Metascore
45

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics What's this?

User Score
6.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 73 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Starring: , ,
  • Summary: Elizabeth: The Golden Age finds Queen Elizabeth facing bloodlust for her throne and familial betrayal. Growing keenly aware of the changing religious and political tides of late-16th-century Europe, Elizabeth finds her rule openly challenged by the Spanish King Philip II, who with hisElizabeth: The Golden Age finds Queen Elizabeth facing bloodlust for her throne and familial betrayal. Growing keenly aware of the changing religious and political tides of late-16th-century Europe, Elizabeth finds her rule openly challenged by the Spanish King Philip II, who with his powerful army and sea-dominating armada is determined to restore England to Catholicism. Preparing to go to war to defend her empire, Elizabeth struggles to balance ancient royal duties with an unexpected vulnerability in her love for Raleigh. But he remains forbidden for a queen who has sworn body and soul to her country. Unable and unwilling to pursue her love, Elizabeth encourages her favorite lady-in-waiting, Bess, to befriend Raleigh to keep him near. But this strategy forces Elizabeth to observe the growing intimacy of the other two. As she charts her course abroad, her trusted advisor, Sir Francis Walsingham, continues his masterful puppetry of Elizabeth's court at home to end her campaign to solidify absolute power. (Universal Pictures) Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 35
  2. Negative: 2 out of 35
  1. 75
    Expect a fast-paced, beautifully mounted and well-acted soap opera with overripe dialogue that plays fast and loose with history - just like they did in the '30s, '40s and '50s - and you won't come away disappointed.
  2. 63
    Weighed down by its splendor. There are scenes where the costumes are so sumptuous, the sets so vast, the music so insistent, that we lose sight of the humans behind the dazzle of the production.
  3. Too bad Kapur's new, glittering sequel also shows up feeling prematurely old, square, and cautious. A production of exquisitely complicated wigs and expensively grand wide shots, it pauses often to admire its own beauty, leery of messing with previous success.
  4. It's common in Hollywood to describe a disappointing film this way: "Well, it certainly looks great!"
  5. Reviewed by: Dana Stevens
    50
    If you go in fully prepared for the cinematic equivalent of a grocery-store novel, this unnecessary sequel to "Elizabeth" (1998) has its pleasures.
  6. Blanchett miraculously gives a good performance, even when saddled with lines like this one, to Clive Owen's Sir Walter Raleigh: "In another world, could you have loved me?"
  7. Overdresses and ultimately abandons what drew us to its 1998 predecessor in the first place: an intimate embrace with history.

See all 35 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 37
  2. Negative: 10 out of 37
  1. TimurR.
    Apr 27, 2008
    10
    This highly underrated film is actually quite brilliantly directed with one of the best performances of all time. I am sure the studios cut This highly underrated film is actually quite brilliantly directed with one of the best performances of all time. I am sure the studios cut it as it could have used another hour. However, this talk of being historically accurate is simply unfair. I don't know of any movies that are historically accurate. They are not lectures, they are art! If you want history, listen to some lectures or read a book. This is to give you the experience of the time. And as for bombastic, overripe and all the other nonsense comments, well I guess if a film shows some emotion, it is too much for our cynical age. Collapse
  2. ElaineS.
    Nov 19, 2007
    9
    Brilliant wigs, makeup and costuming. A bit casual on historical interpretation.
  3. DavidT.
    Oct 22, 2007
    8
    Much better than the critics are saying.
  4. JordanM.
    Oct 23, 2007
    5
    A big "Ooops" goes here. Cate Blanchett - she's good, we knew that, so what else is new??? Nothing "golden" about the movie. Wish we did A big "Ooops" goes here. Cate Blanchett - she's good, we knew that, so what else is new??? Nothing "golden" about the movie. Wish we did something better with our time. Expand
  5. TonyB.
    Nov 10, 2008
    5
    A major disappointment, the film is spectacular to look at but difficult to connect to. As she always is, Cate Blanchett is excellent and so A major disappointment, the film is spectacular to look at but difficult to connect to. As she always is, Cate Blanchett is excellent and so are those around her. The background music was frequently intrusive. Expand
  6. PeterK.
    Oct 21, 2007
    4
    Played fast and loose with the facts and evolved into something much bigger and much less than the historical scenario that was Played fast and loose with the facts and evolved into something much bigger and much less than the historical scenario that was Elizabeth's life and times. A pity that such great actors (and such a production) had such a poor treatment of history. Expand
  7. WesM.
    Oct 12, 2007
    1
    Pathetic, historically inaccurate and boring. I was totally disappointed.

See all 37 User Reviews

Trailers