'Elizabeth' still keeps her throne.

Rating: 8/10 (30 April 2008)

My Take: Not as bold, dashing or historically accurate as the first ELIZABETH, this sequel still has stunning visuals and superb acting.
Stated at the end of the original ELIZABETH are the untold events not portrayed in the film. It is said that Elizabeth I ruled for 40 years, and that those years were also known as the "Golden Age". Untold, no longer. For now, there is ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE, a sequel to a great film that didn't warrant a sequel. Don't get me wrong, ELIZABETH was a great film. A bold, dashing and exhilarating foray into the dark and powerful reign of The Virgin Queen, but its not the kind of film that would require a sequel. It's like expecting a sequel to GONE WITH THE WIND.
THE GOLDEN AGE doesn't even do its homework on history. I'm no history buff, but I don't have to be to say that it's highly improbable that Sir Walter Raleigh, even with his strength, defeated the entire Spanish Armada on his own. That's a thing that happens in films like 300 that doesn't give a damn about accuracy. Putting it in a "serious" historical biography could only be the fault of Hollywood. Other than being inaccurate, the screenplay is often confusing and riddling. Either the script can't stay focused on a single point, or the film lacks the right direction. The films main plot concerns the attempts of Span, led by its unruly King Phillip I (Jordi Mollà), and England's own Virgin Queen (Cate Blanchett, in top form) who regrets to surrender. But the film also revolves around a love triangle between the Queen, a ravishing seafarer Sir Walter Raleigh (Clive Owen) and one of the queens' handmaidens (Abbie Cornish). There's also the plot to overthrow Elizabeth from her thrown by Mary Stuart (Samantha Morton), who proclaims herself the heir to England's throne. Revolving too very often from one plot line after another, it just raises confusion and too many questions.
ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE is a practice in style over substance. Ah, but what style! How much can you put so much style under a single 2-hour feature. Although it has a plot and script intact, the real reason for the film's existence is that Director Shekhar Kapur, costume designer Alexandra Byrne and set production designer Guy Dyas had a field day with the costume designs and sets. The costumes are breathtakingly awesome, bursting with style and certainly puts the "fab" in fabrics. In fact they are so good, it gets are mind off what the people who wear them are saying. Honestly, we are too busy thinking about how Cate Blanchett wears these outfits each day of filming rather than listening to what the queen is saying. We also marvel at the wondrous sight of incredible set designs that burst with textures and tapestries. The style here is overwhelming, that they even overwhelms the plot.
Other than the fabulous designs, the best thing still about the film is the ravishing return of Cate Blanchett for the role that gave her the boost to stardom. Her performance here as the queen is actually tougher and more energetic. When confronted with the Spanish Ambassador, the spunky queen bellows "I, too, can command the wind sir! I have a hurricane in me that will strip Spain bare when you dare to try me!". Once again, best best bits of the screenplay goes to Ms. Blanchett, who delivers them with stunning power guaranteed to make a killing at the Oscars. Supporting performances are also fine, especially from Geoffrey Rush returning as the mysterious Sir Francis Walsingham.
Overall, it sinks with history and confuses with screenplay, but stuns with sheer beauty, breathtaking style and great performances. It's confusing, riddled, but ravishingly entertaining. Fans of the first film will like what they see, even if it lacks the total control and boldness of its predecessor. For everyone else, its a popcorn-movie which cares less about accuracy but aims to entertain. Set aside the criticism said about this film, and enjoy it for what it is. Sure it's as accurate to history as 300 was (or is that inaccurate), but its fancy and fancifully entertaining.
Rating: **** out of 5.