I love a historian who can point out the historical inaccuracies but still appreciate the film and understand why film makers choose to change some things.
Why do they insist on giving Mary, Queen of Scots a thick Scottish accent when she was raised in the French court from the age of six to 19, famously by Cathrine de Medici.
She was brought up at the French court from the age of around 6, and no doubt learned to speak French as though it were her first language. However, she also was always surrounded by similar age companions who came with her from Scotland. She was already Queen of Scotland when she was first sent to France, so her mother would have been careful to have Mary instructed in Gallic. Mary would presumably rule Scotland as well as be Queen consort of France. Mary was also intelligent and charismatic and knew how to present herself in whatever way she thought advantageous. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that she would choose to speak in a Scottish accent. Nevertheless more than likely the director just wanted to be sure the audience, many of whom wouldn’t know much about Mary’s background, knew that she was Mary Queen of Scots.
"That's a silly place to put a head on a spike" *Man unsheathes blade, ready to disembowel the Spanish ambassador* "Look at him, he's cute. Like a puppy!" A thoroughly enjoyable and highly entertaining presentation by the charming Dr. Paul. Hope to see more in the future.
I agree. She was brilliant in a penguins books video a couple of years ago, and I hope she's a regular on here now. Search it if you haven't watched it 😊
I'm surprised that Joanne didn't mention my biggest problem with Elizabeth - that they made Robert Dudley a traitor. That was pure slander. He was absolutely loyal to her.
Mary Tudor is played by the fabulous Kathy Burke in Elizabeth. She's very well known in Britain but more as a comedian, comedic actress and writer. But, occasionally, she'll do these more heavy dramatic roles, and it's always fun to watch. She's also in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and Nil by Mouth, perhaps her greatest dramatic turn. She was awarded best actress at Cannes for her role in that film.
I suspect they cut the "heart and stomach of a king" line from Golden Age because they used it already (somewhat modified) in the first film, in which she says: "I may be a woman, Sir William, but if I choose I have the heart of a man! I am my father's daughter. I am not afraid of anything." I think that when they made the 1998 film, they had no clue they would be able to make a sequel. So they just did their best to fit in all of Elizabeth I's most iconic quotes and sentiments. But then I'd bet they felt a little weird about repeating that one line when they found themselves making Golden Age a full nine years later. Though I personally think they should have just included it, since it was heavily tweaked the first time anyway.
I am not that sure that is why. Elizabeth could use similar imagery and they could have still retained one of the most famous speeches she ever gave. My own view is the writers and directors thought they could improve on history.
It must depend on which cut you've seen because I know she does do this speech, somewhat truncated but the depth was still there, during that scene on the horse.
@@hbic3 Right, she performs the Tilbury speech in the film, we're discussing why the most famous line from the historical account of the speech ("heart and stomach of a king") is not part of the speech she gives in the film.
Waited for the part where u eviscerate them for writing that Dudley was involved in an assassination plot.. HOW did that get a pass?! I can ignore making Cecil an ancient antagonist who abandoned her, but Dudley betraying her?? This review is wayyyyy too generous
Thank you for showing this. My mother (who has past away) loved everything on the Tudor Dynasty (she liked to call it that) after taking a trip to England with my Dad. Granted, it was in 83, and only a week but still, when she got home, she got books, and watched everything she could on the subject. So thank you, this brings back memories in a good way... because she also got me hooked on the period as well 😊
@@skepticalbadger yes I know. It's just something I noticed since it is one of my favourite pieces of music. It's always bothered me for some reason lol not saying it was a bad choice, just saying it stands out to me every time I watch it. 🤷🏻♀️
The actress who played the best depiction of Elizabeth I, was Glenda Jackson. Those outside the UK, may not know her, but her depiction in the 1970’s is seen as the best ever.
Elizabeth R was very popular in the US. Glenda Jackson won two Emmy awards for her work in that series, and well deserved, she is still my favorite film Elizabeth.
Also one of the rare Labour MPs who was actually left wing. Her and Vanessa Redgrave are both an absolute credit to Greenwich and Blackheath. Great politics, both of them.
I love these kinds of movies even though some are loosely based on the real history. I’m such a history buff. It is so interesting to have an actual historian talking about what was right or wrong historically in the one of my favourite movies. I loved the first one the best.
She’s OK. Should have figured out the brown contacts, though. She would have appeared more regal, intense and formidable. Blanchett seems too vulnerable.
I’m no historian, but I always thought the 1970s miniseries, “Elizabeth R” was more accurate historically. It would be great to have a historian talk about the accuracy and inaccuracies of that particular production. I thought it was incredibly good. In it, I especially liked Michael Williams portrayal of François, Duke of Anjou. And I like the fact that they let Elizabeth (Glenda Jackson) look middle-aged which she was when she encountered him and considered him for marriage.
Dudley is missing on the second movie because for some reason they made him one of the conspirators in the first movie and it ends with her letting him alive as a reminder, which I get it for dramatic reasons but historically is the biggest buchery.
It's such a brutally cold ending to the first film though. She basically turns into a walking icon/deity and sheds her humanity and personal affections.
I think that was the wrong Thomas Howard portrait painting that came up there, that was the 3rd Duke of Norfolk, the one who Ecclestone is playing is the 4th Duke of Norfolk of the same name. The 3rd died in his early 80's whereas the 4th was the one who was executed during Elizabeth's reign.
Absolutely loved this deep dive! Dr. Joanne’s commentary really highlights the historical accuracy (and inaccuracies) with such fun insights. Fascinating to see what the movies got right and where they took creative liberties!
As an absolute Tudor dynasty junkie (read, seen anything I can get my hands on...and probably why I love your channel and others), loved that you tackled these two awesome movies. I've watched both countless times and despite the minor inaccuracies, I still love watching them over and over again. I never tire of Cate in the role. Loved your review and insight from a historical point of view. However, funny how different scenes can be interpreted many different ways. Case in point, when Mary is to be executed and she looks up at the throne, you stated it was for effect that they had never met in person and that's why the throne was empty. I took it in a totally different way. The way Mary looks up and there's a slight smile. Like a wish finally granted. To me, this was a moment of happiness for Mary. Something she sought for decades, probably most of her life and probably never seen before, was finally within reach. The throne that should have been hers. Something almost tangibly in her grasp...even for one final fleeting moment. She smiles softy at what was almost won. You would probably agree with me, that the throne, something that's so revered and considered the ultimate symbol of a sovereign's power and authority would not have been placed so close. Another reason that made me think this was done for cinematic effect to show a final slight on behalf of Elizabeth to Mary. Putting something so close to her, an empty throne, so so close, that Mary will never have. Anyhoo, my two bits. Keep up the great work. Love every episode.
I saw it that way too! I hadn’t realised the bit about Elizabeth being absent represented by the empty throne but present in her life as a sister Queen. It makes sense but I always saw that final look at the throne as a sort of wistful glance at a thwarted ambition.
I'm surprised to see such a positive review by a Tudor historian. Both films have a lot of problems and I'm not sure why we are being so gentle about it here. Just to name one: While it was great to not have Mary & Elisabeth meeting, it's a nonsense presentation to have her speaking English with a Scottish accent. If she had an accent after all, it would have been French, since she grew up at the French Court and spend many years there. She even was the actual Queen of France (vs. the English only claiming to be)
I literally just finished watching History Buffs videos on the Elizabeth movies, they certainly did not spare their words. If you want a more scathing critisism, I recommend checking those out, they are good and hilarious.
Loved this so much! Thanks for such a deep examination of these films, Dr. Paul! 11:53: Christopher Eccleston is actually playing the Duke of Norfolk (EDIT: thanks to those who noted that Norfolk's give name was Howard) 34:33: Ugh, the flower headdress. No, you're not missing anything. They make such weird choices The Golden Age with the costuming. In addition to the giant flower in this scene, there's also an enormous bow on the front of a blue gown and what I like to call the "Taco Shell" headdress in the scene with John Dee. 43:00: I love your appropriate frustration with the way Robert is dealt with. It's so frustrating that the ridiculous betrayal story story they gave him in Movie 1 meant he couldn't be in Movie 2 (He's actually in the novelization, and they have some lovely scenes). It's especially annoying considering there's so much drama in the real story; both in regard to how unpopular Robert was and the strange and suspicious death of his wife, which ignited rumors that Elizabeth and Dudley had something to do with it. I don't know why film adaptations shy away from that story when it feels too dramatic to be true.
I was so disgusted with the treatment of Robert in "Elizabeth," that I refused to watch the sequel. I also hated the fact the first film put Elizabeth in "white makeup" when she was still a young woman. Ugh!
Interesting thought that occurred during the coronation scene: that was the last coronation of the King/Queen of England that wasn't also K/Q of Scotland, as James I/VI was her successor
Would also like to note that Elizabeth never wore that thick white clown makeup. Opaque makeup like that simply didn't exist at the time. Lead makeup added a sheer white pearlescent cast to skin that was quite beautiful. That's why people wore it even knowing how dangerous it was. I'm sure if it wasn't illegal, some people would probably still wear it now.
My personal favourite Elizabeth I portrayal is Anne Marie Duff, even though I do have love for Glenda Jackson, Helen Mirren and Cate Blanchett too, but I could watch The Virgin Queen miniseries over and over again and never get bored of it. She portrays Elizabeth's journey from young princess to aged queen beautifully, also her version of the Tilbury speech was amazing.
I'm looking forward to watching this! Your house of Dudley book was very well written I'm banned from watching Tudor stuff on TV with anyone else as I can't keep my mouth shut when it comes to unrealistic scenes or actors I have a master's in history and hopefully a PHD one day too Here goes .......I'm going to watch your up load now
Yes, the 2005 mini-series was brilliant (and subsequently overlooked in favour of later productions). Anne-Marie Duff was an excellent Elizabeth, and I thought that the insular machinations of court were very well represented. Ian Hart as William Cecil was also a great choice.
As a kid, seeing this particular movie set me on a Tudor reading road that lead to a British History reading road that continues all these decades later
Good thoughts. However I think the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth in the first scene was quite well set even if not accurate. It represented Mary’s “confinement” and loneliness without obviously stating her pregnancy troubles blatantly. Nuanced well
I'd like to hear a neurologist's or doctor's analysis of what beheading would be like. She was most certainly praying during those fifteen minutes? Lifted from Wikipedia: "Physiology of death by decapitation- Unconsciousness occurs within seconds without circulating oxygenated blood (brain ischemia). Cell death and irreversible brain damage occurs after 3-6 minutes with no oxygen, due to excitotoxicity." So according to that, any lip movement after 6 minutes was reflexive twitching.
@@shannon890 I imagine the shock would be too much to process, and therefore no pain would be felt, or brief pain of the skin only. Just imagining how the pain system shuts down in childbirth (been there), maybe beheading is similar.
@@skepticalbadger It's the type of sh*t-kicking performance that made Richard Harris, Peter O'Toole, Oliver Reed and Richard Burton legendary and that is meant as a compliment.
This was great! I’d like to hear what she thinks of the Elizabeth R series in the 70’s with Glenda Jackson. Plenty more Dudley in that version! I have zero notes on that one. It was brilliant, a lot less Hollywood but a lot closer to the chronology of their real lives. Well, as much as my own knowledge of the period goes anyway!
The most accurate depiction of Queen Elizabeth I put on screen is without a doubt, the 2005 Tom Hooper miniseries, "Elizabeth I", with Helen Mirren playing Queen Elizabeth I. The 1971 TV series, "Elizabeth R.", starring Glenda Jackson, is a close second. The Kate Blanchett movies don't even close.
I was impressed with Anita Dobson who played QE1 around the time of the Armada and how scared she was as things were so uncertain and at that stage could have gone either way. In hindsight it is easy to assume Elizabeth was confident in the outcome but she was shown in private having doubts
Never liked these movies The first one is OK, but the second is not much. The Tilbury speech scene is rubbish. If you are making an historical movie , especially with such a famous speech surely you should respect history
I think the all time benchmark for Elizabeth I, at least how I imagine her from what I have read about her (not sure how historically accurate it is) is Glenda Jackson in the miniseries Elizabeth R from the 1970's. Personally, I think Cate Blanchett was at least take some notes from her (particularly the deep voice she uses).
I once wrote an informal and personal 7500 word essay about the inaccuracies of the first film. Edit: That's the wrong Thomas Howard image, the shown image was his grandfather who died in 1554. Their major was mistake was having Richard Attenborough play William Cecil rather than someone more suited to Attenborough's age, the Marquess of Winchester. There's also something so cinematic and ambient from Elizabeth's speech its giving me a feeling of those films that has a large amount of characters casting top-tier actors at the time.
I hold out hope for one last ELIZABETH movie with Cate Blanchette - covering the relationship with Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, one of Elizabeth's later favorites who attempted a coup to overthrow her, with Elizabeth eventually having to put him to death. So much material for potential drama with the death of William Cecil, the rise of his son Robert Cecil and Robert's own conflicts with the Earl of Essex, creating a three way struggle for power. Also, the multiple deaths of the old guard (Cecil, Walsingham, Hatton, Dudley, etc) that signal the reign of Elizabeth drawing to an end could make for quite a poignant final film.
Lead white makeup does not coat the skin as is often portrayed and falsely interpreted from paintings. It produces a light, pretty, subtle and sophisticated glow.
Obviously most liberties are taken for dramatic effect to make a Hollywood blockbuster, but I have so many things that get to me in these movies as a historian. Robert Dudley mostly stayed in favour with Elizabeth until his death at in Oxfordshire in 1588. Though they had many heated arguments and he faced a few court banishments, especially after his marriage to Lettuce Knowleys, he was probably the most important person of her life. The dismissal of William Cecil in the first film is just plain dreadful. He was the central figure to her reign until his death in 1598. He was probably the most senior figure in England until his death and his son Robert's rise to power. England was NOT the most powerful and wealthy country upon her death, Spain still maintained precedence as the super power of the world at the time. In fact, at the end of Elizabeth's reign, England's economy was weakened by her handing monopolies to her favourites who abused the tax income. Her famous last speech to the English parliament apologised for this. Mary Queen of Scots would've had a French accent. Her execution as pointed out was also very grizzly. She was also a red head as per the inheritance of 'Britannic' monarchs, thanks to her grandmother Princess Margaret of England (sister of Henry VIII). She was actually personally very fond of the Duke of Anjou, and was said to be quite upset when it became apparent that her council and her country did not support the marriage. Though it is also believed she had her own reservations. One thing that most of these of Elizabeth miss depicting as well is her constant indecisiveness. She was infamous for trying to side step issues rather than dealing with them and it often frustrated her council. These films love to portray this strong, decisive woman and I get why, but it's what made her so interesting considering how successful her reign was in the long run.
this was great, I actually saw another documentary on the makeup Elizabeth used, and this makeup historian and makeup artist did some research and even went to a makeup lab to recreate this white led makeup. they applied it on a pig skin and they were amazed at what it did. the makeup wasn't as crazy white as people believed But did something almost like a color correct on the skin it took away the pinks and discoloration and left this very nice flawless look. which I believe is one of the reasons Elizabeth used a lot of it because after her small pox attack it probably did leave some discoloration and red marks on her face. and the makeup though dangerous color corrected her skin gave her a nice pale skin tone and probably diminished the appearance of the scarring. it was a very interesting video. it was a 2 parter and what shocked me was the host literally put a smidge onto her own skin on her hand (she removed it immediately after) but like what it did to the pig skin it took away the pinks and blushing in her hand and brought out more of her natural fair complexion
Of all the inaccuracies in Tudor films, I don’t think Elizabeth and Mary meeting is an issue itself because of the letters like said here. Like in the Mary Queen of Scotts film from 1970s starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson. The Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan one was terrible. But the symbolism here is powerful.
Where's Essex? Also, did they say that Walsingham served for her entire reign? He died in 1590. Oh, and Walter Raleigh's wife is the mad old girl who carried his head around in a bag for years after his execution.
58:34 Sorry Dr Paul, you are wrong. One can stand on the White Cliffs of Dover and see Calais on a clear day. A large battle that size with dozens of warships afire would clearly be seen from the Kent coast in England. You are correct that Tilbury is found in the mouth of the Thames. It has no cliffs and faces North. Add to the fact it is around 60 miles away from Calais as the crow flies over the county of Kent.
West Tilbury is on the north side of the Thames Estuary - in Essex, not Kent. So even further away from being able to see Calais. Good view of Gravesend though...
![[TH] 2024 PMGC League | Survival Stage วันที่ 1 | PUBG MOBILE Global Championship](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FVFT-PFwU80/mqdefault.jpg)
![กี่หมื่นฟ้า | Your Sky Series EP.1 [1/4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vLGjxFL6U_I/mqdefault.jpg)
I love a historian who can point out the historical inaccuracies but still appreciate the film and understand why film makers choose to change some things.
Why do they insist on giving Mary, Queen of Scots a thick Scottish accent when she was raised in the French court from the age of six to 19, famously by Cathrine de Medici.
I always think it too.
That annoys me with many interpretations
She was brought up at the French court from the age of around 6, and no doubt learned to speak French as though it were her first language. However, she also was always surrounded by similar age companions who came with her from Scotland. She was already Queen of Scotland when she was first sent to France, so her mother would have been careful to have Mary instructed in Gallic. Mary would presumably rule Scotland as well as be Queen consort of France. Mary was also intelligent and charismatic and knew how to present herself in whatever way she thought advantageous. It’s not out of the realm of possibility that she would choose to speak in a Scottish accent. Nevertheless more than likely the director just wanted to be sure the audience, many of whom wouldn’t know much about Mary’s background, knew that she was Mary Queen of Scots.
It always makes me cringe
According to contemporary sources, when Mary did start learning English, she very much did have a noticeable Scottish accent.
It appears that the actress who plays Mary, Queen of Scots here now plays Catherine de Medici in The Serpent Queen.
Samantha Morton she's also a main character in the Harlots tv show really great actress😍
@@bonnielass75 she matched Sean Penn's great performance in Sweet and Lowdown without saying a single word!
The first Mary Tudor is Kathy burke.
Well in this case she went from "historically very inaccurate film" to "historically monstrously inaccurate series".
SAMANTHA MORTON ❤❤❤
“The actress” 😢 I was offended lol she is and will always be FIRE
"That's a silly place to put a head on a spike"
*Man unsheathes blade, ready to disembowel the Spanish ambassador*
"Look at him, he's cute. Like a puppy!"
A thoroughly enjoyable and highly entertaining presentation by the charming Dr. Paul. Hope to see more in the future.
I agree. She was brilliant in a penguins books video a couple of years ago, and I hope she's a regular on here now. Search it if you haven't watched it 😊
I'm surprised that Joanne didn't mention my biggest problem with Elizabeth - that they made Robert Dudley a traitor. That was pure slander. He was absolutely loyal to her.
Also Norfolk wasn't a Catholic and Gardiner died years before Elizabeth's reign.
And her most loyal and trusted adviser was William Cecil, not Walsingham.
@@brontewcat well Cecil wasn't 100 years old at her coronation.
@ Yes - he was 37 and died well into his 70s in the 1590s.
@@brontewcat don't tell the movie that. Though we should be happy they at least got the hair color right for Elizabeth.
I would love to hear her review of the Elizabeth film with Helen Mirren and Jeremy Irons as Elizabeth and Dudley.
That movie was sooooo beautifully written!
She never comments on the cathedral like castles in both films. This bothered me a lot because Tudor places were rabbit-warrens of halls and rooms.
Mary Tudor is played by the fabulous Kathy Burke in Elizabeth. She's very well known in Britain but more as a comedian, comedic actress and writer. But, occasionally, she'll do these more heavy dramatic roles, and it's always fun to watch. She's also in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and Nil by Mouth, perhaps her greatest dramatic turn. She was awarded best actress at Cannes for her role in that film.
Kathy Burke as Linda in Gimme Gimme Gimme absolutely a scream. Keep hoping they'll bring it back. Hilarious.
She is great.
I suspect they cut the "heart and stomach of a king" line from Golden Age because they used it already (somewhat modified) in the first film, in which she says:
"I may be a woman, Sir William, but if I choose I have the heart of a man! I am my father's daughter. I am not afraid of anything."
I think that when they made the 1998 film, they had no clue they would be able to make a sequel. So they just did their best to fit in all of Elizabeth I's most iconic quotes and sentiments. But then I'd bet they felt a little weird about repeating that one line when they found themselves making Golden Age a full nine years later. Though I personally think they should have just included it, since it was heavily tweaked the first time anyway.
I am not that sure that is why. Elizabeth could use similar imagery and they could have still retained one of the most famous speeches she ever gave.
My own view is the writers and directors thought they could improve on history.
It must depend on which cut you've seen because I know she does do this speech, somewhat truncated but the depth was still there, during that scene on the horse.
@@hbic3 Right, she performs the Tilbury speech in the film, we're discussing why the most famous line from the historical account of the speech ("heart and stomach of a king") is not part of the speech she gives in the film.
Waited for the part where u eviscerate them for writing that Dudley was involved in an assassination plot.. HOW did that get a pass?! I can ignore making Cecil an ancient antagonist who abandoned her, but Dudley betraying her??
This review is wayyyyy too generous
Man, Joseph Finnes was a whole thirst trap back in the day.
Yes, he was but so was Johnathan Rhys Meyers who played King Henry the 8th in “The Tudors”
@@laikanbarthSoo true!!! ❤
Sht, still is!
"Back in the day" welp. Now I feel old 😂
😅 for real! 💦 ❤
Thank you for showing this. My mother (who has past away) loved everything on the Tudor Dynasty (she liked to call it that) after taking a trip to England with my Dad. Granted, it was in 83, and only a week but still, when she got home, she got books, and watched everything she could on the subject.
So thank you, this brings back memories in a good way... because she also got me hooked on the period as well 😊
It was the Tudor dynasty. At present, we have the Windsor dynasty, whereby a monarch comes from the same family head.
@@Cdr_Mansfield_CummingDidn’t the Tudor line died out with Elizabeth?
I'm Soo sorry about your mum, my condolences 💔
@@laikanbarth sort of. The line continued just not under the Tudor name. It became the Stuarts. James I was the great grandson of Margaret Tudor.
PLEASE do the Helen Mirren two parter mini series from HBO where she plays an older Elizabeth and Jeremy Irons plays Robert Dudley
*Cate* Blanchett is perfection in this.
Love a deep dive: thank you!
Was thinking recently how lacking in interior decoration the castles in many movies are. So nice to hear your educated take.
I love the usage of Mozart's Requiem in the hair cutting scene. It didn't get written for another 200 years. 😂
Eh? It's not diagetic - it's part of the movie's score.
@@skepticalbadger yes I know. It's just something I noticed since it is one of my favourite pieces of music. It's always bothered me for some reason lol not saying it was a bad choice, just saying it stands out to me every time I watch it. 🤷🏻♀️
This might be the dullest criticism of all
🤪
@BwInNewJersey well good thing it wasn't a criticism then 🤷🏻♀️
The actress who played the best depiction of Elizabeth I, was Glenda Jackson. Those outside the UK, may not know her, but her depiction in the 1970’s is seen as the best ever.
Wonderful depiction. We were glued to that version in the 70’s on PBS! ❤
Elizabeth R was very popular in the US. Glenda Jackson won two Emmy awards for her work in that series, and well deserved, she is still my favorite film Elizabeth.
Cate Blanchett also did an amazing job. But no-one will ever outdue Glenda
Also one of the rare Labour MPs who was actually left wing.
Her and Vanessa Redgrave are both an absolute credit to Greenwich and Blackheath. Great politics, both of them.
Ironically actresses who have each played Elizabeth and Mary Queen of Scots respectively.
I love these kinds of movies even though some are loosely based on the real history. I’m such a history buff. It is so interesting to have an actual historian talking about what was right or wrong historically in the one of my favourite movies. I loved the first one the best.
Cate Blanchett is Elizabeth I!! she is incredible!!!!
She’s OK. Should have figured out the brown contacts, though. She would have appeared more regal, intense and formidable. Blanchett seems too vulnerable.
I watched Elizabeth 1 when it was released in cinemas and still like to occasionally watch both movies. Guilty pleasure😊
It’s an absolutely amazing movie
YES! The icon Joanne Paule is back. Love her.
One of my favorite Historians for the Tudor histories!
Great presentation. Thank you.
And how great is Cate Blanchett! One of the great talents of our (Cate and I being about the same age) generation.
The editing for this video is so good! Shoutout to the editor.
I’m no historian, but I always thought the 1970s miniseries, “Elizabeth R” was more accurate historically. It would be great to have a historian talk about the accuracy and inaccuracies of that particular production. I thought it was incredibly good.
In it, I especially liked Michael Williams portrayal of François, Duke of Anjou. And I like the fact that they let Elizabeth (Glenda Jackson) look middle-aged which she was when she encountered him and considered him for marriage.
Yes! Loving the long form reaction!
Every Elizabethan historian watching Elizabeth "why are there stone walls everywhere".
Dudley is missing on the second movie because for some reason they made him one of the conspirators in the first movie and it ends with her letting him alive as a reminder, which I get it for dramatic reasons but historically is the biggest buchery.
@@LeBlonQ I have to question if she even watched the movie, to miss out on this heresy of a narrative lol
It's such a brutally cold ending to the first film though.
She basically turns into a walking icon/deity and sheds her humanity and personal affections.
Wish we could see the movies in whole with Joanne's commentary, she's brilliant
Man Galadriel gets around. I think she wore a big headress and threw swords in another little franchise.
Clive Owen as Raleigh is perfect casting. 🥰
I think that was the wrong Thomas Howard portrait painting that came up there, that was the 3rd Duke of Norfolk, the one who Ecclestone is playing is the 4th Duke of Norfolk of the same name. The 3rd died in his early 80's whereas the 4th was the one who was executed during Elizabeth's reign.
Absolutely loved this deep dive! Dr. Joanne’s commentary really highlights the historical accuracy (and inaccuracies) with such fun insights. Fascinating to see what the movies got right and where they took creative liberties!
As an absolute Tudor dynasty junkie (read, seen anything I can get my hands on...and probably why I love your channel and others), loved that you tackled these two awesome movies. I've watched both countless times and despite the minor inaccuracies, I still love watching them over and over again. I never tire of Cate in the role.
Loved your review and insight from a historical point of view. However, funny how different scenes can be interpreted many different ways. Case in point, when Mary is to be executed and she looks up at the throne, you stated it was for effect that they had never met in person and that's why the throne was empty. I took it in a totally different way. The way Mary looks up and there's a slight smile. Like a wish finally granted. To me, this was a moment of happiness for Mary. Something she sought for decades, probably most of her life and probably never seen before, was finally within reach. The throne that should have been hers. Something almost tangibly in her grasp...even for one final fleeting moment. She smiles softy at what was almost won.
You would probably agree with me, that the throne, something that's so revered and considered the ultimate symbol of a sovereign's power and authority would not have been placed so close. Another reason that made me think this was done for cinematic effect to show a final slight on behalf of Elizabeth to Mary. Putting something so close to her, an empty throne, so so close, that Mary will never have. Anyhoo, my two bits.
Keep up the great work. Love every episode.
I saw it that way too! I hadn’t realised the bit about Elizabeth being absent represented by the empty throne but present in her life as a sister Queen. It makes sense but I always saw that final look at the throne as a sort of wistful glance at a thwarted ambition.
She could have been smiling knowing at that stage it would be her son who inherits both thrones and in an direct way she had won
Every Kate Blanchett film is a masterpiece of the acting craft..
Wouldnt mary queen of scots sound French?
Oui
Best ever adaptation was Elizabeth R starring Glena Jackson.
I'm surprised to see such a positive review by a Tudor historian. Both films have a lot of problems and I'm not sure why we are being so gentle about it here. Just to name one: While it was great to not have Mary & Elisabeth meeting, it's a nonsense presentation to have her speaking English with a Scottish accent. If she had an accent after all, it would have been French, since she grew up at the French Court and spend many years there. She even was the actual Queen of France (vs. the English only claiming to be)
I literally just finished watching History Buffs videos on the Elizabeth movies, they certainly did not spare their words. If you want a more scathing critisism, I recommend checking those out, they are good and hilarious.
Because it is meant to be entertaining and not a documentary. You have to differentiate here.
@@Cu5T05 No excuse for so many historical inaccuracies in a historical film.
Couldn’t agree more, this movie was a mess, historically speaking. They had Dudley in an assassination plot ffs!
@@Cu5T05the literal point of this video is a historical analysis… or it was supposed to be lol
Loved this so much! Thanks for such a deep examination of these films, Dr. Paul!
11:53: Christopher Eccleston is actually playing the Duke of Norfolk (EDIT: thanks to those who noted that Norfolk's give name was Howard)
34:33: Ugh, the flower headdress. No, you're not missing anything. They make such weird choices The Golden Age with the costuming. In addition to the giant flower in this scene, there's also an enormous bow on the front of a blue gown and what I like to call the "Taco Shell" headdress in the scene with John Dee.
43:00: I love your appropriate frustration with the way Robert is dealt with. It's so frustrating that the ridiculous betrayal story story they gave him in Movie 1 meant he couldn't be in Movie 2 (He's actually in the novelization, and they have some lovely scenes). It's especially annoying considering there's so much drama in the real story; both in regard to how unpopular Robert was and the strange and suspicious death of his wife, which ignited rumors that Elizabeth and Dudley had something to do with it. I don't know why film adaptations shy away from that story when it feels too dramatic to be true.
I was so disgusted with the treatment of Robert in "Elizabeth," that I refused to watch the sequel.
I also hated the fact the first film put Elizabeth in "white makeup" when she was still a young woman. Ugh!
The Duke of Norfolk's family name WAS Howard...
@@darcypenn6702beat me to it lol
@@SKILLIUSCAESAR😂
@@darcypenn6702 Ahhhh, thanks! That makes more sense!
Interesting thought that occurred during the coronation scene: that was the last coronation of the King/Queen of England that wasn't also K/Q of Scotland, as James I/VI was her successor
Would also like to note that Elizabeth never wore that thick white clown makeup. Opaque makeup like that simply didn't exist at the time. Lead makeup added a sheer white pearlescent cast to skin that was quite beautiful. That's why people wore it even knowing how dangerous it was. I'm sure if it wasn't illegal, some people would probably still wear it now.
She is very insistent in wanting me to have a crush on Robert Dudley too
Not cool to objectify anyone, male or female. It’s annoying as are all the um and uh - she’s got to work on the speech tics and her fan girling
My personal favourite Elizabeth I portrayal is Anne Marie Duff, even though I do have love for Glenda Jackson, Helen Mirren and Cate Blanchett too, but I could watch The Virgin Queen miniseries over and over again and never get bored of it. She portrays Elizabeth's journey from young princess to aged queen beautifully, also her version of the Tilbury speech was amazing.
I'm looking forward to watching this! Your house of Dudley book was very well written
I'm banned from watching Tudor stuff on TV with anyone else as I can't keep my mouth shut when it comes to unrealistic scenes or actors
I have a master's in history and hopefully a PHD one day too
Here goes .......I'm going to watch your up load now
Mmmm Clive Owen is the beautiful one... : ) But I love how Cate says "a p-huddle!" I take on that attitude a lot.
I have always enjoyed the 1995 BBC production of The Virgin Queen. One of my favorites.
Yes, the 2005 mini-series was brilliant (and subsequently overlooked in favour of later productions). Anne-Marie Duff was an excellent Elizabeth, and I thought that the insular machinations of court were very well represented. Ian Hart as William Cecil was also a great choice.
It wasn't called traitors gate at the time, it was called the water gate.
Omg I could watch this kind of content all day .. thank you for doing this
You can see calais from certain high points in kent.
As a kid, seeing this particular movie set me on a Tudor reading road that lead to a British History reading road that continues all these decades later
As a kid, seeing Amadeus sent me on a similar lifelong…uh…journey?
I'm so glad you bought up the eyes!!! The eyes are essentially the bolyn and Elizabeths charm. That was one of issues with the film
Good thoughts.
However I think the meeting between Mary and Elizabeth in the first scene was quite well set even if not accurate.
It represented Mary’s “confinement” and loneliness without obviously stating her pregnancy troubles blatantly. Nuanced well
Actually think Kathy Burke is a great if unconventional bit of casting.
PLEASE do a break down of the Helen Mirren 'Elizabeth I' Limited Series from 2005.
Timeline did a documentary on Elizabeth and the actor that played her was amazing
I'd like to hear a neurologist's or doctor's analysis of what beheading would be like. She was most certainly praying during those fifteen minutes? Lifted from Wikipedia:
"Physiology of death by decapitation-
Unconsciousness occurs within seconds without circulating oxygenated blood (brain ischemia). Cell death and irreversible brain damage occurs after 3-6 minutes with no oxygen, due to excitotoxicity."
So according to that, any lip movement after 6 minutes was reflexive twitching.
I guarantee you can find that, but it’ll be interesting to see what Google results appear alongside your search
@@heatherhaven1268 Yeah, whenever you look up something like that you get suicide prevention hotlines!
The only people that can tell us for sure are dead
@@shannon890 I imagine the shock would be too much to process, and therefore no pain would be felt, or brief pain of the skin only. Just imagining how the pain system shuts down in childbirth (been there), maybe beheading is similar.
I like the content warning at the start. Some people indeed find historical inaccurary distressing.
Oh my days the motion of Hermes’ flying Ody into the sky was so good op 😫🙏💕
I'm so excited about watching this later
Me too. Have to watch this again.
Love Dr. Paul!! Thank you for this video
I had the privilege to see Christopher Eccleston playing Macbeth at the Barbican. Brilliant performance!
You can really tell they had not planned to do a sequel of Elizabeth since there are a major actors missing it’s pretty clear
Hey it may not be perfect but holy CRAP did Kate Blanchett chew the scenery!
Scenery-chewing is not supposed to be a compliment...
@@skepticalbadger It's the type of sh*t-kicking performance that made Richard Harris, Peter O'Toole, Oliver Reed and Richard Burton legendary and that is meant as a compliment.
I’m surprised you didn’t talk about how Dudley participates in the plot against Elizabeth in the first movie!
This was bloody interesting..thank you so much for your insights.
This was great! I’d like to hear what she thinks of the Elizabeth R series in the 70’s with Glenda Jackson. Plenty more Dudley in that version! I have zero notes on that one. It was brilliant, a lot less Hollywood but a lot closer to the chronology of their real lives. Well, as much as my own knowledge of the period goes anyway!
The most accurate depiction of Queen Elizabeth I put on screen is without a doubt, the 2005 Tom Hooper miniseries, "Elizabeth I", with Helen Mirren playing Queen Elizabeth I. The 1971 TV series, "Elizabeth R.", starring Glenda Jackson, is a close second.
The Kate Blanchett movies don't even close.
But you can't deny the presence and vibe of the Kate Blanchett versions
Thanks for the referrals
Rot. Never saw Jackson on a horse.
Well, two British series compared to US films. The British version should be a lot more accurate. Series also have more time to cover events.
No, Glenda Jackson played the role the best. Those outside the UK may not know her. She played her as close to records.
I was impressed with Anita Dobson who played QE1 around the time of the Armada and how scared she was as things were so uncertain and at that stage could have gone either way. In hindsight it is easy to assume Elizabeth was confident in the outcome but she was shown in private having doubts
Absolutely loved this video. I love learning about the Tudor period. ❤
The 'heart of a king' was actually used in the first film which is why I suspect they didn't use in the second
Love this woman, and this video series in general. Instant click
Never liked these movies
The first one is OK, but the second is not much. The Tilbury speech scene is rubbish. If you are making an historical movie , especially with such a famous speech surely you should respect history
Oh. It just occurred to me that the same actress who portrays Catherine de Medici, also played Mary of Scots in the film ❤ How fun.
Mary grew up in France so never had a Scottish accent.
You mean Mary Queen of Scots, right?
@@martinputt6421 hehehe yes, I was cooking while watching that 😅 I was probably typing with my pinky.
@@peterpaul9644 We've all done it at one time or another 😆
By far the best and possibly most accurate portrayal of Elizabeth was from the film Anonymous where the Queen was played by Vanessa Redgrave.
Dr Who should have been at the coronation of Charles III.
This is weird, I just randomly decided to watch the Elizabeth (1998) movie yesterday and now this is in my feed.
35:22 if this was the Tudors version of bumble Honey, I’m here for it
😂😂
Amazing video :)) What a great knowledge
I think the all time benchmark for Elizabeth I, at least how I imagine her from what I have read about her (not sure how historically accurate it is) is Glenda Jackson in the miniseries Elizabeth R from the 1970's. Personally, I think Cate Blanchett was at least take some notes from her (particularly the deep voice she uses).
I once wrote an informal and personal 7500 word essay about the inaccuracies of the first film. Edit: That's the wrong Thomas Howard image, the shown image was his grandfather who died in 1554. Their major was mistake was having Richard Attenborough play William Cecil rather than someone more suited to Attenborough's age, the Marquess of Winchester. There's also something so cinematic and ambient from Elizabeth's speech its giving me a feeling of those films that has a large amount of characters casting top-tier actors at the time.
I also thought it odd that they didn't use the "let tyrants fear" line from the Tilbury speech! Love this video.
I hold out hope for one last ELIZABETH movie with Cate Blanchette - covering the relationship with Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, one of Elizabeth's later favorites who attempted a coup to overthrow her, with Elizabeth eventually having to put him to death. So much material for potential drama with the death of William Cecil, the rise of his son Robert Cecil and Robert's own conflicts with the Earl of Essex, creating a three way struggle for power. Also, the multiple deaths of the old guard (Cecil, Walsingham, Hatton, Dudley, etc) that signal the reign of Elizabeth drawing to an end could make for quite a poignant final film.
Great, now please do Blackadder.
Lead white makeup does not coat the skin as is often portrayed and falsely interpreted from
paintings. It produces a light, pretty, subtle and sophisticated glow.
Obviously most liberties are taken for dramatic effect to make a Hollywood blockbuster, but I have so many things that get to me in these movies as a historian.
Robert Dudley mostly stayed in favour with Elizabeth until his death at in Oxfordshire in 1588. Though they had many heated arguments and he faced a few court banishments, especially after his marriage to Lettuce Knowleys, he was probably the most important person of her life.
The dismissal of William Cecil in the first film is just plain dreadful. He was the central figure to her reign until his death in 1598. He was probably the most senior figure in England until his death and his son Robert's rise to power.
England was NOT the most powerful and wealthy country upon her death, Spain still maintained precedence as the super power of the world at the time. In fact, at the end of Elizabeth's reign, England's economy was weakened by her handing monopolies to her favourites who abused the tax income. Her famous last speech to the English parliament apologised for this.
Mary Queen of Scots would've had a French accent. Her execution as pointed out was also very grizzly. She was also a red head as per the inheritance of 'Britannic' monarchs, thanks to her grandmother Princess Margaret of England (sister of Henry VIII).
She was actually personally very fond of the Duke of Anjou, and was said to be quite upset when it became apparent that her council and her country did not support the marriage. Though it is also believed she had her own reservations.
One thing that most of these of Elizabeth miss depicting as well is her constant indecisiveness. She was infamous for trying to side step issues rather than dealing with them and it often frustrated her council. These films love to portray this strong, decisive woman and I get why, but it's what made her so interesting considering how successful her reign was in the long run.
Would like to point out that West Tilbury is in Essex, NOT Kent.
this was great, I actually saw another documentary on the makeup Elizabeth used, and this makeup historian and makeup artist did some research and even went to a makeup lab to recreate this white led makeup. they applied it on a pig skin and they were amazed at what it did. the makeup wasn't as crazy white as people believed But did something almost like a color correct on the skin it took away the pinks and discoloration and left this very nice flawless look. which I believe is one of the reasons Elizabeth used a lot of it because after her small pox attack it probably did leave some discoloration and red marks on her face. and the makeup though dangerous color corrected her skin gave her a nice pale skin tone and probably diminished the appearance of the scarring. it was a very interesting video. it was a 2 parter and what shocked me was the host literally put a smidge onto her own skin on her hand (she removed it immediately after) but like what it did to the pig skin it took away the pinks and blushing in her hand and brought out more of her natural fair complexion
Of all the inaccuracies in Tudor films, I don’t think Elizabeth and Mary meeting is an issue itself because of the letters like said here. Like in the Mary Queen of Scotts film from 1970s starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson. The Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan one was terrible. But the symbolism here is powerful.
And of course the iconic Glenda Jackson, when I was growing up she WAS QE1
La Volta is described in Orchesographie, by Arbeau. Having danced both, neither this nor the galliard, is accurate in this film..
Where's Essex? Also, did they say that Walsingham served for her entire reign? He died in 1590. Oh, and Walter Raleigh's wife is the mad old girl who carried his head around in a bag for years after his execution.
Great video! Would love to see her do a review of the Helen Mirren's portrayal of the same story.
Kathy Burke was absolutely incredible as Mary I
Helen Mirren gets to do the 'body of a weak and feeble woman' line in Elizabeth 1. Also a great film. 😉
Fantastic video
58:34 Sorry Dr Paul, you are wrong. One can stand on the White Cliffs of Dover and see Calais on a clear day. A large battle that size with dozens of warships afire would clearly be seen from the Kent coast in England. You are correct that Tilbury is found in the mouth of the Thames. It has no cliffs and faces North. Add to the fact it is around 60 miles away from Calais as the crow flies over the county of Kent.
thx for pointing that out. I have had the same though when she said that.
amazing video!!!
Great content, thank you.
West Tilbury is on the north side of the Thames Estuary - in Essex, not Kent. So even further away from being able to see Calais. Good view of Gravesend though...
Cate Blanchett and all the other actors are wonderful, but I can’t stand these movies - terribly inaccurate regarding the history and relationships
I would've loved to see what she thought of the assassin priest.