Read our editors' picks for the movies and shows we're watching in March, including "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier," Boss Level, and Zack Snyder's Justice League.
Looking for something new to add to your Watchlist? Check out our favorite stills from shows you can stream now on Paramount +.
Related lists from IMDb editors
Related lists from IMDb users
Title: Elizabeth (1998)
Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.
| Cast overview, first billed only: | |||
 |
Liz Giles | ... | Female Martyr |
|
|
Rod Culbertson | ... | Master Ridley |
| Paul Fox | ... | Male Martyr | |
| Terence Rigby | ... | Bishop Gardiner | |
| Christopher Eccleston | ... | Duke of Norfolk | |
|
|
Peter Stockbridge | ... | Palace Chamberlain |
| Amanda Ryan | ... | Lettice Howard | |
| Kathy Burke | ... | Queen Mary Tudor | |
|
|
Valerie Gale | ... | Mary's Dwarf |
|
|
George Antoni | ... | King Philip II of Spain (as George Yiasoumi) |
| James Frain | ... | Alvaro de la Quadra | |
| Jamie Foreman | ... | Earl of Sussex | |
| Edward Hardwicke | ... | Earl of Arundel | |
| Cate Blanchett | ... | Elizabeth I | |
| Emily Mortimer | ... | Kat Ashley | |
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 CharmedGirl47
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.