Disappointingly daft and clichéd but features a rich, fascinating performance from Blanchett

Rating: 6/10 (23 December 2007)

"The Virgin Queen", Queen Elizabeth I, arguably the greatest monarchial leader England has ever seen, has received the royal treatment when it comes to the cinema. She has been played by an abundantly wide plethora of actresses, both old and young, and has garnered more than a few awards and nominations for those actresses. Arguably the greatest incarnation of the queen, though, and also probably the best film about the monarch, is 1998's Elizabeth, which was unfairly overshadowed by the vastly inferior and overrated Shakespeare in Love due to both films being set in the same time period and featuring a virtually identical cast of actors. But while Shakespeare in Love was light, fluffy, and almost irritatingly cutesy, Elizabeth was a far darker, grander, broodier incarnation of 16th century England, and featured a performance that should have gotten Cate Blanchett her first Academy Award were it not for Miramax's relentless promotion of Shakespeare In Love and the eventual (and undeserved) victory Gwyneth Paltrow of that very film scored in the category. With The Golden Age, the cast and crew were given a rare chance: A chance to re-tread the brilliant ground without the pressures of an all-too-similar parallel film. And unfortunately, for the most part, they missed that chance.
While the first Elizabeth film served as a wondrous combination between dramatization of a fascinating period in England's history, deliciously lavish production design, and an intense, amazingly dedicated character study on Cate Blanchett's part as she dubiously explores every possible nook and cranny of the mysterious Virgin Queen. The sequel gains much by retaining high quality in the latter two categories, but suffers miserably from severe drawbacks in the first and arguably most important category.
The film easily confuses epic and heroics with clichés, and is weighed down by an overwrought script not much above cheap daytime television melodrama in terms of the plot events. All would be forgiven had these elements been even remotely rooted in historical fact, but in reality the filmmakers took uncanny liberties and unabashedly replaced historical fact with melodramatic romance and epic fantasy action. Is she with child without royal consent? Would Sir Walter Raleigh have ever possibly swing heroically from ropes off of burning ships, dramatically brandishing his sword? Did Queen Elizabeth really ride horseback out to give her army a pep talk, even though we don't even see any of these soldiers in action when the day is done? Does it even matter than in 1585, when the film is set, Elizabeth was over 50 while Raleigh was barely 30, thus rendering their imaginary romance conceived especially for this film quite unrealistic? Indeed probably the biggest drawback to the film's replacing fact with melodramatic fantasy-fiction is that in most of the cases, it is totally unnecessary and barely felt. The film shifts gear from lavish costume drama to epic sea battle action for probably no more than five minutes before hastily returning to form. The Armada battle is over so quickly one barely even has time to notice Raleigh's exaggerated swashbuckling heroics.
That said, the film does have two slightly more successful fields, first and foremost its lavish look. Costume dramas traditionally exceed in the production, set and costume design fields, but the costumes Queen Elizabeth wears alone are sure to win awards. Such meticulous detail is put into designing every last frill and tapestry, that the film is undeniably a true work of design mastery, much like the first film. The cinematography is also more than complementary of the look and direction the film obviously was aiming at, drenching almost every scene with very dim but harsh glows, leaving many blacks and shadows, perhaps in order to emulate Elizabeth's state of mind. The country is prospering, but the Queen is forever torn inside.
And indeed the film more than excels in that final category, regarding the character study of Queen Elizabeth. And for that I give most of the credit to Miss Blanchett. It's impossible to deny it: Cate Blanchett is indisputably one of today's very best and most prominent leading actresses, and in recent years in particular she has more than excelled in delivering fascinatingly multi-layered and expertly acted roles in every genre possible. Blanchett is no stranger to playing real-life people: Aside from already playing Queen Elizabeth I in the 1998 film, she has also channeled Veronica Guerin, Katharine Hepburn, and Bob Dylan. But with Queen Elizabeth, Blanchett gets to do something very special: Since the character comes from a time before the media era, there is essentially nothing for Blanchett to imitate and to base her performance on. Thus, she is forced to (and succeeds admirably in) finding the character within Queen Elizabeth on her own. She plays her with a wonderfully entertaining combination of authoritarian matriarch and playful, mischievous teenager. Cate delivers a truly powerhouse performance in the film, and her performance is easily the best aspect of it. Just watch how broken she is as she mourns the treachery of her own sister, Mary Queen of Scots, expertly played by Samantha Morton and also the only of the film's plot points that was actually remotely interesting to watch unfold.
I was greatly looking forward to this film; the historical costume drama is a consistently reliable genre, and the concept of the combination of epic swashbuckling action-adventure with the dramatic depiction of Elizabeth's reign, as well as the notion of Blanchett returning to arguably her greatest film role, got me perhaps a little over-excited for this release, which made the poor reviews and subsequent box office performance even more disappointing than I would have expected. The film indeed suffered from some inconsolable plot weaknesses, but does feature exquisitely lavish production design and an expertly poignant, rounded and fantastically intense performance from the always great Cate Blanchett, and that's enough to make it even somewhat worth a look.