Tag Archives: fiction

Elizabeth (1998) and Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007)

19 Jul

Queen Elizabeth I, also known as the Virgin Queen, was England and Ireland’s monarch from the year 1558 to her death in 1603. Since then, she’s become one of England’s most iconic leaders, which certainly doesn’t mean she was loved by all. In fact, she was a very divisive and often controversial queen. That being said, there’s a lot of material to work with if anyone were to create a big budget movie about her reign. Well, lucky for us we have two. Elizabeth was first released in 1998 and it’s sequel, Elizabeth: The Golden Age, was released in 2007. Now, I’ve been wanting to watch these movies for a long time, and I’ve finally gotten around to it. The question remains, still, on wether or not they’ve lived up to the hype that I’ve built for myself.

Let’s start out in 1998 with Shekhar Kapur’s Elizabeth.

f336b34034b7d83016e935267e3398f4

When Queen Mary I dies in 1558, the next in line of succession is her half sister, Elizabeth (Cate Blanchett), a young woman who is now in way over her head. At her time of coronation, England is in a terrible state. Her army is all but useless, debts plague the entire country, and there’s heated violence between Catholics and Protestants. With Elizabeth being a Protestant, there are many Catholics in her court that want her off the throne. One of these people is the influential Norfolk (Christopher Eccleston), a scheming duke with his ultimate goal of wearing the crown. With everything collapsing, Elizabeth surrounds herself with trusted advisors and defenders like William Cecil (Richard Attenborough) and the cunning Francis Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush). Even with these powerful minds surrounding her, her dedicated and unlawful affair with a member of her court, Robert Dudley (Joseph Fiennes), might prove to be her ultimate downfall.

I have a weird past with this movie because I remember being young when this movie first came out and thinking it looked pretty cool. I don’t know where I saw advertisements for it, but I was always stricken by the colors, the architecture, and the costumes. Now, all these years later I’ve finally seen it and it’s pretty much exactly what I thought it would be. Elizabeth is a damn fine movie that tells an interesting, albeit fictitious, look at the early days of Queen Elizabeth’s reign before the Golden Age really began, and how the naïve girl who is crowned at the beginning of the movie turns into the rock solid monarch she is known for being. It’s a great story that’s full of political intrigue, war, corruption, and romance. That’s really all you can ask for in a movie like this, and it’s done very well. Never did I feel like I was getting cheated out of something watching this movie. It hits all of the marks splendidly.

There are few elements of the movie I have to especially give more notice to. First of all, Cate Blanchett’s performance is fantastic. This was the movie that really started her career in the way that we know it today. She was acting before Elizabeth, but this is the role that got her noticed. Her arc throughout the story is an expressive one and it’s great to watch all of the changes happening to her and her reactions to them. It’s a very expressive performance that’s worthy of all the attention it receives. The costume design and make up rank up with the best of the best in film history. They are absolutely out of this world, along with the set design which honestly must have been a nightmare. Finally the collaboration of Kapur and cinematographer Remi Adefarasin makes this film truly look as beautiful as it does.

After years of wondering about this movie, it’s a relief to finally see it. Elizabeth is a really good movie about an interesting and violent time in England’s past, and also about the monarch that would come to unite the country. It’s a beautiful film to look at, but also has a great story performed by great actors to back it up. It often feels Shakespearean in it’s scale, and you really can’t go wrong with that.

The sequel didn’t come until nearly 10 years later, with Shekhar Kapur returning as director. This is, of course, Elizabeth: The Golden Age.

2007-elizabeth_the_golden_age-1

While the first film began with the early days of Elizabeth’s reign in 1558, this film starts much later on in 1585. By this point, Elizabeth has established herself as a very firm and respectable leader who isn’t easy to persuade or frighten. She is surrounded by loyal subjects like the ever present Lord Walsingham and her favorite lady-in-waiting Bess Throckmorton (Abbie Cornish). When not being attended to by the people of the court, she s regaled with stories by the explorer Walter Raleigh (Clive Owen), who has plans of starting a colony in the New World. While this loyalty makes her stand tall, enemies are still lurking on all sides, with the Spanish led by King Philip II (Jordi Molla) and his Inquisition being the most relevant threat. His plan violence and schemes soon find their way into Britain with his support going to the imprisoned Mary, Queen of Scots (Samantha Morton) and an assassination attempt that may be enough to spark a war.

Elizabeth: The Golden Age is definitely an impressive sequel, which is a good thing to say since it had the challenge of following up its beloved predecessor while also recreating history using a fair amount of both fact and fiction. There’s a lot of things going for this movie including the return of director Shekhar Kapur and the lead actors Cate Blanchett and Geoffrey Rush. There’s also some excellent additions like Clive Owen, Abbie Cornish, and Samantha Morton. The inclusion of foreign powers like the Spanish and the English spies that supported them also makes for really good intrigue and action to push the movie along, while there’s also the romance that you would come to expect with this kind of movie. The ingredients are all there, but it doesn’t quite reach the heights of the original Elizabeth.

One thing that is missing from The Golden Age is the beautiful set design that the first film had. I understand that Elizabeth is now a completely different monarch than she was in the first film and the set is meant to reflect the personality she puts on as she leads her people, but I really miss the colors and the vastness of some of the room in the palace. There’s also nothing really new added to this movie and it feels like something of a retread in certain ways. By that I mean that I mean all of the same themes of the first film are explored, but in some different ways. I think I just wanted more from this one in the ways that the first film succeeded.

Still and all, Blanchett returns with another powerful performance and the costume design are all on par with the original. It’s important to look at sequels as movies in and of themselves and not just follow ups, so in that way Elizabeth: The Golden Age is a very good movie, but compared to Elizabeth it’s a weaker entry. That being said, I still had a good time watching this movie and for fans of the first film, it’s still worth a look.

Watching movies like this are really great at pulling you into a time period and recreating history in the most lavish of ways. Anyone who hasn’t had the chance to watch the Elizabeth movies should really get right on that. They have quite a bit to offer and something in there for everyone.

Advertisements

The Last Temptation of Christ – Review

8 Jan

Religion seems to be a topic that many people have close minded views on. What someone believe is in is right, and will not accept anything other than what they have been taught their entire lives. Some people, however, find that it is healthy and good to question aspects of your faith. When Martin Scorsese released The Last Temptation of Christ is 1988, it was met with immediate controversy. In fact, many people will rank it as one of the most controversial films ever made.

The_Last_Temptation_of_Christ_poster

Jesus (Willem Dafoe) is a carpenter who uses his skill to make crosses for the Romans to crucify Jews. He is not happy with what he does, being a Jewish man, and also struggle with the fact that he is on Earth for something bigger. After much meditation and sorrow, he begins to recruit others to the cause of love, starting with Judas Iscariot (Harvey Keitel). Jesus’ message spreads far and wide with news of his teachings and miracles. Even with the proof of his divinity, Jesus is still a human being and suffers with temptation and doubt many times, the most difficult time being on the cross.

I can see how some people would be cautious going into this movie seeing that religion is always a controversial subject. With this movie, Scorsese looked controversy square in the eye and welcomed it. Religious zealots who never even saw the movie began to condemn it and call it blasphemous. After seeing the movie, I can’t really see any true blasphemy. Sure, the film takes a look at a side of Jesus that is rarely discussed, but I can hardly call that an assault on his existence or demeaning him in any way. In fact, the message of this movie is quite positive.

Dafoe-Christ-Temptation

 

What this movie does, and what I love, is that Jesus is made more human than we have ever seen him. Christianity teaches that Jesus was both fully God and fully man. In that regard, Willem Dafoe does an outstanding job. Everything he does in this movie feels different than the other performances of Jesus that I’ve seen. A runner up in humanity would be Jim Caviezel in The Passion of the Christ. Even in that movie, there was always confidence that he would succeed in his torturous mission, because it was pretty understood throughout that movie that he was a divine figure. Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ always looks like there is a small amount of doubt in what he’s doing, but he still sticks with it. Like I said, it’s the most human portrayal of a biblical figure I have yet to see.

Mostly, though, this film is a complete work of fiction, and Scorsese states that it is not an accurate account of the Gospels. It was a little hard getting used to the story in this movie in contrast to the story I already know. It’s a very drastic change, but one that is really interesting once you get used to it. These changes made a lot of people angry. Even something that may be considered objectively offensive turns out to be reinforcing Jesus’ character or just creating dramatic tension. Never is the Gospels or God put down in any way.

600full-the-last-temptation-of-christ-screenshot-500x265

This movie does get a detraction, however. Some of the dialogue is downright terrible. At times, it’s so bad that I can’t believe Scorsese was actually comfortable with filming it. These scenes are acted pretty bad because there is no way to really make this dialogue sound authentic. Harvey Keitel is also usually a really good actor, but his Bronx-like portrayal of Judas feels lazy. He didn’t seem to really try to change his personality at all to get into the role of Judas, who most certainly wasn’t from New York even in this work of fiction.

The Last Temptation of Christ is a moving look at something that people remain very close-minded about. It dares to ask “what if?” and also shows Jesus in a way that I can imagine isn’t normal thought about. I was a little concerned going into this movie thinking it was going to be preachy, but it was anything but. It’s a fantastic exploration on a person whose existence has been debated for centuries, but believe in him or not, this is not a movie that you should overlook.