| Subcategories | Region(feature_browse-bin) |
|
|
|
|
| ![Elizabeth [HD DVD] [1998] [US Import]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51xYRkIvd4L._SL500_.jpg)
| Director: Shekhar Kapur
Actors: Cate Blanchett, Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Joseph Fiennes, Richard Attenborough
Studio: Universal Studios
Category: DVD
Buy Used: £5.30
New (8) Used (2) from £5.30
Rating:  39 reviews
Sales Rank: 28996
Format: Colour, Widescreen
Languages: English (Original Language), French (Original Language)
Media: HD DVD
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Number Of Discs: 1
Running Time: 124 Minutes
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1
Dimensions (in): 7.1 x 5.4 x 0.6
MPN: 61101939
UPC: 025195015622
EAN: 0025195015622
ASIN: B000RF7XZI
Theatrical Release Date: November 6, 1998
Release Date: September 18, 2007
Availability: Usually dispatched within 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: BRAND NEW!!! May have case wear and/or marks. SHIPPING FROM THE UNITED STATES. 10-21 day delivery time. QUICK Shipping Turnaround. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 6-10 of 39
Best not to know the history January 27, 2008
G. J. Weeks (London)
A lavish film, well acted, but I was put off seeing it earlier by reviews critical of the unhistorical nature of the portrayal. br /In the film, Elizabeth finds out from Sir William Cecil that Robert Dudley is married, but Elizabeth in reality attended his wedding. though she may not have known about his second marriage . Elizabeth and Henri, Duke of Anjou two never met .William Cecil was not old when Elizabeth began her reign, . He was not retired by the queen but remained one of her most trusted advisors until his death, shortly before hers. Walsingham was not involved in the death of Mary of Guise who died of dropsy. Elizabeth had brown eyes from her mother Anne Boleyn . br /I found the film to have too much explicit sex and another intrusion of the 20st century was some lines which seemed historically out of place. that Elizabeth took on the role of virgin Queen to give the English a substitute for popular devotion to the Virgin Mary seems far fetched. But if you are ignorant of the historic realities you will enjoy the drama. Some modern Roman Catholics should object ed to the film but I think the cruelty of a subversive and persecuting Catolicism is factual, as is the torture used by the Protestant regime too.
An entertaining, sinister, but historically inaccurate drama on the notable English Queen. September 12, 2007
little_miss_sunnydale (South Gloucestershire, England)
7 out of 8 found this review helpful
`Elizabeth' staring Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth I, Geoffrey Rush, Joseph Fiennes and Christopher Eccleston covers the early years of the reign of Elizabeth I, one of the most prominent English monarchs and the last ruler in the Tudor dynasty. br / br /The film commences in the year 1554. Immediately we witness the public burnings of `heretical' Protestants under the Catholic Marian regime. It is clear that the contrast between Elizabeth and her half-sister Mary I cannot be greater; when Mary I is shown she is depicted in a sinister atmosphere full of conspiracy and religious fanaticism. In contrast our first glimpse of Blanchett's Elizabeth is when she is dancing freely in a field full of light surrounded by her frivolous ladies. Yet the film does not continuously maintain such a black and white approach; as the film progresses Elizabeth's youthful and somewhat naive nature is slowly stripped away and we eventually witness a queen who is prepared to act mercilessly, bravely and detached in order to preserve her power and create an awe-inspiring image for herself. br / br /`Elizabeth' is not a historically accurate, and for anyone who has extensive knowledge of this period may feel distracted by the many bizarre liberties the writers have decided to take. However the overall general tone of the piece sets it apart from other productions on this period. While other productions on Elizabeth I may seem more upbeat and even frivolous like the BBC's `The Virgin Queen' or relies more upon the actors rather than the setting and cinematography like `Elizabeth R', `Elizabeth' in contrast tends to excel in a variety of areas. Fantastic performances are given, particularly by Blanchett, Rush and Eccleston, while simultaneously the costumes are sumptuous, the camera work is excellent and the scenery is superb. The music score supports the film well; from the daunting music played over the beginning credits to the poignant use of Elgar's Nimrod near the end of the film. br / br /The film was designed to be part of a trilogy which aims to covers the whole of Elizabeth's reign. The next part entitled `The Golden Age', which covers the uneasy relationship between second cousins Mary Stuart and Elizabeth I and the defeat of the first Spanish Armada, is due to come out sometime in the autumn of 2007. Hopefully it will manage to reach the same standards of the first film and acquire more Academy Awards of which the first film was unfairly overlooked (having only won one for `best make-up'). br / br /Overall `Elizabeth' is a sumptuous costume drama that manages to portray the political and religious intrigues of the sixteenth century. Blanchett provides one of the most memorable portrayals of Elizabeth I (although according to the film she is not exactly the `Virgin Queen'!). What tends to let the film down is the often silly portrayal of minor characters like Marie of Guise and the Duke of Anjou and the frequent pointless historical inaccuracies. However, fantastic performances are given by the main actors and the tone of the piece is wonderfully sinister. br /
The First Half of The Virgin Queen's Reign July 16, 2007
Kasey Driscoll (Raynham, MA United States)
4 out of 5 found this review helpful
Elizabeth is a beautifully shot film directed by Shekhar Kapur. The cast was a whose who of future stars and past cinema giants. The cast includes Geoffrey Rush, Christopher Eccleston, Kelly MacDonald, Daniel Craig, Vincent Cassel, Emily Mortimer, Richard Attenborough, Fanny Ardant, Joseph Fiennes and of course Cate Blanchett. It is screen legend John Gielgud's final picture before his death at the age of 96 and he gets to play the Pope. English pop singer Lily Allen also appears in a small role when she was just 12 years old. The film portrays the early part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth I of England. She is the bastard child of King Henry VIII and Anne Bolyn, and was queen for 45 years starting in 1558 and until her death. The period she ruled was often regarded as the most significant period of growth in England's past. Her legacy is a positive one and she is often recognized as the most highly regarded British monarch in history. br / br /The film follows how Elizabeth became queen after Mary I of England's death. It deals with many issues regarding the fact that she is Protestant and was imprisoned for allegations that she planned to assassinate Queen Mary I. She is released when Mary I dies and Elizabeth becomes queen. Many conspire against her, from Catholics to the Scots and the French. It also follows Elizabeth's love affair with Robert Dudley (Joseph Fiennes). The film ends fittingly with Elizabeth's reign entering stability just before the beginning of the English Renaissance. I say fittingly because a sequel to Elizabeth is being released this fall and it will no doubt exhibit the true nature of Elizabeth's legacy and the reverence held toward her to this day. It covers a more interesting period in my opinion. br / br /I actually had a problem with the concept of this film. The nature of this period in Elizabeth's life didn't sit well with me in terms of transferring to a motion picture. The way liberties are taken with historical facts inject drama effectively and actually makes up for what should've been a fairly anti-climactic story. So her life becomes a bit of soap opera. Part of me thinks that if the film was pure history it still could've been good but perhaps not has marketable. I found it enjoyable either way. The sets and costumes are incredible and the cinematography is also worth praising. The real strength in Elizabeth is Cate Blanchett. She is the best actress of this generation and is amazing here. This may not seem like a timely review (it's about eight years overdue) but with the sequel coming out I recommend seeing Elizabeth. The sequel has Samantha Morton as Elizabeth's antagonist Mary, Queen of Scots and Clive Owen as Walter Raleigh. No doubt its release for the fall is setting it up for some major awards.
Not a history lesson, but a good story July 4, 2007
Jenny J.J.I. (That Lives in Northern Nevada)
5 out of 6 found this review helpful
To those of you, who have yet to realize what an amazing actress Cate Blanchett is, look no further than 'Elizabeth'. The characters, the costumes, and the production designs are good enough to make this movie watch able, but it's Blanchett who breathes life into the film and makes it cinema storytelling at its best. br / br /The story revolves around the rise of the young Queen Elizabeth I (Blanchett) who would soon become one of England's most powerful rulers. Reviled as a heretic by the Catholic Church, surrounded in the midst of traitors, and caught up in a romance with a young Lord that could jeopardize her crown, Elizabeth is forced to learn that as a queen... she must become untouchable in order to maintain her throne. The supporting cast does an excellent job with special nods to the ever elegant Geoffrey Rush, but it's Blanchett who manages to steal each and every scene. Her performance was more than Oscar worthy, and is surely one of her best. br / br /Some have compared this with `Shakespeare in Love' which includes two of the main leads from this film and was also released in the same year. Both are good films, but whereas `SIL' plays generally for laughs, Elizabeth is a serious film that should be taken seriously. There are historical plot holes - but these should not be used as a reason for slating the film. In fact it seems that Hollywood encourages this type of approach these days. There are any numbers of unexplained actions, and characters are sometimes hard to identify, but the camera work, color, and scenic backgrounds are superb. Locations are all real, and the acting is uniformly convincing. If an initial viewing leaves you a tad confused, do a little reading on the period, see the film again, and enjoy it all the more. br /
Poor history; good entertainment May 13, 2007
John Williams (Llansadwrn, Wales/Cymru)
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
Other reviewers have commented on the historical inaccuracy of this film. I'm not too bothered about this. The history of this period is too complicated to be to be translated into a watchable film, and no-one should expect to learn history from watching films, anyway. Let's not shy away from the fact that this is pure entertainment. I enjoyed the rich colours of the photography and the lavish sets, even though the attempt to make a palace out of a cathedral failed somewhat. The acting was good; Kate Blanchett was a convincing Virgin Queen, and Geoffrey Rush came across as a particularly strong, ruthless Walsingham. I enjoyed the cameo appearances too, but couldn't help wondering how things might have gone if Eric Cantona had tried out his celebrated two-footed drop kick on Walsingham. Throughout most of the film the music was unobtrusive, as film music should be, but then I almost had to reach for the bucket when Elgar's 'Nimrod' popped up in just the wrong place only to be followed by Mozart's Requiem! Film makers should know better than this. But there are relatively minor beefs. On the whole I enjoyed this film, a good story (though much simplified for the benefit of the cinema) set in an age we are all curious about, well shot, well acted. Can't complain.
|
|
|
| |
