Elizabeth: the sellout age

This huge film, destined to demonstrate the hugeness of the humongous history of Queen Elizabeth, sequel to another film entitled Elizabeth a few years ago, achieved the quasi-impossible. It proved that it is actually possible to depict the history of this period with even less intrigue, interest and wit than the first one did. An achievement of cinematographic mediocrity like no other. Just how did they do it?

The thing that fuels my ire the most about this film is that you don't even need to have an original writer to create an interesting plot around this queen's life. The history itself is full of intrigue, suspense, sex, murder, plots, wars, exploration, literary and philosophical originality and the thrill of the British renaissance. You don't even need to fictionalise it; it's all outstanding film material. How they even managed to make this reality boring is quite beyond me.

Elizabeth is portrayed as this snivelling, cold-hearted Queen whose humanity and womanhood nonetheless pours through the cracks to reveal her weaknesses, or what Hollywood would disgustingly caricature as her 'femininity'. During an era of unprecedented literary growth, of science developing beyond belief, and of religious strife tearing families and communities to shreds, the Elizabeth of this movie spends her time moping over Sir Walter Raleigh, in a J-lo meets Britney rich bitch scenario barely worthy of Desperate Housewives. The males in the film - who are incidentally unanimously appalling actors - are tapping her on her regal shoulder, reminding her that the Spaniards are, sort of, coming for war with thousands of well-armed ships, and maybe she should be doing something other than teaching Sir Walter Raleigh how to two-step with her lady-in-waiting. But this isn't even intended as humour. This is supposed to be either good fiction or historically accurate? And Walter Raleigh, who was the most fraudulent explorer ever, is depicted as some sort of war hero, who single-handedly sets fire to the Armada ships, jumps overboard and swims to safety as his horse dives headlong at him. What this was meant to mean I really don't know.

Aside from being historically inaccurate, this film is a two hour emotional porn flick, with even less effort given to plot than a Hugh Heffner would bother with. Scenes of decapitated limbs are cut to larger-than-life philharmonic string sections, between even more gratuitous scenes of Elizabeth wringing her hands over her sex life and the decisions she had to make. No effort is made to display the woman's unparalleled wit, her paranoid delusions, her machiavellian war genius, her obsession with virginity coupled with unbridled sexual desire... Even the sex is shoddy. How did they get that wrong?

It is worth seeing Elizabeth: The Golden Age, just to see how creative Hollywood filmmakers can be at ruining a good story. But if this doesn't interest you, stay home and watch the Simpsons, and avoid the flooded bathrooms of cinema multiplexes where staff dismiss you nonchalantly when you mention that Niagara Falls has taken over the gents' loo. Perhaps they had a hand in making this film