Stephanie criticized some of the very things that make this movie seem worthwhile. I hold it to the director's credit that he doesn't go all out. That is one of the biggest problems with this kind of production. If I wanted Cecile B. Demille, I would look at Turner Classics. Everything that she seemed to criticize seems appropriate either in terms of historical characterization and cinematography. Stephanie, go watch Copolla's absurdity about Marie Antoinette instead. Leave the Elizabethans to English restraint for once, because that is as it should be.

Elizabeth faced all manner of challenges during this period. Her clever manipulation of international politics through remaining unmarried also led to considerable unrest at home. Many feared that her death would result in civil war since the line of succession was not especially clear, and the best claimant was the Catholic Mary Queen of Scots, a woman not well loved in Scotland, and nearly despised by the populous of England. She faced several plots to remove her from the throne. Her alliance with France was under stress due to the violent repression of the Huguenots by the Catholic crown. And to top all of that, there was the largest and most impressive armada ever created being sent by Europe's greatest superpower to conquer the country and covert it, by the sword if necessary, to Catholicism. So onto that backdrop, Stephanie Zachareck would have liked to have seen a "a lavish, silly entertainment." Sure. After that, they'll make that musical comedy that takes place amidst the Battle of Gettysburg, and ends with Lincoln on roller skates, singing the Gettysburg Address to the tune of "Dancing Queen."

I just don't know how anyone can partially judge a picture on historical accuracy, and particularly what one's "friends" may think - experts, though, I sure they are!

Shakespeare wrote quite a few plays that had strong historical backgrounds, none of which pretended to be be accurate retellings of history. He was telling a story, a familiar one to his audience, and what critics study was what his story was about; how he wrote it, the beauty of his language; how his retelling contributed to our moral or human understanding; things like this. That is why we consider Shakespeare a great artist.

With Ms. Zacharek, we get complaints about a curious lack of eyebrows and aspersions cast against the director's potency. Perhaps Mr. Kapur sees this historical period as dead, limp, or whatever; perhaps many things, none of which were delineated in this "review" - except the need for more "nutball pageantry"...

I despair (but I'll definitely see the film!).

I haven't seen the movie yet, so will simply say this:

I hate it when they get the history wrong, but I can live with it if it's basically accurate. And if they pull off the essential truth in a memorable way, good for them. I was hugely impressed by the trailer's shot of the Spanish Armada, a terrifying sight from the viewpoint of an Englishmen watching it from the south coast of England.

Of course, the truth is that, despite some harassing attacks by the English which helped things along, those galleons, unmaneuverable as they were, were doomed as soon as they turned into the English channel. They eventually had to let themselves be blown all the way through, and then they had to double back by going north of Scotland and meeting new disaster off Ireland, losing ships all the way to the elements. If the film lets some of that truth come in along with crediting the English, it will do. If the event is just a chorus of "Hail Britannia", that chapter of the movie fails.

Yah, Stephanie's review only makes me want to see the movie that much more. 'English restraint' is a good phrase for a movie about an English queen. And to expect Hollywood to be historically accurate over the much-convoluted politics of the English Renassiance AND still have an entertaining movie is unrealistic.

The trailer looks awesome and I loved the first Elizabeth so I am most definitely going to be there this weekend.

However, I plan on seeing it, as none of your criticisms seemed enough to deter me.

It's a novelty (for me) to see a movie about a woman, who isn't a victim or a Queen Bee in high school, model thin or really a guy in a fat suit. It's why I went to see "Gracie" despite that too getting mediocre reviews. Can you off the top of your head name 5 summer movies starring women (that weren't ensemble casts or animated)? It you can, I'm impressed.

You see, sometimes I get tired of the following movies, which are so popular, I don't see them going away any time soon.

1) Joe Doe is an irresponsible slob who lives with Mom and Dad. He meets a gorgeous woman with her act together. Because, of course, professional women with their act together are always looking for a mama's boy.

2) Uplifting sports movies! These are so cool. A ragtag team learns life lessons under a tough but gold-hearted coach. Mostly, they are a team of guys, with perhaps a token girl.

3) Action movies where the woman is only eye candy. But does she look sexy running in high heels or what?

4) War movies because women have never fought in a war.

5) School movies, in which the protagonist is usually a guy.

6) Indie movies, again, usually with a guy protagonist.

7) Animated or claymation style movies or penguin movies - about a group of plucky male animals with a token female saving the barnyard/forest/etc. from big bad developers.

8) Kid-centered movies - Usually a boy. Or a boy with a girl pal.

Again, if you think I'm totally wrong, please write in and corretc me. If there's a lot of current movies featuring strong, independent women out there, by all means, let me know so I can go watch.

Sorry, I haven't seen the movie, but I have to correct an error that seems to be establishing a foothold in the language:

populous = an adjective meaning "full of people"

populace = a collective noun for the inhabitants of a place

The Internet has a way of propagating incorrect usages to the point where they supplant the correct ones. While we're at it, can we agree to blame Microsoft Word Spellcheck for the sudden proliferation of things that are "defiantly" true, or beautiful, or [insert adjective here]?