The death of King Henry VIII throws his kingdom into chaos because of succession disputes. His weak son Edward, is on his deathbed. Anxious to keep England true to the Reformation, a ... See full summary »
Helena Bonham Carter,
An aspiring young physician, Robert Merivel found himself in the service of King Charles II and saves the life of a spaniel dear to the King. Merivel joins the King's court and lives the ... See full summary »
Robert Downey Jr.,
Queen Victoria is deeply depressed after the death of her husband, disappearing from public. Her servant Brown, who adores her, through caress and admiration brings her back to life, but ... See full summary »
Young Queen Margot finds herself trapped in an arranged marriage amidst a religious war between Catholics and Protestants. She hopes to escape with a new lover, but finds herself imprisoned by her powerful and ruthless family.
This film details the ascension to the throne and the early reign of Queen Elizabeth the First, as played by Cate Blanchett. The main focus is the endless attempts by her council to marry her off, the Catholic hatred of her and her romance with Lord Robert Dudley. Written by
1998 was the only year that two performers were nominated for Academy Awards for playing the same character in two different films in the same year. Judi Dench was nominated (and won) for Best Supporting Actress for playing Queen Elizabeth I in Shakespeare in Love (1998) and Cate Blanchett was nominated for Best Actress for portraying Elizabeth I in this film. See more »
The first shot of Walsingham in the film (from behind the head), is actually used twice. Just before the next shot (of his face), a sharp slit of silver can be seen heading toward Walsingham's head from the right side of the screen. However, Walsingham's servant then crosses the room, and gets a knife out of its case. When the next shot of the back of Walsingham's head is seen, this slit is the knife now being held to his throat by the servant. See more »
I have rid England of her enemies. What do I do now? Am I to be made of stone? Must I be touched by nothing?
See more »
I just watched Elizabeth, for the second time and once again I was ...what would be the word...moved? Not in the teary-eyed sense, but in a way that makes you want to read more about Elizabeth I.
However, I have read other comments and two things occurred to me. First, that many people (brilliant scholars or erudite people whom I respect) pretend that "it did not look that way" or " it did not happen that way", such and such. Who are you to tell? History is not an exact science, it is a HUMAN way to try and keep in touch with the events that shaped the world we live in. Being interested in history and costume history myself, nothing STRIKE me as BLATANTLY anachronistic. I think that Mr. Kapur primarily wanted to illustrate Elizabeth's rise to power, not her entire reign, which would take several films. His film is an account of an episode of English history, not a chronic on life in Tudor England, hence the lack of filth and lice, as someone mentioned... The second element is a more personal one, that in fact came to my mind while watching the film: how could Cate Blanchett lose the Oscar to Gwyneth Paltrow, of all people?! Her performance in Shakespeare in Love was charming, no less but no more. I think that trying to catch the conscience of a queen, to make an illustrious historic figure come to life is far more difficult than playing William Shakespeare's (fictitious) love interest.
It was my humble opinion, and I wanted to share it with other IMDB users.
56 of 91 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?