AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

robert-259-28954 BRAVO, HBO, for producing a film of such class and emotional power. Seldom am I at a loss for words when describing the acting ability of anyone, but in Helen Mirren's case, I am rendered speechless. As an actor myself, it is habitual to be often over-critical of another's screen performance, no matter their reputation or experience. But in both parts of this two-film masterpiece, all I could see is perfection from stem to stern, a mind blowing tribute to the art and perfection of a single actor's brilliance. It is rare in this day of CGI, gratuitous sex and violence, and making movies for profit only, to witness such an amazing film creation, with values as wonderful to the soul as to the eye and ear. In addition to Mirren's flawless performance, is the inspired casting of another British icon, the great Jeremy Irons, in perhaps the performance of his life. I have often found Mr. Irons to be cold and unemotional in his acting choices, but in this role, he truly took the gloves off, delivering a stunning tour de force on a par with the emotional depth of Ms. Mirren. To miss this motion picture, so lovingly created by HBO, is to deprive yourself of a modern day classic, so rare for this day and age. Don't miss it.

TheLittleSongbird There are many films and dramatisations of the life of Queen Elizabeth I, and of the ones seen all of them range from good to outstanding. While not quite as great as 1998's 'Elizabeth' and 'Elizabeth R' with Glenda Jackson, though almost in the same class, 'Elizabeth I' is one of the outstanding ones.'Elizabeth I' has a couple of things that don't quite come off as well. Leicester's role is rather underwritten, and it does give Jeremy Irons (who is still very good in the role and makes a real effort to give him complexity) little to do. For such a big time span covered, dates and years are not always clear even to people familiar with the Tudor/Elizabethan period and a couple of events are depicted in a slightly confused manner.However, these are outweighed by the things that 'Elizabeth I' does incredibly well, these are a great many and done brilliantly. It's gorgeously made, with scenery, settings and costumes that will take the breath away and photography that makes one forget that it was made for TV. 'Elizabeth I' is strongly directed as well, the style is never cheapened and pacing and clarity of storytelling are rarely compromised. The music, with a mix of classical and medieval period which gives it authenticity, is dramatic yet sympathetic, giving scenes stirring power and nuanced pathos, always a good fit for every scene's atmosphere.With the script, it has a humorous edge, touching yet never mawkish romance and a lot of emotion beautifully balanced, while always provoking thought. The storytelling throughout is incredibly compelling, the romantic elements feature prominently but not at the expense of everything else, political commentary and dilemmas of the time are not neglected and the very graphic executions and torture wrench the gut (some may feel that the series overdoes it with the brutality, with the execution of Mary Queen of Scots being especially shocking, to me as decapitations, drawing and quartering and torture were gory and brutal it wasn't inappropriate). There are liberties taken with history to accommodate the story, but there are far worse and more insulting cases of films and series playing fast and loose with the facts.Great acting helps, and the performances are more than great across the board with all the characters well realised (with only underwritten Leicester being a reservation). A wonderful job is done with making Elizabeth a complex character and as a woman of many passions. Hugh Dancy is dashing, charming, loyal and passionate as Essex, while Irons, Toby Jones, Barbara Flynn (as a touching and dignified Mary Queen of Scots), Ian McDiarmid, Patrick Malahide et al are without fault. Reigning over them all is the always great Helen Mirren, whose Elizabeth is nothing short of a miracle.All in all, not devoid of flaws but a real joy to watch. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Red-125 "Elizabeth I" (2005) is a two-part TV mini-series directed by Tom Hooper. The film stars Helen Mirren as Elizabeth I, Jeremy Irons as the Earl of Leicester, and Hugh Dancy as the Earl of Essex.Any movie about the life of Elizabeth I is going to be inherently interesting. She was a larger-than-life personage, she reigned for many years, she was the monarch of a Protestant nation contesting for supremacy with powerful Catholic nations, and she imprisoned and ultimately executed her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.Her personal life was equally interesting. Although Elizabeth never married, and was called "The Virgin Queen," her love for her "favorites" was widely known at the time, and has been portrayed in numerous movies before this one.So, the questions are, "Why make another film about Queen Elizabeth I?" and "Why watch another film about Queen Elizabeth I?" For me, the answer to those questions is, to watch a great actor take this part and transform it into something unique, rather than just another role about the famous monarch.Helen Mirren is a great actor. She is probably the only actor to play both Elizabeth I and Elizabeth II, and she is superb in both roles. Mirren's Elizabeth I is intelligent, foolish, loving, cruel, mature, and childish. There is never a moment when she forgets that she's a woman, and never a moment when she forgets that she's a Queen. Mirren's work as Elizabeth is a tour de force of acting skills.Irons and Dancy are fine actors, but in this movie they are planets revolving around Mirren's sun. In this films the settings are lush, the beheadings are bloody, the tortures are ghastly, and the supporting cast supports well. You don't watch Elizabeth I to see any of these. You watch Elizabeth I to see Helen Mirren portray the queen. That's why you should find this movie, watch it, and enjoy it.

annog There is some sort of mass hysteria going on here. I think people have been fooled into believe that Elizabeth I, is deep. Here as on Masterpiece Theatre, expensive costumes and flash photography do not a "masterpiece" make.Mirren's "Bess" is a good one basically. She does swing well into the part, playing Elizabeth as a lusty CEO. Through 80% of the film this characterization works. But, when her character is emphatic in her darker emotions, Mirren is really over-the-top overwrought. And it reminds me of Mel Blanc, doing such things in the guise of many characters he voiced in Warner Brothers cartoons. I am actually embarrassed for her.Some of the blame for this poor acting must be shared with the script writers. There is an old axiom in screen writing that you can not just have the actors stand about and shout out their emotions. I am angry! I am anguished by your betrayal! You have to have clever dialogue to weave the fabric of the story for the audience.Elizabeth l commits the sin of having Mirren, and others, shout out their feelings. And it happens many times throughout the series.There is also the small matter( to some) of the very large liberties taken by the film with historical fact. They are numerous and at times completely at odds with the woman and her times.Elizabeth l is designed to be smutty, emphasizing Bess' odd, conflicting libido. I doubt that she and Leicester, or Essex, ever petted each other in public, let alone at a mass ceremony for the people.The Earl Of Leicester died at his house in Oxfordshire. Bess was no where close. and certainly not in bed with him. Essex, a shallow man, was no great fan of his step father, and was not there at his deathbed either.There are more and they pollute the truly fascinating story of one of history's most remarkable monarchs