The retelling of France's iconic but ill-fated queen, Marie Antoinette. From her betrothal and marriage to Louis XVI at 15 to her reign as queen at 19 and to the end of her reign as queen and ultimately the fall of Versailles.
A veteran high school teacher befriends a younger art teacher, who is having an affair with one of her 15-year-old students. However, her intentions with this new "friend" also go well beyond platonic friendship.
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
Thomas Howard, AKA Duke of Norfolk (Christopher Eccleston) and Sir William Cecil, AKA Lord Burghley (Richard Attenborough) actually had a common relative. Norfolk's mother was Frances de Vere, whose nephew Edward de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, was married to Burghley's daughter Anne Cecil. It has also been suggested that Edward de Vere was the true author of Hamlet (usually considered to have been written by William Shakespeare), and that the characters Hamlet, Ophelia and Polonius were based on himself, Anne, and William, respectively. Christopher Eccleston has played Hamlet on stage, and Richard Attenborough appeared in the 1996 film Hamlet (1996). See more »
Robert Dudley recites Sir Philip Sidney's sonnet "My true love hath my heart" to Elizabeth in a boat. This sonnet was not written until at least 1580, about 20 years after the time the movie is set, and wasn't published until 1593. See more »
She is just a child and yet still you piss yourselves!
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.
59 of 95 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?