45
Metascore
35 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 63ReelViewsJames BerardinelliReelViewsJames BerardinelliElizabeth: The Golden Age lacks the intricate plotting that characterized its predecessor. The screenplay is more action-oriented but not as smart, and some of the dialogue is downright cheesy.
- 58Entertainment WeeklyLisa SchwarzbaumEntertainment WeeklyLisa SchwarzbaumToo bad Kapur's new, glittering sequel also shows up feeling prematurely old, square, and cautious. A production of exquisitely complicated wigs and expensively grand wide shots, it pauses often to admire its own beauty, leery of messing with previous success.
- 58Seattle Post-IntelligencerSean AxmakerSeattle Post-IntelligencerSean AxmakerFavors pageantry over substance.
- 50Rolling StonePeter TraversRolling StonePeter TraversCate Blanchett can do anything, even play Bob Dylan, but she can't save this creaky sequel to her star-making 1998 biopic of Elizabeth I.
- 50Austin ChronicleMarjorie BaumgartenAustin ChronicleMarjorie BaumgartenDespite good performances all around, particularly the ever-brilliant Blanchett, Elizabeth: The Golden Age is a gilded ornament, speculative and uninterested in much besides this queen's matters of heart.
- 42Christian Science MonitorPeter RainerChristian Science MonitorPeter RainerBlanchett miraculously gives a good performance, even when saddled with lines like this one, to Clive Owen's Sir Walter Raleigh: "In another world, could you have loved me?"
- 40New York Magazine (Vulture)David EdelsteinNew York Magazine (Vulture)David EdelsteinAn unholy mixture of the banal and the bombastic.
- 40VarietyTodd McCarthyVarietyTodd McCarthyWithout the pleasure of watching Cate Blanchett continue the role that launched her to stardom, there would be little to recommend this latest of many cinematic and television accounts of the celebrated monarch's life.
- 40Village VoiceVillage VoiceKapur and his screenwriter have little interest here in maintaining even a dollop of historical accuracy.
- 30Washington PostDesson ThomsonWashington PostDesson ThomsonOverdresses and ultimately abandons what drew us to its 1998 predecessor in the first place: an intimate embrace with history.