Catholics | Kevin Barrett's Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Catholics’

I Am Married – To England

Posted in General Comments, Movie Review, Movies, Reviews, tagged Best Makeup Oscar, Cate Blanchett, Catholic Church, Catholics, Christopher Eccleston, Daniel Craig, Duke of Norfolk, Elizabeth (1998) — movie review, Elizabeth Tudor, Fanny Ardant, General Comments, Geoffrey Rush, John Ballard, Joseph Fiennes, Mary of Guise, Moderate Movie Recommendation, Movie Reviews, Protestants, Queen Mary, Queen of England, Reviews, Richard Attenborough, Robert Dudley, Scotland, Shekhar Kapur, Sir Francis Walsingham, Sir William Cecil, Tudor England, Virgin Queen on March 24, 2026| Leave a Comment »

“Elizabeth” (1998) — movie review
Today’s review is for the historical drama “Elizabeth” (1998), directed by Shekhar Kapur and starring Cate Blanchett as Elizabeth Tudor, the young princess who unexpectedly becomes Queen of England and must learn to survive a court filled with schemers, spies, and religious factions; Geoffrey Rush as Sir Francis Walsingham, Elizabeth’s loyal, calculating advisor who quietly eliminates threats while shaping her political instincts; Joseph Fiennes as Robert Dudley, Elizabeth’s closest companion and would-be consort / lover, whose ambitions and loyalties complicate her early reign; Christopher Eccleston as the Duke of Norfolk, a powerful nobleman whose arrogance and Catholic allegiance push him toward treason; Richard Attenborough as Sir William Cecil, the seasoned counselor urging Elizabeth toward caution and stability; Fanny Ardant as Mary of Guise, the French-backed rival whose military pressure adds to Elizabeth’s growing list of dangers; and Daniel Craig as John Ballard, a fanatical Catholic priest and conspirator whose involvement in assassination plots underscores the deadly stakes of Elizabeth’s early rule. With this ensemble, the film dramatizes the transformation of a young, uncertain monarch into the formidable “Virgin Queen” who would define an era.

Background: This was my first viewing of this film and I had no prior knowledge of the film or much about Queen Elizabeth or English history from this period for that matter. Released in 1998, the movie was both a critical and commercial success. It received seven Academy Award nominations and won one (Best Makeup). Blanchett’s performance was widely praised and is often cited as the role that launched her international career. Historically, the film is significant because it helped revive interest in Tudor-era dramas and presented Elizabeth I not as a distant icon, but as a young woman navigating danger, betrayal, and the brutal realities of 16th-century politics. The film takes liberties with the facts (as most historical dramas do), but it captures the emotional truth of Elizabeth’s early reign: survival required sacrifice.

Plot: The story begins with England divided between Protestants and Catholics, with Queen Mary’s failing health creating a dangerous power vacuum. Elizabeth, Mary’s half-sister and a Protestant, is arrested and interrogated but ultimately spared. When Mary dies, Elizabeth becomes queen and immediately faces pressure from all sides: foreign powers seeking alliances, nobles plotting behind her back, and religious factions threatening rebellion. Robert Dudley, her closest friend, pushes for influence and intimacy, while Walsingham quietly uncovers conspiracies involving Norfolk, the French, and the Catholic Church. As threats escalate (including assassination attempts and military pressure from Scotland), Elizabeth realizes she cannot rule as a naïve young woman. The film builds toward her transformation into the “Virgin Queen,” symbolized by her decision to sacrifice personal relationships and present herself as married to England itself.

So, is this movie any good? How’s the acting? The filming / FX? Any problems? And, did I enjoy the film? Short answers: Yes; excellent; visually striking; a few; yes.

Any Good? Yes. “Elizabeth” is a political drama that blends court intrigue, personal struggle, and historical sweep. It’s not a documentary, and it works as a portrait of a young monarch learning the cost of power. The pacing feels steady, the tension builds naturally, and the film does a good job showing how Elizabeth evolves from uncertainty to resolve. The emotional core is strong, and the film earns its reputation as one of the better Tudor-era dramas.

Acting: Blanchett is outstanding. She plays Elizabeth with vulnerability, intelligence, and growing steel — you can see the transformation happening scene by scene. Rush brings a quiet menace to Walsingham, making him both unsettling and indispensable. Fiennes gives Dudley charm and ambition, though the script simplifies his historical complexity. Eccleston is convincingly cold as Norfolk, and Attenborough adds gravitas as Cecil. The ensemble works well, and Blanchett’s performance anchors the entire film.

Filming / FX: The film is visually rich. The production design captures the grime, danger, and claustrophobia of Tudor England — dimly lit rooms, crowded courts, and ornate costumes that feel lived-in rather than theatrical. The cinematography uses shadows and candlelight to emphasize the uncertainty of Elizabeth’s early reign. Some of the visual symbolism may be a bit over the top, but overall the film looks and feels like a polished period drama.

Problems: A few. I have no personal knowledge of whether the film takes liberties with historical accuracy — if timelines are compressed, characters are simplified, or events are dramatized for effect. The Catholic Church is portrayed in a very villainous light, which felt accurate (from my knowledge of history), but some might find it objectionable. There is no mention of what the religious divide is about, so that left a vacuum for me in trying to understand the background of the film. I have a feeling the movie is more about emotional truth than factual precision.

Did I Enjoy the Film? So-so. It’s engaging, well-acted, and visually compelling, but I did not find I “enjoyed” the film. The farthest I would go would be “interesting“. Blanchett’s performance alone makes it worth watching, and the political intrigue keeps the story moving, but without a prior knowledge of the history / period, I found myself at a loss understanding the political dynamics. But, even without knowing the historical facts or liberties, I found the film satisfying as a character study of Elizabeth’s early transformation. It’s not a perfect film, but it’s visually impressive as cinema and “interesting” from a political leadership perspective.

Final Recommendation: Moderate recommendation. “Elizabeth” is historically significant for revitalizing interest in Tudor-era dramas and for launching Blanchett into the spotlight. It’s a well-made, emotionally resonant film with strong performances and striking visuals. It’s rated R for violence (a burning at the stake and some piked heads) and some sexuality (frontal nudity and a couple of sex scenes). It’s best suited for viewers who enjoy political intrigue, historical stories, and character-driven dramas. Watch it for Blanchett’s commanding performance, the tense court politics, and the film’s portrayal of a young queen forging her identity in a dangerous world.

.
Click here (24 March) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Faith Is A Challenge For All

Posted in Faith, Philosophy, Quotes, tagged Catholics, Challenge, Eucharist, Ordinary, Philosophy, Quotes, Shawn Tunink on April 30, 2023| Leave a Comment »

It is a challenge to all Catholics to never let receiving the Eucharist become something ordinary.

— Shawn Tunink

.
Click here (30 April) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

MAGA?

Posted in Humor, Politics, Quotes, tagged Abortion, Birth Control, Catholics, Choice, H. L. Mencken, Humor, Mother, Politics, Quotes, Rhythm, Roe v. Wade, The Pill on June 25, 2018| 1 Comment »

It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a resort to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to physics or chemistry.

— H. L. Mencken

[Mencken was a satirist and cultural / social commentator who passed away before the invention of the birth control pill and Roe v. Wade. Do we want to go back?

I remember growing up and hearing the name used to describe Catholic women who practiced “the rhythm” method of birth control. It was “mother”. — kmab]

.
Click here (25 June) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Bits And Bobs And Birthdays

Posted in Faith Family and Friends, tagged Calculus, Cancer, Catholics, Cherry Blossoms, Family, Gall Bladder Removal, Lincoln Memorial, The Holy Bible, Washington D.C., Washington Monument on March 24, 2012| Leave a Comment »

First off, Happy Birthday to my younger brother Sean!!

You gave us quite a scare with all this Cancer business back in December and January. Fortunately, you’ve come through for another BD (and hopefully, many more to come).

As to my own health, I’m still working through gallstones. I’ve got my gall bladder removal scheduled for early May so (fingers crossed) I can start getting back to working out and losing some weight.

I was doing some random browsing and I stumbled on an article about how few Catholics have actually read the Holy Bible from cover to cover. Well, I must admit to being one of those who haven’t. So, I’ve decided to rectify that. This week I started at page one. I’ll periodically be posting thoughts and quotes as I go along. I’m not going off the religious deep end (well, anymore than usual), but I would like to be able to say I’ve read the Bible all the way through at least once in my life. (Ego rearing it’s ugly head, again.)

As a coincidence, I’m also currently struggling through a book which is an introduction to calculus. I took analytic geometry / pre-calc when I was in high school, but I never had much of a math requirement when I went through college, so I never had to get stuck into calculus. I wouldn’t say I’ve regretted it, but calculus has always been one of those topics I’ve never been able to discuss – because I’m ignorant of it. (Hmmm, I wonder how many will say that’s never stopped me talking about other things I was ignorant of.) Anyway, I’m slogging through an intro to calculus book, too.

My oldest daughter is off on a business trip to Washington, D.C. She had a few hours off, so she texted me she was doing some sight-seeing at the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial. It brought back memories of my only trip to D.C., back when I was in the Army, and I took a long weekend off to visit. When I was growing up, I saw a photo of some kids playing in the reflecting pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial. I thought, “I’d like to do that some time…” Well, I didn’t play, but I did soak my feet. It was a typical hot, muggy, Washington afternoon and the water was terrifically refreshing! If you ever get to D.C. in the summer, I highly recommend it.

Anyway, my daughter’s text was that the Cherry blossom’s were out in full force. I was (am) soooo jealous!! I’ve always wanted to see the Washington Cherry blossom season. (Is it a “season“, when it’s only a couple of weeks long?) Oh, well, some other year… Another item for the bucket list.

.
Click here (24 March) to see the posts of prior years. I started this blog in late 2009. Daily posting began in late January 2011. Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.