Despite Blanchett, ‘Elizabeth’ disappoints

History tells us this film was a mistake.

By BETSY PICKLE

KNOXVILLE (TENN.) NEWS SENTINEL

Coming nearly nine years after the release of “Elizabeth” and set 31 years after that film’s starting point, “Elizabeth: The Golden Age” has all kinds of history against it.

First is the legacy of the 1998 film that launched Cate Blanchett onto the world film scene and marked the English-language debut of Indian director Shekhar Kapur (“Bandit Queen”). Sensual and energetic, the first movie was a cut above the average costume drama.

Second is textbook history, which was toyed with in the 1998 film but is treated with outright contempt in this installment. Teachers should consider themselves warned.

And third is true-to-the-spirit history, which can make up for breaks with reality if it plugs into the emotional honesty of the real-life events. “The Golden Age” comes about as close to resonating with the truth of Elizabethan England as a “Mr. Bean” movie does.

With Blanchett returning in the lead, “The Golden Age” concerns itself with Roman Catholic plots against the Protestant queen, Elizabeth’s (debatable) infatuation with Sir Walter Raleigh (Clive Owen) and her determination to prevent the Spanish Armada sent by her brother-in-law, Philip II (Jordi Molla), from conquering England.

Elizabeth’s Scottish cousin, the Catholic Mary Stuart (Samantha Morton), is held prisoner in a remote castle, suspected of trying to incite the assassination of Elizabeth. Meanwhile, Elizabeth holds court, lazes on the royal barge and attends her prayers in a variety of dazzling gowns and elaborate wigs. And she seems far more enthralled with Bess Throckmorton (Abbie Cornish), one of her ladies-in-waiting, than she ever does with Raleigh.

Only an Elizabethan scholar would have a clue who the various players are, and any scholar would be outraged by the breezy approach to facts taken by screenwriters Michael Hirst and William Nicholson.

Fortunately, there are some familiar faces to keep the proceedings from becoming total chaos. Geoffrey Rush returns as Elizabeth’s spymaster and confidant Sir Francis Walsingham. Rhys Ifans plays a monk up to no good. Tom Hollander is Mary’s keeper.

It’s hard to say why the writers and Kapur created lesbian undertones between Elizabeth and Bess, but it’s impossible not to notice them. Perhaps this is their theory as to why Elizabeth never married; the broadly held assumption is that she never took a spouse because she didn’t want to have to share her power or wealth.

Blanchett’s Elizabeth comes across as a petulant schoolgirl, filled with modern-style angst over the love she’ll never know and dependent on an astrologer for political counsel. The character’s immaturity is all the more irritating because in 1585 Elizabeth would have been 52. Blanchett, who’s 38, doesn’t seem a day over 35. Morton, who’s 30, could pass for younger as well, but Mary is supposed to be 43.

No doubt Kapur thought it would balance out because Raleigh, who was 19 years younger than Elizabeth, is played by Owen, who’s nearly five years older than Blanchett.

The drama, which consists of heaving bosoms and historical-romance-novel dialogue, is undermined further by Kapur’s penchant for cockeyed camera angles. And despite the title, there’s no evidence of the “golden age” of literature and philosophy that flourished during Elizabeth’s reign.

“Elizabeth: The Golden Age” is a big disappointment.