SummaryMary Queen of Scots explores the turbulent life of the charismatic Mary Stuart. Queen of France at 16 and widowed at 18, Mary defies pressure to remarry. Instead, she returns to her native Scotland to reclaim her rightful throne. But Scotland and England fall under the rule of the compelling Elizabeth 1. Each young Queen beholds her “s...
SummaryMary Queen of Scots explores the turbulent life of the charismatic Mary Stuart. Queen of France at 16 and widowed at 18, Mary defies pressure to remarry. Instead, she returns to her native Scotland to reclaim her rightful throne. But Scotland and England fall under the rule of the compelling Elizabeth 1. Each young Queen beholds her “s...
Rourke does enough to both honor and reshape the hallowed mold to keep things interesting. Working with a script from Beau Willimon—the House of Cards creator whose smart streak is sometimes undone by hammier impulses—she steers an interesting course through cliché, both upending and satisfying the royals fan’s hunger for repetition, for familiar tropes staged anew.
Well done. Mary is the star of the movie, for sure. The setting and appearance seemed spot on. The acting was excellent. However, I could not totally follow the story, nor always assess who were supporting Mary and who were not. I did get the gist, but would have enjoyed it more with either some narrative, written or spoken.
Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie are both superb in muted performances and, while the film’s palace intrigue gets a bit dense, the story never loses sight of its deep compassion for these characters and their shared plight of being held hostage by conniving, belittling, power-hungry men determined to usurp their authority.
You find yourself focusing on the details of Alexandra Byrne’s flowing costumes, or on the wince-inducing meticulousness of Robbie’s post-pox makeup, rather than caught up in the story. Except when Ronan’s face catches the light; there, Mary Queen of Scots finds its fire.
Perhaps you can accuse all historical fiction of presentism, the sin of applying contemporary values to historical events. Why does the past interest us if not for the comparisons it provides with the present? But with the example of "The Favourite’s" wittily anachronistic romp through the 18th-century court of Queen Anne so fresh at hand, it is hard not to judge the earnest Mary Queen of Scots for its ignorance of the problem.
This movie is little more than a vibrant-looking tableau, a two-dimensional take on an intricate piece of history. It’s a tale that’s been told better before, and Willimon’s modern updates are less enlightened than they initially seem.
The performances of the two lead actresses (Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan) were great, and the rest of the cast (full of well-known British actors) was strong also. That said, I think you have to be interested in history to really enjoy this film. I am, so this was no problem for me and my family. However, this film was more about history than about human beings, although I don’t think that was the fault of the actors, but of the director. And although I was interested and never bored, the film seemed longer than two hours.
As the clouds roll onto the waving and knotting hills of Scotland, a haze of insecurities, betrayal and bloodshed awaits two powerful Queens; two women whose blood lines and loyalties are blurred by the manipulative and convoluted men in their lives. Yet although history always tells us that men have been at the forefront of politics and royalty, Mary Queen of Scots is a highly dramatized account of the 16th Century events surrounding Queen Mary (Saoirse Ronan) and Queen Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie), two of the most powerful and influential women, not only of their time, but of all time. As cousins, the two share a very respectful and adorning attitude and relationship, although never meeting according to the pages of history books, Mary Queen of Scots amps us drama for a fateful face-to-face between the two. Young Mary, widowed and eighteen by the time she claims her position as Queen in Scotland, is free-spirited, understanding and audacious. Embracing the many facets of a colourful and diverse world, including ****, Mary’s beliefs and perspectives may be a little too liberal in a 16th Century world, yet we are manipulated into believing anything, especially when Ronan is playing the title role. On the other end, Queen Elizabeth I is a reserved, alienated and scorn barren woman whose fate was almost succumbed to smallpox. Embarrassed and hidden underneath the many layers of white make up to hide her smallpox scars, Elizabeth is riddled with sadness and tragedy, who confidence is hidden underneath elaborate and grandiose dresses that retracts men, even the tenderness and love of a man in desperate search of her love, Robert Dudley (Joe Alwyn). While both actresses are faces of beauty in Hollywood, Ronan’s Mary is the only Queen noticed for her divine and unpaired magnificence. Mary Queen of Scots is just another role to add to Robbie’s recent fascination of diving into roles of women lacking much physical, emotional or mental beauty, despite the actress’ undoubted charm and elegance. Robbie’s interpretation of Elizabeth I is just one more notch under Robbie’s belt solidifying her devotion and passion to her craft.
While it isn’t much of a spoiler to know that Mary’s fate is found on the chopping block in 1587, the film begins with her demise, focusing on just how she got their. The film, directed by Josie Rourke and written by Beau Willimon based on a book by John Guy, historians may very well disregard Mary Queen of Scots because it becomes clear that the film is less fascinated with shedding historical and real light on the life of these two reigning women, and play more like a dramatic narrative, very similar to the style and narrative flow of The Other Boleyn Girl a decade prior. While that film features two of Hollywood’s most promising young actresses then, Mary Queen of Scots showcases two of the strongest young female actors of today.
Both Robbie and Ronan are magnificent in their respective royal roles. Overshadowing all of their male counterparts, even with the likes of David Tennant, Jack Lowden and Guy Pearce gracing the screen, Ronan and Robbie are acting forces, elevating the material of the screen, regardless of how potent it every really becomes. Mary Queen of Scots is a masterclass of acting for two very deserving actresses today.
Both actresses, nominated for Academy Awards the year prior, Ronan for Lady Bird and Robbie for I, Tonya, are in a class of their own, Ronan may reign supreme however between the two budding actresses, after all, the film is called Queen of Scots. Ronan carries the brunt of the film’s heavy story material, constantly dealing with betrayals, death and obscenities beyond her control, despite her position of Queen. Ronan’s delicate portrait of a scourged historical figure is riveting.
Sadly, as the film’s story unfolds and the ruse of each woman’s power is displayed in glorious fashion, the film is still bounded by the approval of men, fertility and virginity. Lines like “How did it come to this? Wise men servicing the whims of women”, or “Worse than a plague is a woman with a crown”, the content of the film is wholly vexed by the presence of men. While the royal women have a clear path to attain their goals, the men provide the women and the film with the majority of the narrative’s twists, turns and rivalries to unfold. Emotions, notions of privilege and family drama are the driving forcing for Mary Queen of Scots, proving the line in the film “the matters of the heart dictate the outcomes of countries” unequivocally.
United and strong, Mary Queen of Scots gives audiences a ponder-some conclusion and climax, basically setting up a narrative film for a fictitious meeting between the two Queens. Decorated and flooded with white sheets to separate the two and set in place to avoid any direct face-to-face contact, the film seems to be one big lead up to this grand moment.
Although the story might be quite interesting to some, it did not appeal to me personally and I found myself quite bored after about half an hour. I don't think the actors or actresses are to blame for this as I thought the performances passable though far from splendid. And it wasn't so much the historical inaccuracies but mostly that the storytelling was too bland to keep me even somewhat interested. I can't recommend this one to anyone without a special interest in this Scottisch-English (hi)story.
Fantastic performances by Ronan and Robbie. The rest of the cast, especially David Tennant, do a great job in their bit parts as well. That doesn't stop the film from being freaking boring though. So very little happens onscreen and most of it just comes off as typical soap opera drama, It's boring and it fails to maintain your interest throughout. So as much as the cast tries, The material they were given fails to bring anything to the table but that's to be expected. Most historical drams fail to capitalize on the source material.