GAMES: GameSpot | GameFAQs MUSIC: Last.fm | MP3.com MOVIES: Metacritic | Movietome TV: TV.com
Home | About Metacritic | About Metascores | What's New | Wireless Versions | Discussion Forums | Advertising Inquiries | Contact Us | RSS
Metacritic.com: We Deal With Criticism
     Help
> Switch to Advanced Search  
Film Video/DVD Music Games TV

DVD and Video

Upcoming Release Calendar
Awards & Bests By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores
How Metascores Are Calculated
Discuss Film In Our Forums

 



 

Printer-Friendly Version Email This Page Discuss In Our Forums

Elizabeth: The Golden Age
Universal Pictures

Elizabeth: The Golden Age reviews
Critic Score
Metascore: 45 Metascore out of 100
User Score  
6.0 out of 10
based on 35 reviews
Read critic reviews
How did we calculate this?
based on 48 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie

MPAA RATING: PG-13 for violence, some sexuality and nudity

Starring Cate Blanchett, Geoffrey Rush, Clive Owen, Samantha Morton, and Abbie Cornish

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 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)


GENRE(S): Drama  
WRITTEN BY: Michael Hirst
William Nicholson
 
DIRECTED BY: Shekhar Kapur  
RELEASE DATE: DVD: February 5, 2008 
Theatrical: October 12, 2007 
RUNNING TIME: 114 minutes, Color 
ORIGIN: UK / France 

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

75
New York Post Lou Lumenick
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.
Read Full Review
75
San Francisco Chronicle Ruthe Stein
An enticingly risque saga of the 16th century monarch.
Read Full Review
70
Chicago Reader J.R. Jones
Cate Blanchett returns to the role that made her a star, and though this sequel to "Elizabeth" (1998) is less defensible as history, as florid costume drama it's just as entertaining.
Read Full Review
63
Philadelphia Inquirer Carrie Rickey
Blanchett commands the screen as she commands the royal navy. Her unforced majesty makes a so-so film worth watching.
Read Full Review
63
Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert
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.
Read Full Review
63
ReelViews James Berardinelli
Elizabeth: The Golden Age lacks the intricate plotting that characterized its predecessor. The screenplay is more action-oriented but not as smart, and some of the dialogue is downright cheesy.
Read Full Review
63
Boston Globe Wesley Morris
Historians might demand a little more history from Elizabeth: The Golden Age. But soap opera loyalists could hardly ask for more soap.
Read Full Review
60
Empire Will Lawrence
Over-indulgent and melodramatic, as is the nature of artistic mythmaking, The Golden Age will beguile and repel in equal measure. The performances are supreme, although some viewers may struggle to reconcile the director’s epic intentions.
Read Full Review
58
Portland Oregonian Marc Mohan
It says a lot about this movie that the most arresting character in it is Mary, whom Morton unsurprisingly endows with a fanatical combination of narcissism and rage.
Read Full Review
58
Entertainment Weekly Lisa Schwarzbaum
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.
Read Full Review
58
Seattle Post-Intelligencer Sean Axmaker
Favors pageantry over substance.
Read Full Review
50
Wall Street Journal Joe Morgenstern
Ms. Blanchett can do no wrong, and does none here, though the movie around her, a popcorn-worthy sequel to the 1998 "Elizabeth," often lapses into opacity or grandiosity.
Read Full Review
50
TV Guide Maitland McDonagh
History gets short shrift from screenwriters William Nicholson and Michael Hirst -- starting with the not insignificant fact that in 1585, Elizabeth was 52 years old – but Kapur is clearly more interested in spectacle and soap opera than dusty old facts.
Read Full Review
50
USA Today Claudia Puig
Squanders the opportunity to give us a telling glimpse of the woman behind the ruff. Instead, the costume drama is all gilt and opulence.
Read Full Review
50
Chicago Tribune Michael Phillips
It is a silly film about serious matters.
Read Full Review
50
Slate Dana Stevens
If you go in fully prepared for the cinematic equivalent of a grocery-store novel, this unnecessary sequel to "Elizabeth" (1998) has its pleasures.
Read Full Review
50
The New York Times Manohla Dargis
It’s intentionally playful and an inadvertent giggle, an overripe melodrama that’s by turns a bodice-ripper, a cloak-and-dagger thriller and a serious-minded historical drama with dubious contemporary overtones.
Read Full Review
50
Austin Chronicle Marjorie Baumgarten
Despite good performances all around, particularly the ever-brilliant Blanchett, Elizabeth: The Golden Age is a gilded ornament, speculative and uninterested in much besides this queen's matters of heart.
Read Full Review
50
Rolling Stone Peter Travers
Cate Blanchett can do anything, even play Bob Dylan, but she can't save this creaky sequel to her star-making 1998 biopic of Elizabeth I.
Read Full Review
50
Premiere Glenn Kenny
This handsomely mounted film, in its cute ADD way, soon forgets its half-hearted attempt to make History Relevant to What Is Going On in the World Today and morphs into a sort of Classic Comics on acid, or, as a friend so brilliantly put it, "the longest Eurythmics video ever made."
Read Full Review
50
Charlotte Observer Lawrence Toppman
It's common in Hollywood to describe a disappointing film this way: "Well, it certainly looks great!"
Read Full Review
50
New York Daily News Elizabeth Weitzman
The Golden Age is packed with distractions. But the biggest of all is the story itself, which works so mightily to tarnish the queen at its core.
Read Full Review
50
The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Liam Lacey
A shrill and silly affair, bordering at times on camp.
Read Full Review
50
Time Richard Schickel
It's a faux epic -- swell costumes, historically authentic settings, a certain amount of bustle and skulking, but very little dramatically gripping activity.
Read Full Review
50
Miami Herald Connie Ogle
Despite its title, Shekhar Kapur's new film resembles tarnished copper, its dull focus more appropriate for an episode of “One Tree Hill” than a biopic of one of Britain's greatest monarchs.
Read Full Review
42
Baltimore Sun Michael Sragow
The best you can say about Owen is that no actor has looked better in thigh-high boots and puffed-out britches.
Read Full Review
42
Christian Science Monitor Peter Rainer
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?"
Read Full Review
40
Variety Todd McCarthy
Without the pleasure of watching Cate Blanchett continue the role that launched her to stardom, there would be little to recommend this latest of many cinematic and television accounts of the celebrated monarch's life.
Read Full Review
40
Village Voice Robert Wilonsky
Kapur and his screenwriter have little interest here in maintaining even a dollop of historical accuracy.
Read Full Review
40
New York Magazine David Edelstein
An unholy mixture of the banal and the bombastic.
Read Full Review
40
Salon.com Stephanie Zacharek
Might have been a lavish, silly entertainment. In places it comes close, but no sheaf of tobacco.
Read Full Review
40
Film Threat Pete Vonder Haar
The original “Elizabeth” was visually lush and quite engaging, but this is a sprawling mess.
Read Full Review
40
Los Angeles Times Carina Chocano
Gives new meaning to "costume drama" in that it is a drama primarily about costumes. But the drama is about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the temple.
Read Full Review
33
The Onion (A.V. Club) Keith Phipps
So instead of history and drama, we get images, many of them striking but none of them memorable, and noise that deafens until no sense can escape. The events beg for Shakespearean gravity, but the only tragedy here is that so little could be made of so much.
Read Full Review
30
Washington Post Desson Thomson
Overdresses and ultimately abandons what drew us to its 1998 predecessor in the first place: an intimate embrace with history.
Read Full Review

What Our Users Said

Vote Now!The average user rating for this movie is 6.0 (out of 10) based on 48 User Votes
Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Tony B. gave it a5:
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.

Andrea M. gave it a5:
Ludicrous screenplay. Only Cate Blanchett shouldn't be embarrassed to have been involved.

Timur R. gave it a10:
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.

Jill P. gave it a4:
Patently silly from start to finish. The whole thing seems like an endlessly long perfume ad, complete with billowing gauze and guttering candles in nearly every scene. All style, no substance, a movie does not make.

Prins M. gave it a3:
The first one was awful. This is even worse.

Judy T gave it a2:
Waste of film.

Angelica H. gave it a7:
It was worth watching for the costumes alone. But the movie does not explore the queen herself and her own complexity as a human being. Too bad.

Read more user comments...

Discuss this movie in our forums

Return to top of page
Home | FILM | DVD/VIDEO | MUSIC | GAMES | TV | Forums | About Metacritic metacritic.com

Popular on CBS sites: iPhone 3G | Fantasy Football | Moneywatch | Antivirus Software | Recipes | E3 2009

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use