I primi anni del regno della regina Elisabetta I d'Inghilterra e l'arduo compito di districarsi con i requisiti necessari per essere una monarca.I primi anni del regno della regina Elisabetta I d'Inghilterra e l'arduo compito di districarsi con i requisiti necessari per essere una monarca.I primi anni del regno della regina Elisabetta I d'Inghilterra e l'arduo compito di districarsi con i requisiti necessari per essere una monarca.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Vincitore di 1 Oscar
- 35 vittorie e 56 candidature totali
George Antoni
- King Philip II of Spain
- (as George Yiasoumi)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- Quiz1998 was the only year that two performers were nominated for Academy Awards for playing the same character in two different movies: Dame Judi Dench was nominated (and won) for Best Actress in a Supporting Role for playing Queen Elizabeth I in Shakespeare in Love (1998), and Cate Blanchett was nominated for Best Actress for portraying Elizabeth I in this movie. Joseph Fiennes and Geoffrey Rush appeared in both movies as well.
- BlooperRobert 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.
- ConnessioniEdited into Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007)
- Colonne sonoreTe Deum
Composed by Thomas Tallis
Performed by St. John's College Choir, Cambridge
Conducted by George Guest
Recensione in evidenza
Well made though not exactly great history.
Making a historical biopic like "Elizabeth" is a very, very difficult thing--something many viewers would not expect. Although Elizabeth I of England was an incredibly important figure, there are two HUGE problems with a film about her. First, although she had LOTS of folks executed for treason, we really have no idea if many of these folks were actually guilty of anything. Executing potential threats and rivals back then was like eating potato chips--you can't stop with just one! Untangling this mess of intrigues is impossible today, so many of the plots you see in this film might not have even existed or occurred later in her reign (the executions in the film actually occurred over a very long period of time--not all at once). Second, there is scant little written from the time about the character and personalities of the major characters you see in the film. So, the film makers either inferred or simply made up stuff for the sake of cinematic style and intrigue. For example, Sir Francis Wallsingham was a man of intrigues and operated a personal spy network--so the inferences about him in this sense in the movie are reasonable. BUT, showing him with the young man who he then viciously kills at the beginning of the film is completely fictional. There is no evidence he murdered people with his own hands and I think the scene STRONGLY implies that he's either gay or bisexual--something that is made up for the movie. Another example is Elizabeth's sex life. This is NOT something they kept records of (for obvious reasons) and there has been MUCH conjecture that she was gay, asexual or carried on affairs behind the scenes with men. No one really knows the truth. So, my advice for the film is to take it all with a grain of salt--the main points are accurate but so many of the details are fabricated in order to create a neat sort of fictional non-fiction.
As fictional non-fiction, the film looks great. The costumes and sets are wonderful. The acting is also quite good. And, the film is rather interesting and gives a good GENERAL overview of the early years of Elizabeth's reign. However, be forewarned: the film is NOT for the squeamish, prudish or easily offended. It is very bloody (beginning with an incredibly vivid opening execution scene) and there is a lot of nudity. In many ways, this film helped set the template for later historical mini series which are much like history, a soap opera and a bit of skin combined. Well made but like most biopics, short on historical accuracy.
As fictional non-fiction, the film looks great. The costumes and sets are wonderful. The acting is also quite good. And, the film is rather interesting and gives a good GENERAL overview of the early years of Elizabeth's reign. However, be forewarned: the film is NOT for the squeamish, prudish or easily offended. It is very bloody (beginning with an incredibly vivid opening execution scene) and there is a lot of nudity. In many ways, this film helped set the template for later historical mini series which are much like history, a soap opera and a bit of skin combined. Well made but like most biopics, short on historical accuracy.
D’aiuto•113
- planktonrules
- 11 dic 2013
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare una lista video per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- Elizabeth: The Virgin Queen
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 30.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 30.082.699 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 275.131 USD
- 8 nov 1998
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 82.150.642 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione2 ore 4 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti