|
Showing reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 85)
|
|
 |
Amazing movie!!! Way better than the first one. (I am amazed that some people still expect historical accuracy from Hollywood movies. You'd better watch a documentary if that's what you want. A good movie is well plotted, well acted and not boring, but not necessarily historically accurate.)
9/10
5.12.2008 -
alinuta_mures@ - age: 18-25
Very well made and acted, for a sequel it is just as good as the first... interesting history lesson!
8/10
4.15.2008 -
phylippe1@ - age: 18-25
The costumes were FANTASTIC!! No wonder the designer got Best Oscar!! Well chosen for sure! Cate Blanchet was also amazing in her role as the queen, however I found it was too much "romance" in this movie and not enough history...
6/10
3.12.2008 -
kidda_mtl@ - age: 26-35
I googled a bit of history before going to see this movie; Mary Tudor and the line of succession etc. and this really helped to follow the story and know a bit about the characters and period. I found this movie to be an excellent production. A real spectacular! Kate Blanchett once again delivers a finessed performance.
9/10
12.2.2007 -
comi2@ - age: 50+
Cate Blanchett alone make this movie worth seeing. What an Actress! Pure pleasure to watch! She sure deserves an Oscar for this role.
10/10
11.21.2007 -
arts48@ - age: 36-49
Fantastic acting, action, costumes. Kate is magnificent.
10/10
11.20.2007 -
mhawkins@
Enjoyed the costumes, scenery and acting. It was a bit slow in places.
7/10
11.19.2007 -
colleenmilne1@ - age: 50+
I thought it was really amazing even though I know that the information was a bit false I thought the acting was really good especially by Cate Blanchett.
9/10
11.17.2007 -
gennarose21@ - age: 13-17
Great continuation from the first movie cannot wait for the third! Hope they can get Cate Blanchett to finish. She is such a strong part of this film... would not be the same without her!
9/10
11.14.2007 -
privateconfidential@ - age: 36-49
AMAZING CINEMATOGRAPHY AND THE ACTING IS SUPERB! The wardrobes and costuming are also incredible. It's a fantastic movie and helps you understand how very pivotal that time in history really was for Europe and the entire world.
9/10
11.11.2007 -
juliedarleen@ - age: 26-35
Sweeping orchestral panoramas and angelic choirs blasting away non stop at full volume even when nothing is happening, couldn't hide the fact that this movie distinguishes itself solely by its massive mediocrity. Weak dialogue, historical inaccuracy and an almost zero plot line whose central theme was an overdrawn execution & a pitifully constructed battle scene made this quite probably the third worst movie I've ever scene. I cant actually think of the other two so I'm being generous. Don't waste your time on this garbage.
2/10
11.6.2007 -
gas210@ - age: 50+
Looked good, but what was up with the CSI dialogue?
5/10
11.5.2007 -
saskhamster@ - age: 36-49
This movie was terrible. Horrible acting and there were many a couple of inappropriate scenes. I would not recommend this movie to people 13-20.
1/10
11.4.2007 -
shetlandgallie@ - age: 36-49
How can anyone like this piece of crap. Bad script! Plodding! Over acted! Historically inaccurate! Poor Camera work! Worst of all the boom mic in the shot for the first 30 mins.
2/10
11.2.2007 -
bellagio70@ - age: 50+
Scenery, costumes, excellent. Script like any other difficult plot of lives in and out of love, war, and nutty RC people... average. First half boring. Not at all like previous movies, but worth an evening out.
6/10
11.1.2007 -
tstaley@ - age: 50+
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
A little slow.. excellent costumery, sets, acting... but historical garbage. Sir Walter Raleigh is depicted as leading the British forces against the Armada... he wasn't there. Sir Francis Drake takes that credit and his name wasn't mentioned.. neither is the fact that Elizabeth was supported by an alliance with the Dutch and had a combined fleet 50% larger than that of the Spanish. The battle as shown is a farce. Fireships were deployed but did no damage though the Spanish fleet scattered in panic - most driven North by storms and many lost against the Scottish/Irish coasts.. but a majority eventually returned to Spain.
4/10
11.1.2007 -
jjmoseley@ - age: 50+
Managed to catch the first movie of the two on cable. This was an excellent finish to the set. Marvelous acting all round. I really like Cate Blanchett, a fine actress. Geoffrey Rush is wonderful as Walsingham, a man trying to serve Queen and country while struggling with ill health. Clive Owen is HOT as usual. I loved his visionary/rogue portrayal of Raleigh. All in all the acting is finest caliber, costumes should be Oscar worthy, cinematography as well.
9/10
10.31.2007 -
venasilliphant@ - age: 50+
| | | | |
I was impressed by the costumes and scenery.
7/10
10.30.2007 -
ritartj@ - age: 50+
Brilliant!!! Well acted, well directed, deserves an Oscar nomination. Kate Blanchett is mesmerizing and a pleasure to watch on screen.
10/10
10.29.2007 -
clado@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
This attention holding film. I loved the musical background and the use of colour tone to match mood and historic period. At times it felt like I was viewing a medieval portrait. Historic accuracy was good although the romantic angle with Sir Walter Raleigh may have been overplayed. I enjoyed the plotting regarding Mary, Queen of Scots and how it played into Phillip's hands. Well done! This is a must see!
10/10
10.28.2007 -
davgre@ - age: 50+
| | | | |
Seems like I don't give too many 9/10 as of late. But this movie earned it in my books. A great story, told by a talented director, with excellent performances by Cate Blanchett, Clive Owen (and I'm not a huge fan of Owen's acting chops), as well as a great supporting performance by the always entertaining Geoffrey Rush. All acting performances were great! The on-screen chemistry between Blanchett and Owen is amazing. In my opinion, Blanchett definitely will earn an Oscar nomination for her gut-wrenching portrayal of Elizabeth, and I have yet to see a performance that would be more deserving of the Oscar than hers. The setting and music are perfectly choreographed, and the costumes are spot on! This is what going to the movies is all about: being whisked away for a few hours, transported into another world, at another time, and being told an incredible story. You do not see the actors, but rather only see their characters. This movie could have been 30 minutes longer and I would have enjoyed it even more. It's one of those movies you just want to enjoy. Yes, I love historical biopics, but I am also hard to please, having suffered through too many bad ones. This one is excellent, a definite must see in my opinion. Bravo! Well done!! Cinema worth going to!!!
9/10
10.28.2007 -
rimbaud1972@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
It is easy to see why everyone talks about Cate Blanchett in this film. It is a near perfect role for her and she does not disappoint. I think perhaps though, that Elizabeth should have been played by someone with much less stage presence. Cate is not the sort of woman easily forgotten by a dashing explorer, such as Sir Raleigh. Sir Raleigh did not convince me that he would have settled for the lady in waiting either. This is a story with beautiful cinematography and intricate costumes that were a work of art. Geoffrey Rush and Abby Cornish were perfectly cast as the queen’s closest confidents and Samantha Morton played her smallish role as Mary Queen of Scots with brilliant confidence. This is also a story of love, war and passion, but mostly of betrayal. My heart went out to the queen who wanted so much to have passion and knew that it was almost impossible to achieve. She vacillated between wanting to view it vicariously through Bess and hoping at the same time that Sir Raleigh would choose a life much like her own…to love from afar and painfully pine for the unattainable. I loved the web of doubt and the complications of love in all its forms…. the love of country and of duty…. how very British.
9/10
10.28.2007 -
aprilkaizen@ - age: 36-49
Dog, terrible script, nothing like the last "Elizabeth" movie - avoid.
4/10
10.27.2007 -
russells@ - age: 36-49
I think this movie has to obtain several Oscars. Cate Blanchett was excellent as always. Very good landscapes and music!!! As well as the secondary actors and actresses.
9/10
10.27.2007 -
normafdez@ - age: 26-35
The movie itself was Ok. Cate did an excellent job but I personally didn't seem to be attach or interested in the subject matter.
6/10
10.26.2007 -
sentenza99@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
Not a sound in the theatre - not even a crunch (of popcorn) All eyes and ears were riveted on this spectacular production! Fabulous performances, dramatic depiction of history (whether fact or fiction) Costumes and scenery were thought provoking and did I mention the acting? Quite splendid and I enjoyed it.
9/10
10.26.2007 -
lindaholland9@ - age: 50+
An outstanding performance by Cate Blanchett, as usual. Cate's role as a queen is indeed the most wonderful performance I have seen from her... She always dazzles me with her attitudes, actions, and reflection through the camera lense. The movie industry has been lost in a world of silliness and stupidity until this movie came on screen.
9/10
10.26.2007 -
farahazrak@ - age: 18-25
This was a really good movie with excellent acting, if you like history, this is a great way to watch it.
8/10
10.25.2007 -
bigbradhill33@ - age: 18-25
2 talented actors compensate for the lack of pace... up to a point.
7/10
10.25.2007 -
mcpenes@ - age: 26-35
Pretty good. Not as good as the first. To me the score seemed too 'epic' for a personal drama (sounded like battle music when they were riding horses) Great performances, though.
8/10
10.24.2007 -
god_smack9@ - age: 18-25
| | | | |
The costumes & scenery were awesome!! Very well done.
9/10
10.24.2007 -
itslauna@ - age: 36-49
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Cate is stunningly brilliant in her powerful yet tortured existence as the "virgin" Queen, Geoffrey Rush is forever affecting and even Samantha Morton exhibits a convincing foe. The movie as a whole instilled powerful emotions consistent with the previously released Elizabeth movies. Not a disappointment at all and I'd even watch it again.
9/10
10.23.2007 -
sunn_rize@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
As someone who has written about Queen Elizabeth I, I found the historical liberties taken in this movie to be insulting to the characters that were portrayed as well as those who were irresponsibly omitted. As anyone who knows the life of Queen Elizabeth I, it was William Cecil, later known as Lord Burghley who was her right hand and mastermind behind much of her political ‘will’ throughout her entire reign. Not only was Burghley missing but the Queen’s lifelong best friend, Lord Leicester, who acted as Commander of the forces during the Armada threat, was strangely absent. The role Clive Owen played, that of Sir Walter Raleigh, was indeed someone of interest to Queen Elizabeth but certainly not of romantic interest; he was an investment to her in order to secure her waters and ensure her name was attached to any of his overseas adventures and captured Spanish silver. The most distressing thing about his movie however, is the characterization of the Queen as a woman who, overtaken with emotion, drops to her knees in the middle of her castle floor, unable to contain her own despair. This is hardly taken from the history books—she was, at all times, a controlled individual who prided herself as someone who, as she told her Parliament, felt it “… monstrous that the feet should direct the head. ” Indeed. A movie wholly unworthy of her story.
1/10
10.23.2007 -
magsdoyle@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
As someone who has written about Queen Elizabeth I, I found the historical liberties taken in this movie to be insulting to the characters that were portrayed as well as those who were irresponsibly omitted. As anyone who knows the life of Queen Elizabeth I, it was William Cecil, later known as Lord Burghley who was her right hand and mastermind behind much of her political ‘will’ throughout her entire reign. Not only was Burghley missing but the Queen’s lifelong best friend, Lord Leicester, who acted as Commander of the forces during the Armada threat, was strangely absent. The role Clive Owen played, that of Sir Walter Raleigh, was indeed someone of interest to Queen Elizabeth but certainly not of romantic interest; he was an investment to her in order to secure her waters and ensure her name was attached to any of his overseas adventures and captured Spanish silver. The most distressing thing about this movie however, is the characterization of the Queen as a woman who, overtaken with emotion, drops to her knees in the middle of her castle floor, unable to contain her own despair. This is hardly taken from the history books—she was, at all times, a controlled individual who prided herself as someone who, as she told her Parliament, felt it “… monstrous that the feet should direct the head. ” Indeed. A movie wholly unworthy of her story.
1/10
10.23.2007 -
magsinparis@ - age: 36-49
Slooow , went in with too much expectation. Would not even rent the dvd.
3/10
10.23.2007 -
goyette,djr@ - age: 26-35
Were this only a period piece set in Elizabethan times, it would be merely magnificent. Expertly written and dramatised, with not a single weak performance among the entire cast of actors, it portrayed splendidly and in such cinematic splendour the drama and intrigue of one of history's most seminal eras. This is a genuine masterpiece in film, in my opinion, one worthy of inclusion in any film connoisseur's library.
10/10
10.23.2007 -
hoot41494@ - age: 50+
An excellent movie , about one of the greatest woman of the history of world , with two big actors :Cate Blanchett and Clive Owen.
9/10
10.22.2007 -
nicubelei@ - age: 36-49
This movie is pretty dull, lackluster, schmucky. Ridiculous plot. Very doubtful history transpired this way, and I cannot believe Liz was a sap of a queen as depicted here. I went with my girlfriend, who is a real Elizabethan fan and expert. Even she hated it!
4/10
10.22.2007 -
opengtune@ - age: 36-49
Lacks a lot of realism. Not enough action and battle scenes. They tried to make it too modern. I don't think court étiquette, which was very rigid, would have tolerated many of the occurrences portrayed. The acting was not bad considering the script they had to work with. Did not care for Clive Owen, I thought him ill suited for the part. The action scenes looked a lot cge and lacked veracity. All in all it's not a movie who will find it's way in my dvd collection. Too Bad.
5/10
10.22.2007 -
charron_richard@
More like a stage play, not alot of action. Relies on script.
7/10
10.22.2007 -
clarke10999@ - age: 36-49
| | | | |
This movie is probably more like an 8.5, but definitely more than an 8. Cate Blanchett gives another great performance as Queen Elizabeth. She captures the conflicting emotions (confidence, pride, lonliness, betrayal) so well. I didn't find the camera work to be jerky except during the battle scenes, but I thought the jerkiness added to the feelings of chaos and panic during the fighting. As a fan of the first movie, I was not disappointed with the second movie, and will be eagerly awaiting the third installment.
9/10
10.21.2007 -
jillian3cb@ - age: 26-35
The acting is good, but I don't think movie-makers act responsibly when they deviate from historical fact.
6/10
10.21.2007 -
wgaylord@
The acting and the costumes are the best things going for it. Story wise it's a bit weak and some historical inaccuracies. The king of spain is portrayed like a religious zealot but that wasn't the main reason to invade england. If you like history its still worth it.
6/10
10.21.2007 -
dragao@ - age: 26-35
Really, the worst movie ever! I really don't know what kind of story the director wants to tell. It's just waste of time and money to watch it!!
1/10
10.20.2007 -
bkuzpku@ - age: 26-35
I have seen the first Elizabeth made with the same Cate Blanchett. The first one was much better. This one focuses too much on individual relationships (the word soap opera - medieval style -comes to mind), The first Elizabeth had a global view - this one delves too often in the personal. There is too much walking in dark cathedrals with a sorrowful 'woe is me' and 'why am I the Queen'. As a costume drama it is superb.
6/10
10.20.2007 -
mikebrunet@ - age: 50+
I did not see the first one, but now will. Absolutely great acting and wonderful cinematography. Bravo!
10/10
10.20.2007 -
theprez007@ - age: 36-49
This movie is exceptionally well acted, beautifully and intelligently directed and stunningly drop dead gorgeous. It is so refreshing to see this quality of work on the big screen after what seems like an eternity of blatantly mediocre dumbed down films. I applaud the makers of this film for setting the bar higher in an industry that has sadly allowed for the mediocre to become common place. See it if only to be reminded of what excellence can achieve...
10/10
10.19.2007 -
apiette2@ - age: 36-49
Good movie, good costumes, good performances... but very very biased. England is portrayed as the cradle of freedom and Spain as the land of extremist mad men (the truth is that both nations had good and bad things) piracy is not exactly something to be proud of. Lacks action and battle scenes.
7/10
10.19.2007 -
vanjosh1@ - age: 26-35
This movie is a an excellent portrait of queen Elizabeth, she was not the sadistic ruler people made her out to be, she had courage and strength like alot of women today, she only had 1 fear and that was the destruction of england, I am British so have studied much about this, and Mary queen of Scots was not a beautiful woman, she was the total opposite, this movie is in my opinion very accurate.
10/10
10.19.2007 -
redi_jp@ - age: 18-25
Good movie in terms of pace and timing. Beautiful shots, really makes you feel like you were there. Its only flaw; Elizabeth was a person of great personality, intelligent and very strategic... She managed ( with little experience...) to make England very rich and powerful! This movie focuses on the troubled middle age woman in need of a man!! I think it is a waste... but see the movie anyway if you are a history buff.
8/10
10.19.2007 -
iliana72b@ - age: 26-35
|
