Perhaps the reason why 16th century queen attracts so many greatest actresses is the fact that Elizabeth I was actress herself - her whole life was a perpetual act where not only she had to balance all kinds of power games, but her life was a public stage with no privacy whatsoever and everybody from courtiers to assassins wanted something from her: what kind of curse this was to her I can't even imagine, but lady herself must have been aware that she can hardly trust anybody.If you can erase the memories of so many excellent actresses who preceded Helen Mirren, this is a very enjoyable two-part TV drama (advertised as mini-series, whatever) filmed in sensational locations built in Lithuania (Tudor court looks amazingly real - not glamorous but practical, decorated but still a labyrinth of crowded halls where people watch every step you make). To be honest, all the other memories fade away when I'm watching this - everything from the script, dialogs, costumes to acting in superb. First part has Elizabeth constantly fighting off marriage proposals and juggling one country for another, trusting only her chief advisers and her old favorite Earl of Leicester Jeremy Irons). "What is crown, when love's voice speaks to us?" she sighs when alone with Leicester, who is the only courtier brave enough to tell her things she don't want to hear.The second part has already aging queen falling for Leicester's stepson (Hugh Dancy) but she is no fool - the toy boy is only good as long as he plays her game, as soon as he steps out of line, the head goes off, she is true daughter of Henry VIII after all. This is hardly the only head chopped off here, there are many quite brutal scenes including historically accurate beheading of Mary Stewart. To all who criticize fictive meeting between Elizabeth and Mary Stewart, I would just say - this is too good scene to be missed. And the fact we have no surviving documents about it, don't mean it didn't happen. As always Mirren is magnetic - firm, stubborn, playful, coquettish, sentimental and cruel, she has it all. It is quite an achievement to make Elizabeth a believable, human person under all those elaborate costumes and wigs, but great actress she is, Mirren dominates the scene and she wears the clothes, not the other way around. Those closest to her are all excellent, including Jeremy Irons, Hugh Dancy, Toby Jones, Patrick Malahide and Ian McDiarmid - even Barbara Flynn as unlucky Mary Stewart completely fits to a description what she must have been like. Absorbing and absolutely recommended.

"Elizabeth I" (2005) is a two-part TV mini-series directed by Tom Hooper. The film stars Helen Mirren as Elizabeth I, Jeremy Irons as the Earl of Leicester, and Hugh Dancy as the Earl of Essex.Any movie about the life of Elizabeth I is going to be inherently interesting. She was a larger-than-life personage, she reigned for many years, she was the monarch of a Protestant nation contesting for supremacy with powerful Catholic nations, and she imprisoned and ultimately executed her cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots.Her personal life was equally interesting. Although Elizabeth never married, and was called "The Virgin Queen," her love for her "favorites" was widely known at the time, and has been portrayed in numerous movies before this one.So, the questions are, "Why make another film about Queen Elizabeth I?" and "Why watch another film about Queen Elizabeth I?" For me, the answer to those questions is, to watch a great actor take this part and transform it into something unique, rather than just another role about the famous monarch.Helen Mirren is a great actor. She is probably the only actor to play both Elizabeth I and Elizabeth II, and she is superb in both roles. Mirren's Elizabeth I is intelligent, foolish, loving, cruel, mature, and childish. There is never a moment when she forgets that she's a woman, and never a moment when she forgets that she's a Queen. Mirren's work as Elizabeth is a tour de force of acting skills.Irons and Dancy are fine actors, but in this movie they are planets revolving around Mirren's sun. In this films the settings are lush, the beheadings are bloody, the tortures are ghastly, and the supporting cast supports well. You don't watch Elizabeth I to see any of these. You watch Elizabeth I to see Helen Mirren portray the queen. That's why you should find this movie, watch it, and enjoy it.

I think it is true to say that Helen Mirren is a versatile actor, but she seems to be making a sideline career of portraying Queen Elizabeths. I thought she did a fantastic job of portraying the current Queen but when she steps into the shoes (and large lace collars) of THIS Queen Elizabeth, she does it AGAIN. And perhaps even more so. My apologies to all the other actresses who portrayed Queen Elizabeth I, but Helen Mirren has no equal for this character since Elizabeth I was done by Bette Davis all those decades ago. And for all those who think that there is only "junk" on television, watch this two part mini-series and eat your words, while being educated and thoroughly entertained. A HUGE honourable mention goes to Toby Jones for his role in this. He and Mirren, their rapport and the way they bat the dialogue back and forth is some of the best give and take I've EVER seen in ANY film. Between the two of them, it's hard to remember any other actor in this film. And that says tons because there is a truck load of British talent in this story. (I'll give more apologies to all the actors in the rest of the world but can anybody act as well as the British?) Do yourself a favour. Rent or buy this miniseries, get a big bowl of popcorn and spend an evening (or weekend) watching this. But here's a hint: Don't invite a friend unless they are the kind that can be absolutely silent while a movie is playing, because you won't want to miss one syllable of what's being said.

Once again the strange star rating system recorded by IMDb fools yours truly. How come this gets 8 stars, when Blanchett and Kapur get only 7.5 for their first offering? I was persuaded to buy this DVD because of the 8 stars, and now feel deceived. Helen Mirren is a very good, and sometimes a great actress. She can be absolutely riveting, and Irons isn't exactly bad. So it's not their faults. It must be the writing and directing that made me yawn. It's the direct lack of direction, in point of fact. The narrative ambles amiably along, pointlessly, now and then intercut with some gratuitous torture, bungled executions, disembowellings etc, which seem to be inserted merely in order to jolt the audience out of their danger of dozing off. There's no overall vision, no palpable theme to interest, engage and stimulate the viewer. Instead his mind wanders: he wonders why the whole presentation looks so cheap, almost amateurish. Lack of genuine ideas, general tiredness.