6/10. Here's why:
ELIZABETH wasn’t labeled as a romantic movie because the title character's dilemma on who she should marry was directly related to the conflict of her country. That’s not the case with ELIZABETH PART 2: THE GOLDEN AGE, so her love triangle with WALTER RALEIGH and BESS (her lady-in-waiting) feels out of place with the rest, which does work as a historical drama. What made Cate Blanchett’s performance in the 1st installment so outstanding was her ability to convey layers of emotions with very little. This time, she seems to be too concentrated on her expressions and gestures, which is why her performance is just OK. However, because of how the rest of the cast (specially Samantha Morton, who seems to have the same focus Blanchett has) is, it could be director Shekhar Kapur’s fault. What a waste of Geoffrey Rush! The DVD has a couple of deleted scenes showing WALSINGHAM talking to certain characters. It's most likely that they were cut because they weren’t 100% needed to advance the plot. That may be true, but he barely did anything in the final product. Was he included in the script just because in real life he was there? Nah! Watching both movies makes it clear that the makers weren’t very worried about historical accuracy.
You can read comments of other movies (including the 1st installment) at http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.cl/2016/02/comments-round-up-january-2016.html
Any thoughts? share