Watch The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex For Free

Crappy film

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Copyright 11 November 1939 by Warner Brothers Pictures, Inc. New York opening at the Strand, 1 December 1939. U.S. release: 28 August 1939. Australian release: 4 January 1940. 9,574 feet. 12 reels. 106 minutes. (Available on an excellent Warner DVD). U.S. television title: Elizabeth the Queen.SYNOPSIS: Intrigue and romance at the court of Elizabeth I.NOTES: Nominated for five prestigious Hollywood awards: Color Cinematography (lost to Gone With The Wind); Art Direction (lost to Gone With The Wind); Sound Recording (lost to When Tomorrow Comes); Music Score (lost to Stagecoach); Special Effects (lost to The Rains Came).Maxwell Anderson's play opened on Broadway at the Guild Theater on 3 November 1930, running for 145 performances. A respectable run, certainly, but one that must have been more than a little disappointing to Anderson and his backers after the play's sensational opening night when it received the most thundering ovation in the entire history of the American theater.Unfortunately, accolades from critics and first-nighters are not always a guarantee of a play's appeal to a wider public. And the Great Depression did not help. Philip Moeller directed Alfred Lunt and Lynne Fontanne, who repeat their roles here in the opening scene of their only film together, The Guardsman (1931). COMMENT: A triumph. Forget the nagging critics and all the historical commentators who claim that Flynn was outclassed by Davis. He is in fact perfectly cast. True, there may have been the usual off-camera spats, and Davis certainly did hanker for Laurence Olivier as her co-star; but on screen the two players strike fire.Davis rivets the attention with her make-up and powerful delivery, but Flynn handles himself not only with his usual dash and panache, but he fills in so many character details of the ambivalent Essex as to bring the character to vibrant life. It is the support players who have less luck with their roles. Aside from Donald Crisp who makes the most of some splendid opportunities as Master Bacon, the other players have at most only two scenes each in which to make any sort of impression. Of course Alan Hale comes across strongly in just one scene, but Vincent Price never really gets going, and people like James Stephenson and Leo G. Carroll mill around constantly in the background and really get no innings at all. Of course it would be hard to put down the constantly purring Henry Daniell, while James Stephenson is courteously two-faced to a nice degree, but Olivia de Havilland, after making merry with a taunting song, muffs her second scene in which she tries to explain why she intercepted the queen's letters. Nanette Fabray, however, has an unforgettable moment when she pleads with Elizabeth to recall her knight from Ireland.Curtiz has a grand time, tracking his camera through the richly appointed sets and throwing characteristic silhouettes on the massive walls. The scenes of action and pageantry are further reinforced by Korngold's marvelously heraldic score. Technicolor captures the vivid hues of the period costumes as perfectly as the overpoweringly simple grandeur of the palace and tower architecture. An enthralling story, superlatively told.

"The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex" is one of the best movies that Michael Curtiz ever directed along with "Casablanca" (1942), "The Adventures of Robin Hood" (1938),"Angels with Dirty Faces (1938),and "Yankee Doodle Dandy" (1942) as well as being one of the best historical epics that I have seen in a long time. The movie tells the tale of the at best rocky relationship of Queen Elizabeth I and Earl of Essex. The movie stars Bette Davis as Queen Elizabeth in one the best performances of her career and Errol Flynn in his best work in "The Adventures of Robin Hood" in the previous year. The movie also has a brilliant supporting cast such as Vincent Price, Olivia de Havilland, and Donald Crisp. Curtiz really knew how to direct an effective period film as well as a good action picture even though this isn't the best movie he ever directed but it sure is one of them. Also the acting, set design, and the costumes are totally true to the period. One of the most effective scenes of the movie is when the Queen bans Essex from ever coming to her kingdom for his brash attitude, and within minutes ends up regretting her decision, and allows him to come back once Lady Penelope Gray (Olivia de Havilland) convinces her to let him come back to the kingdom. Curtiz has been known to clash with his actors for his movies to the point where he threatened to fire Errol Flynn because of his alcohol problems even though his directing skills were very good and he chose very good material to make into a motion picture. This is one of 1939's best films

This 1939 movie is loosely based on the story of Elizabeth and her "favourite", Robert Devereaux, the 3rd Earl of Essex. To sum up the plot in a few words (without giving away the ending): they love each other intensely, but their relationship is fraught with the complexities of their personalities and positions. Elizabeth is very much a queen, Essex a headstrong military man eyeing the throne.The actual historical events have been simplified and changed, so if you feel cheated by historical movies that stray from the facts, you might as well skip this one.I am not a fan of old movies. I have little interest in old-time stars like Bette Davis and Errol Flynn. But this was an eye-opener for me. Davis's acting and Flynn's magnetism leapt out at me, even though I was watching their performances 75 years after the fact.Bette Davis was superb. In this film she WAS Elizabeth, in almost every sense of the word. Her performance was so magnificent on so many levels, I can't even begin to go into it.And Errol Flynn. Well, the main thing about Errol Flynn in this movie is that he was really physically attractive. This movie helped me to understand the star appeal of Errol Flynn two generations ago. However, Flynn's acting here was not as strong as Davis's. He didn't really convey the overweening pride that the script called for.The sets and costumes are impressive. There is a lot of Elizabethan pageantry in the movie.This is a queen who always has on her magnificent formal clothing, jewelry and make-up. All the time, even when she's relaxing with her ladies-in-waiting in the evening or pitching woo to Essex. In this movie Elizabeth never lets her hair down. Literally. Was this a child-like movie portrayal of a queen? Or was it historically accurate? It's hard to say, but it felt unrealistic to me. I suppose you could see it as a metaphor for a woman who identified completely with her role as queen.It was a little surreal to see this ageing iconic queen (almost kabuki-like in appearance) in a passionate embrace with a young vibrant male god. In 2012 we recognise them immediately as cougar and boy toy. How shocking it must have been in 1939 to see Essex slapping the Shakespearean Elizabeth on the ass and talking to her with the rude familiarity of an Australian lover. This was 1939, however. There was only so much you could show. In this movie Elizabeth and Essex have a lot to say to each other. In those days movie fans had to be satisfied with repeated professions of love rather than actual depictions of it. Just as they had to be satisfied with the symbolic imagery of the Nine Years' War rather than anything realistic.What Elizabeth sees in Essex is plain to see. But what could Essex possibly see in Elizabeth behind all that make-up and imperial hauteur? Of course her age and make-up didn't matter to him: he was in love with her. But did he love her for her herself or for her throne? This was Elizabeth's dilemma. Essex truly loved her, but he was also ambitious. He loved her as his queen, his ageing kabuki queen. And he was a man, so he could do better on the throne than she.All Elizabeth had to do to land this stud was to give up her pride and offer him her kingdom. All Essex had to do to wed his queen was to give up his pride and be content with being her consort. Could they make it work? Who would have expected such an intriguing psychological angle in a movie from 1939. This hooked me into caring what happened. In particular, their anguish and their struggle with this predicament were realistic and palpable (in a 1939 sort of way).

Bette Davis's Elizabeth is the best thing about this costume drama. Errol Flynn is a lightweight in comparison, but then again the queen was 30-plus years his senior. Davis embodies the realist queen in all her fierce intelligence and hair-trigger perception.She beautifully invokes the poignancy of a woman fiercely loyal to her people to the point of having to sacrifice the only man she ever loved. Yet the movie never really makes clear what she saw in him, other than a pretty face. Flynn seemed like a baby on the Irish battlefield and though I indeed found him handsome -- does anyone else see a resemblance to Kevin Kline? -- I didn't find him very interesting. However, it's clear that Elizabeth died spiritually when he did. What an amazing final scene!One minor aside: I'd hoped the movie would find a way to show at least a snippet of a play by the man referred to as "Master Shakespeare," but it never happened. (Though the drama herein would certainly have interested the Bard.) This movie leaves me curious to see the more modern version with Cate Blanchette...