Elizabeth 1 v The Virgin Queen

[Virgil Reality]

The OTHER version of the story of Elizabeth 1 starring Helen Mirren won Best movie or Mini series at the Emmys last night, with Helen Mirren winning Best Actress and Jeremy Irons best supporting actor and I think it won other categories and/or was nominated in others.

I haven't seen it yet - it screens next month here but i'm interested to hear what those who've seen both thought. How did it compare to "The Virgin Queen" I t certyainly seems to be more highly regarded and I wonder if this was due to better writing, more star power or other factors

Hugh Dancy as Essex was also nominated for best supporting actor but of course lost out to Jeremy Irons. From the clips I've seen, he got more up close and personal that Hans' Essex. I didn't think Essex was at all sympathetically portrayed in VQ and I didn't feel it ever developed a reason for Elizabeth's fondness for him. In fact, she treated him with comtempt most of the time. I felt this made it impossible to really establish the needed rapport between them I'm gathering the E1 version makes their relationship more blatant. i guess I'll see.



Your thoughts?

[Gigi]

This is going to have to be answered for someone with HBO ... but the Variety reveiws were pretty glowing all around and the campaign wasn't too obnoxious so I'd say it won on merit.

It's true -- VQ's Essex was morally ambiguous. Played true, but I agree; he was difficult to trust. Though I did sympathize with what I saw as mental instability, and a state if mother-whipped-ness. Seems Elizabeth was fond of him despite herself -- almost out of obligation to his step-father's memory. She had a weakness for him, but she didn't seem to struggle too much with his slightly opaque manipulations.

It's striking once again--the parallels between this actors protrayals/timing and Hugh Dancy's.

I'm going to have to rent "E1"

[Virgil Reality]

Objective? Me?

I just finished watching "Elizabeth 1" last night. It was interesting how different it was to "Virgin Queen". Definitely more "commercial" and traditional in its approach. I thought it a little soap operaish - like a Tudor version of "Dynasty". I also found it to be quite patchy - at times like a glossy US style soapie a la Dynasty or Melrose Place, at times quite Trad faux Shakespearian and at times quite suburban drawing room sit com. At times the dialogue was very pedestrian and pacing quite slow - very different to the frenetic pacing of VQ

I found some of the scenes with Jeremy Irons and Helen Mirren when they were alone to be quite comfy middle class suburbia vibe - if you ever saw "As Time Goes By" with Judy Dench and Geoffrey Palmer, they were a lot like that. It seemed odd. She was certainly a lot more flirty and flaunting her sensuality than Anne-Marie. And of course she is naturally a much more attractive woman. There was little attempt to make her 'ugly'. At times she seemed to be channeling Judy Dench and/ or Glenda Jackson.

The Earl of Essex was given a lot more attention both in the script and by the Queen. It was certainly well established that she was fond of him right from the start - he was introduced at court by Leicester! There was a lot of flirting and kissing! There was absolutely no sign of his mother in the second episode but his wife was included.

There's no denying Hugh Dancy did a good job - and he looked mighty fine too - is aging into a Colin Firth kind of look which is no bad thing. There were few really similar scenes - interesting how they took different slants to much the same story. I thought that in the scene where she slaps him and he draws his sword, Hans did a much better job there - it's one of my favourite scenes in the whole show so I guess I would.

I guess people like their period dramas in the classic style, and there's no doubt the star power of the leads in this gave it the edge- they just have that 'gravitas' that Anne Marie Duff and Tom Hardy won't have for another 20 years or so, talented though they may be. And Jeremy Irons' voice? Swoon. Only Alan Rickman can top that!

[odybu]

Okay, not to sound like a goob or anything, but is the Elizabeth with Helen Mirren the same movie that swept so many awards at the Golden Globes?? I haven't seen that yet. For some reason I thought that the "recent" movie was about a more recent monarchy???

[Jonathan]

You're right about "Elizabeth" with Helen Mirren, Odybu

[Virgil Reality]

There's the movie "The Queen" which is about Elizabeth 2nd and her reaction, or lack thereof, to Princess Diana's death, and the television mini series "Elizabeth 1, starring Helen Mirren as ER1, Jeremy Irons as Dudley and Hugh Dancy as Essex. So there is a lot about both Elizabeths all of a sudden, which is kind of a pity for "our" version, "The Virgin Queen". Thye've also just finished filming "The Golden Age" a follow up to the Cate Blanchett version.

There have been a lot of other British Kings and QUenns but it seems they only want to make stuff about Henry V111 and Elizabeth.

[starkiller]

I'd like to see them do a movie or three on the era of King Richard Coeur de Lion. But then, that's a period of history that absolutely fascinates me.

[cat]

I attempted to watch Helen Mirren's portrayal of Elizabeth 1 when it was on tv a few months ago. I have to say that I just couldn't get "into" it, to the point where I had to turn the tv off. But then Mirren isn't one of my favourite actresses so maybe there is bias on my part. However, I really enjoyed Cate Blanchett's portrayal of Elizabeth. Anne Marie Duff's portrayal of her was another that I found enjoyable to watch.