Despite the at times claustrophic feel of the sets and the fact that the crowd scenes seem to be a bit sparse, this is still a spectacle to watch. Mirren shines in this film, and don't be surprised to see her walk off with an award or two come January 15th. Besides Mirren, I appreciated that neither the characters of Leicester or d'Anjou were shown as lacking as they have been in other films about Elizabeth I. D'Anjou is particularly effective, being sympathetic, and knowing it is all a charade, and not the gibbering twit that we were treated to in the version with Cate Blanchett. Jeremy Irons is a sauve, polished courtier, not the sullen boy toy, and is very believable as Elizabeth's longtime confidant and friend.


Some caveats. This film is not for the squeamish. There is one torture scene, several beheadings, one hand getting whacked off, and the rather more gruesome details of what is known as a traitor's death -- being hung, drawn and quartered. I'll spare you what that actually means, but it's a pretty messy sight. There are also two glaring historical errors in this as well: Elizabeth never met either Mary, Queen of Scots, nor James VI pf Scotland in her life. She certainly corresponded with them, but they never met in person.

To balance the gory bits, there are two featurettes that are accessed through the special features. One is a 'making of' feature that goes into the casting, direction, locations and costumes for the series. The other is a rather nice little surprise that goes into the actual history of Elizabeth I and her political and personal relationships, presented by none other than David Starkey, a historian that I have come to like and admire. He also presents with what I have to say is the best description of the sex life of Elizabeth I that I have ever heard -- and no, you're going to have to sit and watch just like I did, because it is too good to miss.

This is not a short program, coming in at about 220 minutes, shown in two parts. Worth it just for Helen Mirren alone, and the other actors are fine icing to the cake. Great for costume junkies, history fans, and anyone who wants to see a woman who set the world on its ear -- after all, that period of time is still known as the Elizabethan period, and it's easy to see why with this. My favorite so far in the various films about Elizabeth I.

This scooped up a mountain of Emmys for 2006, including Best Miniseries, awards for production values and Bests for Mirren and Irons.

Five very solid stars, and I would give it six if I could.

Helen Mirren gives a fantastic performance as the unmarried English ruler. She seemed to get the queen's personality down. I felt as if I was getting a look back at history. Hard to believe such a high quality production was created for TV. You see what it takes to be a great, if not lonely, monarch. You do have to close your eyes to a few historical liberties, such as the Queen visiting her cousin in her prison cell. The movie does have a slow start, but stick with it, it picks up. Some of the scenes are very violent and graphic, so beware of that. The reason to see this movie is too watch how Ms. Mirren portrays Queen Elizabeth I. Worth the viewing time.

I love all that is English, when it comes to history, and this is the icing on the cake. Helen Mirren gives an outstanding performance as Queen Elizabeth, the later years. She "feels" the part and "lives" the part. Adding personality to a much misunderstood royal ruler. Even going so far as to play pinch and giggle with the younger Robert. You can see the pained emotions on her face when she is forced to make a choice between love and her throne. But her heart belongs to England so she lives out the remainder of her life as a woman without love or family.

Elizabeth Tudor was one of the most psychologically-complex rulers in history. Alternately ignored and embraced by a tyrannical father who had her mother judicially murdered, coming very near to her own youthful death in prison at the hands of her half-sister Queen Mary, and threatened with invasion and assassination attempts throughout her reign, she -- almost uniquely among her contemporaries -- nevertheless steered a course of moderation that brought England through one of the most tumultuous periods in its history and left it poised to begin the reach for empire that was to give England dominance over the 19th century.

Her long reign at a critical juncture of English history presents a panorama so large that it is virtually impossible to capture in anything less than a lengthy miniseries such as PBS undertook in the 1970's with Glenda Jackson's bravura performance . . . a miniseries plagued, unfortuately, by quickly outdated production values. Given a choice imposed by a shorter format of whether to survey Elizabeth equally as both ruler and woman or to bring the camera in closer and to put more focus on one dimension than the other, Tom Hooper wisely chooses the latter.

I am a voracious fan of Elizabeth's watershed reign but, frankly, it has been surveyed enough. So I am pleased that Hooper chose to canvas the more complex side of Elizabeth the woman. And I am ecstatic that he chose the amazing Helen Mirren to do the heavy lifting. Certainly her job is made easier by a superb script with just the right balance between known events and intelligent guesses about the personal drives and private maneuvers behind those events. And Hooper places her in physical settings built to the true color and scale of the Elizabethan court, not to the exaggerated imaginings of later generations which produced the Gothic horror show of sets in which Cate Blanchett was made to portray her highly-stylized Elizabeth.

Elizabeth was a woman capable of bold maneuvers in the face of danger who nevertheless drove her council crazy with prolonged indecision. She was a woman who could translate Greek into French, who practiced her music, and appreciated poetry -- but who likewise could don armor and stand as rousing orator in front of her army as the indominatable heir to Henry VIII.

But, perhaps more than anything, she was a passionate, feeling woman whom fate had left with a deadly fear of marriage. In an era when monarchs were expected to marry and produce heirs, she came from a family where marriage had been a death sentence more than once. She lived in an era when women -- even queens -- were expected to subordinate their wishes and their estates to those of a husband. She watched her dogmatic sister "Bloody Mary" plunge England into religious mayhem punctuated by a poor marriage choice. She watched her cousin Mary Queen of Scots lose her throne over an imprudent marriage.

Yet she loved and craved love throughout her life. Ensconced in the propaganda of "The Virgin Queen" -- sufficient unto herself, chaste in person and under the sway of no Pope, no foreign Papist husband, and no English subject -- she nevertheless desperately craved the intimacy and security her role and her family history denied her.

Telling this story is one of history's most instructive lessons on the price that power and success can exact on a person. Telling it well is one of history's most entertaining offerings. Telling it this well is one of those very rare events in film history.

I grew up with the magnificent Glenda Jackson version of Elizabeth R, and to me she is the definitive Gloriana. Helen Mirren is superb, but to my mind too flirtatious and indecisive. I don't think the imperious Elizabeth would necessarily have cracked jokes with her courtiers to this extent. Her relationship with the love of her life, the Earl of Leicester, senstively portrayed by Jeremy Irons, is well done, but Leicester did not die in her arms after the defeat of the Armada. Neither did Elizabeth ever meet Mary Queen of Scots (played as a simpering Frenchwoman by Barbara Flynn) or even more bizarrely, her successor, James VI, and Mary was her second, not her first cousin. The Earl of Essex story is more problematic. Though it charts effectively Elizabeth's disillusionment with his ambition and arrogance, it also shows her as being totally besotted by him, which I doubt was the case. Other fine performances are given by Toby Jones as 'Pygmy', Robert Cecil, and by the actors playing Lord Burghley and Francis Walsingham, but for historical accuracy as well as Glenda Jackson's magnetism, Elizabeth R remains definitive.

If you're a historical film and/or history buff then you'll want to see this film to compare Helen Mirren's performance to those of other great actresses who have tackled the role of the Virgin Queen. In my opinion Helen Mirren did a beautiful job of capturing the Queen's humanity but her characterization lacks the proud, reserved demeanor that all of her contemporaries saw and described in Elizabeth Tudor and this weakened the performance considerably. This movie is a lot more entertaining than Glenda Jackson's magnificent Elizabeth R., but it's less accurate historically and Ms. Mirren fails to match Ms. Jackson's splendid performance. Nor, in my opinion is she as good as Flora Robson who played Elizabeth in several films of the 1930s. She is as good or better as everybody else whose played the part, however, and the movie entertains. If you know a lot about Tudor England and you want to see a historically accurate recreation then buy the BBC's early 1970s productions of The Six Wives of Henry VIII and Elizabeth R. If you just want the gist of the story and to be entertained, this is a good choice.

Twenty years into her reign and Queen Elizabeth the 1st is facing threats both internal and external. Spain - led by the pope - is determined to conquer England and rid this country of the heretic Queen. Whilst spies and traitors seek to depose her, Elizabeth (Helen Mirren) constantly under pressure to marry and produce an heir, is intent to root out all those betrayers, determined to protect the English Protestant Church and her hold on the throne.

Her efforts to protect her country and her people do indeed come at a price. As a woman with such power, she knows that there are men in positions of control who are more than ready to take over the top job. Mirren offers a completely convincing picture of a smart, calculating woman whose private needs clash with her desire for power in a world otherwise run by men. Elizabeth faces huge challenges and determined enemies, and her responses are similarly gigantic.

Elizabeth knows she can trust the Earl of Leicester (Jeremy Irons). Indeed, she is deeply in love with him, and they have some passionate, intimate moments, but something keeps holding her back. There's nothing apparently, that would compromise Elizabeth's reputation as the Virgin Queen. It is the Earl of Leicester, however, that connects her with his stepson, the devastatingly handsome Earl of Essex who proves to be the Queen's ultimate romantic nemesis.

Essex is a man with too much faith in his own sexual charm - he's gorgeous, but also a bit of a philanderer and unfortunately has eyes for the other ladies of the court. Outwardly he loves the Queen and is passionate about her, but inwardly he has his own agenda. He nags Elizabeth for a position on the Privy Council and then mistakenly accuses her faithful doctor of treason. Does he want to become King? Perhaps, but the prospect is unlikely, as the Queen must marry royalty.

Elizabeth becomes enraged when she learns Essex has been sent to Lisbon without her approval, and she joins a worshiping throng to celebrate his return. But when Essex is charged with impregnating a young woman of the court, Elizabeth feels betrayed and roars at him with as much vitriol as she can muster. Eventually, a lover's quarrel morphs into a small-scale civil war, one in which Essex and his forces don't stand a chance of seizing the throne, but try anyway.

The politics of the time constantly leave Elizabeth's patience in shatters. Against her better judgment she orders the execution of her cousin, the very Catholic Mary Queen of Scots (beautifully played by Barbara Flynn). But the beheading isn't a clean break, and Mary is ultimately denied her rosary and her priest. When Elizabeth hears about this she becomes distraught and only the levelheaded Earl of Rochester can calm her.

Written by Nigel Williams and directed by Tom Hooper, Elizabeth 1 brings to the screen all the power plays, court machinations and religious fervor of the time. Catholics are pitted against Protestants, and Elizabeth's political enemies are literally disemboweled in an endless display of retribution and reprisal. The movie does take some liberties with history - the dramatic meeting between Elizabeth and Mary of Scots never took place and I can't believe she would fall apart and cry in front of the Privy Council.

Obviously Elizabeth had the stomach for all the violence and sending people to beheaded - indeed she even ordered most of it! - But even in her darkest hour, when there was a real possibility that she would lose her throne, she managed to hold it together, even at the expense of her own heart. Mike Leonard August 06.

Elizabeth I is one of the most fascinating characters in history: not only did she reside over Britain's rise as a world power (culture, political, and military) during the Reformation, but she was glaringly human in so many ways: she was lonely, frequently unable to make decisions, and vulnerable to handsome courtiers. Mirren brings all of this out in this incredible reconstruction of her reign. It begins in the middle of her reign, when she is well established in power, and ends with her death (and so is perfectly compatible with Elizabeth, the other wonderful film on her with the incomparable Cate Blanchett). In between, there are many brilliant triumphs (beating the Spanish armada) and catastrophic mistakes (such as her execution of her trusted doctor, a Spanish Jew, based on the accusations of her later courtier beau, the Earl of Essex. Through it all, Mirren helps us to see her as a real human being. It is one of her greatest performances, and that is saying a lot.

Irons is her first great (apparently unconsomatted) lover-courtier, Robert Dudley. He is equally brilliant and portrayed as a better and far subtler politician than the one of Elizabeth (played wonderfully by Joseph Fiennes as a man dangerously out of his depth). While this is an interpretation that is not necessarily the way he was viewed by his contemporaries, it fits with the plot, given his step son, the other Robert, the Earl of Essex, an insufferable dandy seducer. Once the Earl of Essex takes his place, the drama is racheted up to a stunning and bizarre climax that I believe is extremely accurate historically and a frightening reflection on E I's weaknesses of character judgment. But she suspected him all along - and this is no spoiler - yet needed him. Both of these performances are utterly superb and believable. THere is also the Duc d'Anjou, who is portrayed a bit too sympathically in my view as an apparently loving suitor (he was a cynical transvestite in the other film, which he was), though the doubt is always there as to his deepest motives and never resolved - just like real life. Mary Queen of Scots is also wonderful, just as subtle so that a simplistic label cannot be stuck to her. Was she a Catholic martyr? Or a conspirator in treason? Once again, as we cannot know, so is this film, these questions are never answered. Other courtier-ministers are equally complex characters, from the "pygmy" to E I's master spy, Walsingham.

This is perhaps the best HBO film I have ever seen. There is much for history-buff pendants like me, and a wonderfully realised and intricate story. It is simply brillaint and I will watch it many times again, to seek nuance and different interpretations. That makes this a masterpiece, in my view. Warmly recommended. This is truly deep and informative drama.

This miniseries which focuses on the last twenty years of Elizabeth I's forty year reign (1579-1599) seems designed to showcase Helen Mirren's formidable talents as an actress who is capable of finding, connecting to, and bringing to light what is most human about her larger-than-life characters. In this HBO miniseries about the first Elizabeth as in the Stephen Frears directed feature The Queen (about the second Elizabeth) Helen Mirren has the uncanny ability of showing these monarchs not as abstractions or icons but as extremely complicated, extremeley conflicted, and extremely vulnerable individuals who are, nonetheless, forced to come to terms with the fact that for the people they represent and embody a supra-human ideal and to live up to this expectation they must always conduct themselves in accordance with this ideal. But to live this ideal comes with a terrible price for to live the ideal is to forego actually living life.

Helen Mirren plays both Queen Elizabeth I & II as selfless public servants who must craft themselves according to the public will. Since her power as a monarch is dependent upon the goodwill that her people feel toward her neither Queen is ever free to make decisions based on self-interest but must always weigh her decisions/rulings and consider how they will benefit and/or serve the people. Even though Mirren shows how overbearing each Queen could, at times, be, ultimatley both Queens are seen to be little more than captives of the will of the people. The Queen's every wardrobe choice, every word, and every gesture is carefully crafted and carefully staged; she artfully manages her life to secure the loyalty of her subjects (which ultimatley means that she is their subject and not they hers); and, therefore, no decision the Queen makes is ever a private matter as even her love life is a matter of state. If, in the case of Elizabeth I, the people prefer that their Queen remain a virgin (and loyal only to them) then a virgin she will remain. And if, in the case of Elizabeth II, the people demand that their Queen pay her respects to "the people's princess" (Lady Di) then pay her respects she must.

Though each Elizabeth is an entirely singular individual Helen Mirren really understands both Queens to be suffering the consequences of the same kind of extended confinement (which is, apparently, the common blight of royal life in any age).

Both HBO's two-part Elizabeth I and Stephen Frears' The Queen are must-sees for two groups: fans of royal history and acting fans who wish to see an actor/actress at the top of his/her game.

Also recommended to royal history buffs: David Starkey's two-part series Monarchy (about the English royals from the beginning to Charles II).

Also recommended to Helen Mirren fans: The Painted Lady (1997); Prime Suspect seasons 1-6 (season 6 was directed by Elizabeth I's Tom Hooper); The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover (1989).

Hellen Mirren portrays Queen Elizabeth I as surprisingly human. To look at this queen and compare her with Dench's Elizabeth in Shakespeare in Love (granted, different movies, different goals), they bare resemblance only in hair and clothes. Mirren's Elizabeth is childishly playful in her romps with the Earl of Leicester (Jeremy Irons), flat-out childish and sympathetic in her desires for the much younger and traitorous Earl of Essex, but when need be steel-cold and harsh.

While the costume design art and set decoration are typically HBO-top-notch, and the court intrigues well played, it is Mirren who grabs hold of our attention. It seems that she portrayed every emotion a person could imagine to have, and did it with pinpoint accuracy, especially the more hysterical emotions. One wonders at her exhaustion upon the completion of the filming. She was in virtually every scene, and more and more we are hearing of actors collapsing when the demands of their assignments weigh them down. Indeed, Law & Order Criminal Intent added two new detectives to take pressure off D'Onofrio, and regarding Veronica Mars, Kristen Bell was relieved of the constancy of being in the majority of scenes. Imagine Mirren, with all of her costume changes, and flights of fancy! Amazing.

This was a delight, and its length not at all daunting. I highly recommend this.

4.5 stars rounded up to 5.