By Mathew DeKinder
I have to admit to being a bit of a history nerd. I'm the kind of guy who thinks Ken Burns' documentaries aren't long enough, so I tend to give historical dramas a bit more latitude, long beyond the point when the average film goer is bored to tears.
That said, I enjoyed "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" even though in actuality it wasn't a particularly good movie. This is a sequel of sorts to the 1998 film "Elizabeth" which earned Cate Blanchett an Oscar nomination and made her an international star for her brilliant performance of a young Elizabeth I.
Almost a decade later, Blanchett revisits the role as an older and wiser queen and gives an equally brilliant performance, it is a shame that she won't receive the same attention because "The Golden Age" lacks the focus and insight of its predecessor.
And while being a sequel with director Shekhar Kapur returning, the only other familiar face returning to the screen is Geoffrey Rush as the cunning and ruthless Sir Francis Walsingham.
This time around Elizabeth is still defending her throne as King Phillip of Spain (Jordi Molla) is desperate to depose the Protestant queen and replace her with her Catholic cousin, Mary Queen of Scots (played smartly by Samantha Morton).
Various schemes and plots abound culminating in Mary's beheading and Spain declaring all out war by sending its massive armada to crush the English. (I'd better not get any e-mails complaining about spoilers. This is common-knowledge world history, people. Read a book.)
There are also romantic intrigues at court as the queen fends off dull royal suitors and becomes involved in a love triangle with explorer and occasional pirate Sir Walter Raleigh (Clive Owen) and her trusted lady-in-waiting Bess (Abbie Cornish). I think it's safe to say that at this point Owen has secured his place as go-to Hollywood badass. If you need an epic, sweeping closeup of someone about to do something heroically dashing, Owen is your man. Accept no substitutes.
What I found enjoyable about the film is that it is a serviceable trip in the ol' cinematic time machine. It's easy to get caught up in the elaborate sets and costumes and manners of court, and the movie also manages to stay fairly historically accurate (the most notable exception being that Raleigh probably wasn't even involved in the battle against the Spanish Armada, let alone found singlehandedly steering a fire ship into its midst).
As an actual movie though, "Elizabeth: The Golden Age" has its problems. The plot tends to meander and while it is apparent that the film is desperate to make a point, especially with some heavy-handed imagery during the climactic battle, it's not readily apparent what that point is. I suppose it probably has something to do with state-sponsored religious persecution, but that's foggy at best.
But getting back to the woman at the center of the story, Blanchett does a brilliant job of portraying this complicated woman who, quite literally, has the weight of the world on her shoulders, and that deserves to be remembered in spite of the movie it is presented in.
If you are interested in a more concise and through celluloid examination of the life of the Virgin Queen, then I highly recommend the Emmy-wining BBC mini-series "Elizabeth I," starring Helen Mirren, who pretty much has the market cornered playing English heads of state named Elizabeth.
As for "The Golden Age," a few history nerds aside, the film is a pretty boring and uninspired effort. Her royal highness demands better treatment.
"Elizabeth: The Golden Age" is rated PG-13 for adult situations, violence and brief nudity.
http://southsidejournal.stltoday.com/entertainment/sj2tn20071016-1017ssj_lizzie.ii1.txt
