Review of Queens

Queens (2016–2017)
6/10
Pandering to popular tastes
23 July 2018
I love historical dramas but, alias, this was a disappointment. I give it '6' stars because the high-level historical events were pretty accurate, otherwise it would have got maybe '4'. However when you get down to the details things got banal, bordering on the inane. Lots of sexs panders to popular tastes, no doubt, but portraying a Elizabeth I as a promiscuous slut totally ignores the historical facts. Though she might have hd one liason, that with Robert Dudley, there is no proof or even evidence of any others. The portrayal of Mary Stuart isn't much better, e.g. a love affair with the Earl of Boswell is possible but it's just as likely he raped her. The costumes are gorgeous but boar only a vague likeness to historic reality -- necklines just didn't plunge that far. Likewise the many for the building interiors were unlike real Elizabethan architecture. Acting and directing were mediocre at best. The best performance I'd say was from Rebecca Scott as Elizabeth I; Olivia Chenery as Mary Stuart is 2nd rate. Finally in my personal opinion Elizabeth might actually have been a virgin, bit Mary certainly was not a martyr, she was the victim of her own ineptitude as a ruler.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed