Elizabeth sequel: predictable, innacurate, and boring
It is odd to have a sequel period piece, especially when it came out nearly a decade ago. To assure the audience that “Elizabeth: the Golden Age” is indeed a sequel to the 1998 historical drama, it incorporates random slip bits of the first movie.
This is a film that falls under the “much potential” category, but ultimately does not hold up to that prophesied high ranking. What damages it from the start is its incredible length.
Although it is barely under two hours, the film seems to last for an eternity.
It drags on about the hopeless, fictional, seemingly dramatic, and predictable romantic triangle between Sir Walter Raleigh, Elizabeth, and her lady-in-waiting. However, Elizabeth never has a romantic relationship with Raleigh.
Just as Sofia Coppola’s “Marie Antoinette” can be esteemed for its pretty pastel aesthetics, “Elizabeth” can be appreciated on a small scale by its rich and impressive colors. Elizabeth’s dresses alone are spectacularly gothic with their vivid hues ranging from luscious violet to silky rouge.
But if the intention for watching this film is not solely on the marvelous fabrics and theatrical lighting techniques that are reminiscent of a dark Rembrandt painting, this film can easily be avoided.
There are many historical inconsistencies that might upset a few movie connoisseurs.
This movie portrays Elizabeth as an armor clad heroine, mounted on a glorious white mare in front of a cloudy white backdrop, as if she is an angel sent from Heaven to deliver peace and prosperity to her people.Even her humanitarian sputtering to halt her cousin’s beheading paints her in a rather admirable light.
While Elizabeth is defined as a god in this film, the Catholic Spanish King is defined as a limping, Rasputin , hunched over a candle in the dark, muttering crazed sentiments lunatic that is after the protestant Elizabeth, also often remarked by him and his people as “the whore,” because her religion differs from his.