Elizabeth.... sigh.... I’ve been grappling for weeks whether or not to write a review about this film. You see, sometimes there is a film that... well... just burrowed under your skin, and caused a lump ya could not itch away just to the left of your right shoulder blade. For me... that is ELIZABETH.
It is a film with exquisite production design, stunning actors and lastly it’s focus is on one of the most interesting figures in history... ELIZABETH.
There have been more films on ELIZABETH than I can begin to keep track of. Her life has had a good sized library of documentation and more stories of legend and truth then you can shake a stick at.
And truth be told, I hadn’t heard this particular chapter of her life before. You see, it’s the part before she became a legend. And it is because of that, that I have this damn festering sore next to that dagdum shoulder blade.
When I reviewed THE NEWTON BOYS, I complained about this sort of thing. Ya see, THE NEWTON BOYS story had been sitting around for ages, it had been passed over for a long long time. The reason? Well, it’s about non-violent fairly regular guys that robbed banks and wound up getting caught. That’s just not the stuff of legend.
How does that relate to ELIZABETH? Well, this film is about Elizabeth before she became ‘strong’, when she was still ‘like one of us’. It concerns that period in her life I am least interested in, personally. For me, the second this movie ended, was when I wanted it to begin.
Why?
Because, that’s when she became ELIZABETH. Sigh.... But you see, that’s not my only problem with the film. As a result of having (what I considered) an uninteresting main character, I began looking for interesting characters. Unfortunately I found them.
Sir Francis Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush). Wow. I could have spent the entire movie looking at his behind the scenes juggling. For me, I was just entranced by his every appearance in the film. I loved every iota of his character. BUT he’s not in it that much. Like a dash of your favorite color against a palate of your least favorite, it was... not enough and in the wrong painting.
Then we have Sir William Cecil (Sir Richard Attenborough). A man who was accustomed to the ears of a great king, now watching as the once great kingdom was seemingly withering away. What a character to have followed. Like Anthony Hopkins’ butler in REMAINS OF THE DAY, here was a man that had a position that he loved, that he couldn’t imagine not filling, and... well is not to be a part of it forever. Just as I feel about Geoffrey Rush’s character, I feel the same with this one. Perfect tone, in an imperfect song.
Both of them were flashes of brilliance in a film that otherwise lost me. But I so wanted to fall for this one. It was a type of movie that I adore. I love costume dramas, I love historical films, I love films that focus on Royalty... but... well I like them to grab me a bit more than this one did.
Perhaps it was the lack of scope this film held for me. I wanted the entirety of ye olde England brought to life. I wanted a bigger film. I wanted to be able to see the sets better, I wanted to be able to see the costumes better. Now I know this may have been a budget thing, but... well, I’m a bit tired of the ‘realistic’ look.
Yeah yeah... sure... They didn’t have giant floodlights, they didn’t have electricity, but ya know what, when I look at THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD and THE THREE MUSKETEERS (the one with Gene Kelly and Lana Turner) I didn’t think that they did. You see, here are these amazing castles, homes of the royales... To me, for me, I just don’t mentally think of them living in shadows and darkness. I don’t know where I thought the light came from, I guess I always assumed there were giant chandeliers with 800 candles ablaze lit by 40 servants each day before dusk.
In the last 30 or so years there has been a darkening of historical films. The films became movies of shadows. We’ve seen the dark side of lighting permeate at almost every level of film production as the stylings of light from Film Noir seem to have taken over.
Well, I’m a bit tired of reality lighting. I miss the color and pageantry of IVANHOE and THE BLACK SWAN. I remember watching THE PRIVATE LIVES OF ELIZABETH AND ESSEX and imagining the brilliant colors that went with all those wondrous textures. I miss the colors of Alexander Korda’s films. I guess what happened to me during this film was... this....
I began to think that it was dark and dank and dingy. And I wanted to see the costumes and the sets. I wanted to see the detail that I could see hinted at within the shadows.
AND, I’m tired of the serious and depressing historical film. I want them thrilling tales of yesteryear. I want 4 strip Technicolor, the blazing arc lamps, and special non-melting Estee Lauder make-up or whatever you call it.
Yeah.. I know, I’m crying about wanting a type of film that Hollywood and film in general killed generations ago. It’s a type of film that only exists on video tapes and dvds and laserdiscs. It plays on AMC and TCM on cable. But ya know... it’s not even that really.
Imagine telling a historical epic, with the production stylings of a 1930’s or 40’s Hollywood historical, but with the scripts and the nuance of a 90’s film. Merge the production eye candy with the mental substance of today. Just imagine.
Sigh... yes, I know, I’m no longer reviewing ELIZABETH, I’m now on a rant about what type of movie I want to see. But dammit, that’s the way I feel about this film.
I’m tired of the little historical film with the brilliant production design and the little human story and the dark shadowy world. I’ve seen it. Again and again and again. In fact there is at least one of these damn things every single year at this time, and it always ends up winning ART DIRECTION and gets nominated for CINEMATOGRAPHY. Every single time. Now dammit, let’s move on ok?
Now, as for the period of ELIZABETH’s life they did choose to portray... well, they did it perfectly. They deftly tell a tale about a woman in love, happy, taken from her idyllic settings, and forced into the towers of power. Forced into what was then a Man’s World that she was supposed to be a willing and quiet instrument of his (their) will. Yes. They tell it, they tell it well. Personally I think the message was better told in WORKING GIRL, which I really do love, but hey it’s an important message about how a woman can break the bonds of a misogynist society and stand atop the mountain and proudly be held as an individual with the same abilities and powers that men take for granted.
Bravo!
They tell it quite well, and I suppose that it’s a fine reason to make the movie. But... gosh... I wanted to see ELIZABETH in charge of the country on it’s darkest night as the Spanish Armada was coming to wreck havoc with dear old England. I wanted to see her with her court as they worked to overcome it. I guess what I’m saying, is I want ELIZABETH 2, no not the 2nd, but rather the second part of the ELIZABETH story.
That’s the real movie. That’s a story worth telling on the BIG screen, that will take advantage of all of her wily ways of storytelling.
It’s impossible for us to really go back to the naive and innocent years of Hollywood’s Golden Era, but perhaps there could be a stylistic blending. Right now Kenneth Branagh has been playing with this. His HAMLET is an excellent example of breaking out with the majesty of vintage Hollywood. Even now he is in the works on a 1930’s musical adaptation of William Shakespeare’s LOVE’ LABOR’S LOST. He plans on doing it in the style of a Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers piece. It’s that type of daring that I’m asking from Hollywood. Where we see things being blended, experiments being mounted with originality and freshness. Imagine having the steadicam in a Hollywood Costumed Drama of the 1930’s or 40’s. Imagine all the toys that filmmakers have at their disposal, and how they can be used in conjunction with all the methods and trappings of the hundred years of filmmaking we have.
ELIZABETH is a really solid film. For a lot of people I know, it’s very wonderful. But for me it felt a bit tired, like a boat with no wind to propel it. But hey, it sure did get under my skin, and that’s a key point in film, to get under your skin. It’s what I’d call an ‘ok’ movie. Ya know what I mean?
