Elizabeth: The Golden Age

[Big Magilla]

Deja vu.

While I was on the side of Ian McKellen in the great McKellen/Benigni debate of 1998, I was never as upset as some over the eventual Benigni win. Blanchett, though, was another thing entirely. I thought she deserved the nomination in a weak year, but in no way did she remotely deserve to win.

Most of Blanchett's support came from those who had never seen Glenda Jackson's then definitive portrayal of the virgin queen in Elizabeth R, the epic mini-series of the early 70s.
Now, however, in the wake of Helen Mirren's even more celebrated portrayal in Elizabeth I, it's difficult to imagine that Oscar voters would be inclined to nominate Blanchett for reprising the role. Both she and the film would have to be ten times better than the historically inaccurate 1998 yawner. I just don't see it being so.

[FilmFan720]

How many films with nominated performances went on to have sequels?

Airport, Aliens, American Graffiti, Arthur, Babe, Carrie, Chinatown, City Slickers, The Exorcist, Father of the Bride, The French Connection, The Fugitive, Funny Girl, The Godfather, Going My Way, The Hustler, In the Heat of the Night, Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring, The Last Picture Show, Psycho, Rocky, Star Wars, The Sting, Terms of Endearment, The Thin Man, True Grit

I am sure I am missing a whole bunch, but in almost all those cases Oscar nominated performers appeared again. From what I can tell, only The Godfather Part II, Bells of St. Marys and Color of Money did anything nomination-wise.



Edited By FilmFan720 on 1177388330

[Okri]

How many films with nominated performances went on to have sequels?

[Mister Tee]

I'm a rarity (though Damien, I recall, has expressed similar sentiment) in that I think very highly of Blanchett, but all my good feelings about her came about after Elizabeth, a movie where she didn't impress me at all. What is it about royal roles that get Oscar pundits into such a lather? I thought Judi Dench was dull as dishwater in Mrs. Brown, but people raved like she'd rediscovered acting.

I though Kapur's original film was flashy trash -- some jazzy camera angles camouflaging a plot no more insightful than that in Davis/Flynn's Elizabeth and Essex. I have no idea why people are so touting this sequel -- and, especially, why nearly all prognosticators have Blanchett on their best actress list. Apart from Bells of St. Mary's, Godfather II and Aliens, have any sequel performances yielded nominations?

rudeboy, I simply can't disagree more strongly about Julianne Moore in Far from Heaven. For me it's the performance of the decade to date, and well beyond anything else Moore has ever achieved.

[FilmFan720]

I have never understood the fixation on Blanchett. She has never left much of an impression on me in anything, especially the incredibly bland Elizabeth. Unless this picks up some major Oscar nominations, I will probably avoid this one. Life is too short.

[rudeboy]

I wasn't keen on Elizabeth and have always placed her performance alongside that of Julianne Moore in Far From Heaven - bland, thoroughly forgettable acting, a mere shadow of superior work in similar roles over the years. I've never seen Glenda Jackson's supposedly definitive take on Elizabeth I, but give me Helen Mirren or, especially, Miranda Richardson's enchanting Queenie in Blackadder II over Blanchett any day. Oddly the thing I liked best about Elizabeth was Geoffrey Rush, who as a rule I can't stand.

My interest in this is minimal, frankly. I'm betting it's a dog.

[rolotomasi99]

I did not like the first film or Cate Blanchett's performance. Actually I don't like Blanchett very much period

gasp!!! philistine! get out of my sight!

[kooyah]

I hated Elizabeth. But damn, now I am looking forward to this, not because of Cate Blanchett, but because of Samantha Morton.

[Sabin]

Thoughts...?

I don't care for 'Elizabeth'. The only thing it gets right is the dank, Gothic feel of the time. Shekhar Kapur's extravagant visual eye did not compensate for the dearth of emotional pull underneath, and I remember being quite astonished it did as well as it did on nomination's morning. Or maybe I guess I should not. Needless to say, I wasn't geared up when I heard about this one.

The trailer looks compelling and Clive Owen seems most appropriate for the role. Samantha Morton's one shot is compelling enough to make me purchase a ticket to see what she conjours up. And Cate Blanchett looks fantastic, naturally.

So...issues...?

I'm seeing three screenwriters, each working independently. Not a bad idea, but the result usually has a vision of shakier slant. Also, the film seems to adopt a 'LOTR'-tone which I'm not sure is appropriate for the story. I'm just not sold on what this movie is trying to be, I guess. Barry outright failure, no doubt it'll pick up a slew of nominations. A second for Blanchett? Certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

[Okri]

Ditto.

[flipp525]

Wow. I cannot wait for this to come out. I'm am so Cate Blanchett's bitch.

[Precious Doll]

I'll wait for video for this one as I did not like the first film or Cate Blanchett's performance. Actually I don't like Blanchett very much period and Shekhar Kapur is a hack.

[rolotomasi99]

i know some are not a fan of ELIZABETH, but even detractors of the film usually praise it for introducing hollywood to the incredible genius of cate blanchett.
i personally loved the film and the performance. THE GOLDEN AGE looks like it lives up to and might even surpass the power and beauty of the original, if this trailer is any indication. i know how stupid it is to use the "L" word at this point (or any point really), and i dislike its overuse myself, but this film looks like a lock for a best picture nom. cate is assurred a nom the way mirren was last year, and a win could be very much in her future. back to back queen wins is mighty odd, but very possible. this year is looking much better than last for traditional oscar fare. looking forward to it.

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevan....trailer