badly shot fluff with great acting from the ladies

Rating: 1/10 (12 July 2008)

Its obvious that this was shot by someone who is used to TV - the camera work is very average when compared to other films made about this period in history. It's also not made terribly clear that this is a complete work of fiction and not historical fact, which leads to confusion. 'Anne of a thousand days' was a far better film on all counts - makes me cry every time! Not so with this offering, although I thought Nathalie Portman did her best, as did Scarlett Johannson, the costumes did not fit them properly, and although colourful were clumsily put together. They did not look their best, as the lighting was so unexciting. Both struggled to really take off in dramatic terms because they were hampered by poor production ( did they run out of money half way though?.. I'm sure, in one scene, I saw a set of ready made curtains I've seen in a well known furnishing store!). The script is also weak in places and lacks tempo. Very much a 'b' movie.shame - I normally love a big period drama! I went home and got out Cate Blanchetts Elizabeth to remind me what great production is and can do for a good actor.