TheLittleSongbird There are many films and dramatisations of the life of Queen Elizabeth I, and of the ones seen all of them range from good to outstanding. While not quite as great as 1998's 'Elizabeth' and 'Elizabeth R' with Glenda Jackson, though almost in the same class, 'Elizabeth I' is one of the outstanding ones.'Elizabeth I' has a couple of things that don't quite come off as well. Leicester's role is rather underwritten, and it does give Jeremy Irons (who is still very good in the role and makes a real effort to give him complexity) little to do. For such a big time span covered, dates and years are not always clear even to people familiar with the Tudor/Elizabethan period and a couple of events are depicted in a slightly confused manner.However, these are outweighed by the things that 'Elizabeth I' does incredibly well, these are a great many and done brilliantly. It's gorgeously made, with scenery, settings and costumes that will take the breath away and photography that makes one forget that it was made for TV. 'Elizabeth I' is strongly directed as well, the style is never cheapened and pacing and clarity of storytelling are rarely compromised. The music, with a mix of classical and medieval period which gives it authenticity, is dramatic yet sympathetic, giving scenes stirring power and nuanced pathos, always a good fit for every scene's atmosphere.With the script, it has a humorous edge, touching yet never mawkish romance and a lot of emotion beautifully balanced, while always provoking thought. The storytelling throughout is incredibly compelling, the romantic elements feature prominently but not at the expense of everything else, political commentary and dilemmas of the time are not neglected and the very graphic executions and torture wrench the gut (some may feel that the series overdoes it with the brutality, with the execution of Mary Queen of Scots being especially shocking, to me as decapitations, drawing and quartering and torture were gory and brutal it wasn't inappropriate). There are liberties taken with history to accommodate the story, but there are far worse and more insulting cases of films and series playing fast and loose with the facts.Great acting helps, and the performances are more than great across the board with all the characters well realised (with only underwritten Leicester being a reservation). A wonderful job is done with making Elizabeth a complex character and as a woman of many passions. Hugh Dancy is dashing, charming, loyal and passionate as Essex, while Irons, Toby Jones, Barbara Flynn (as a touching and dignified Mary Queen of Scots), Ian McDiarmid, Patrick Malahide et al are without fault. Reigning over them all is the always great Helen Mirren, whose Elizabeth is nothing short of a miracle.All in all, not devoid of flaws but a real joy to watch. 9/10 Bethany Cox

SnoopyStyle It's 1579 London. After 20 years on the throne, Elizabeth I (Helen Mirren) still refuses to marry. The men of the court plot to get her married for political advantage. She and the Earl of Leicester (Jeremy Irons) have feelings for each other. They await the Spanish Armada with his stepson Earl of Essex (Hugh Dancy). After Leicester's death, Elizabeth takes Essex as her new lover. Essex has a rival in the Privy Council in Robert Cecil (Toby Jones).Helen Mirren is beyond masterful. The great thing is how human the queen is in this version. This is filled with great actors. It's a smaller scale TV miniseries. The first part is interesting that ends with the Spanish Armada. The second part is even better. It's darker and more fascinating. This is a much performed character but Mirren still brings it.

didi-5 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.

Bill Peter 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?