and not surprising. because Helen Mirren has the science and art and force to be inn and out of her characters in a magnificent manner. because nothing could change the powerful impression about her performance. a performance who, in subtle way, transforms the character in a masterpiece. Elizabeth I is a good example. first because, after books and movies, theories and speculations, she is a profound different Queen. rigid and vulnerable, old and energetic, seductive and cruel. the solitude of the Queen becomes not only realistic but an ice show itself. because its roots and ways and maps are so clear. because the story has a special dose of realism. because she is Elizabeth and any comparison with other interpreter becomes strange.

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.

Another version of the story of Elizabeth I may have been redundant, but Helen Mirren is really exceptional as the ageing queen trapped by her own stature in life, unable to love or be loved as anyone else unshackled by monarchy could be.Slightly different in story to other versions, this has Leicester throughout the first episode (which also introduces Essex), and then the second episode concentrates on the ruthless ambition of the Earl of Essex, the late favourite of Elizabeth's in old age.Beautifully shot and well-scripted, and with good supporting performances from the likes of Patrick Malahide and Toby Jones, this Elizabeth isn't a dark political thriller like Cate Blanchett's first appearance in the role, or detached from emotion like Glenda Jackson's classic TV performance. Mirren's Elizabeth is almost woman first and queen second.

I'm a big fan of the film "Elizabeth", but this TV production is better, and I cannot rate it highly enough. Being for TV works to its advantage, as they could pick the best "actor" for each part instead of a "star". For example, Patrick Malahide is far far better than Geoffrey Rush as Walshingham (spelling?). The only slight let-down was the Duke of Anjou. The actor in the old Cointreau advert (that dates me) had far more Gallic charm to woo Elizabeth than the actor here. The gore of punishment was handled well, including the two strokes to kill Mary, Queen of Scots - but what about the three to kill Essex? Unfortunately Helen Mirren, who was a real tour de force, has already done the sequel (Elizabeth II), so we haven't got that to look forward to. However, what about the long-promised film about Mary, Queen of Scots?