Mary Queen of Scots
Ten Second Review: There are better films to be seen in the cinema at the moment, don’t waste your time on this one.
When nominations and awards were being revealed and handed out I wondered where all the praise was for Mary Queen of Scots. From the looks of the trailer, acting ability of the two leads and the history behind the film’s plot, it seemed like a slam-dunk. Now that I’ve seen it I think I understand why it may have struggled.
Mary Queen of Scots tells a fictionalised account of the story of Mary Stuart and Queen Elizabeth I’s rivalry. Beginning after the death of Mary’s first husband and her subsequent return to Scotland, Mary assumes her throne but as she is a Catholic queen in a protestant nation, there is some resistance to her rule. Elsewhere Elizabeth’s court pressures her to marry and bring fourth an heir so as to diminish Mary’s claim to the throne of England. The two women send envoys and letters back and fourth as they attempt to deal with the ruling of their own lands while simultaneously settling their dispute.
What this film really shows is that there is a right way to do fictionalised and stylised history. Taking major historical plot points to ground your story in truth and then filling in the middle with witty dialogue and slightly exaggerated (but vaguely plausible) scenes, while dressing your characters in clothes that are period inspired but not rigidly tied to historical examples, can lead to a really compelling piece of cinema. Throw in some inventive directing and some great acting and you’ve got a dynamite film. The reason we know this is because we all just saw The Favourite and Mary Queen of Scots has made sure to remind us how impressive that film was.
I don’t think anyone would argue that it would be easy to make a film that could truthfully tell the story of Mary and Elizabeth’s rivalry. We only have accounts written by very polarised bases that are steeped in religious fealty. Protestant accounts will always list Mary has a catholic harlot and protestant accounts will grant her a level of martyrdom due to her unwavering faith. Seeing as history doesn’t agree, the best we are ever going to get is either a greatly biased account or a hodge-podge somewhere in the middle that serves no one well in any great measure. More inventive storytelling might of seen a film that plays off this duality of character and has scenes of her as this demure and devout women accompanied by scenes of her as a catholic glutton consumed by lustful tendencies. That actually could have been a really interesting idea and certainly more befitting of Saoirse Ronan whose acting ability is miles in front of the character she is given here.
Setting the idea of a faithful biopic aside, the liberties the film takes must be addressed. Reforming an image of Mary that positions her not from the catholic or protestant point of view but instead as a 16th century woke queen and LGBT ally is a bit bizarre. It is quite hard to believe that a devout catholic in the 1500s would be quite so liberal in her views and seems to just add to an intentionally sympathetic protagonist as opposed to being any great character or plot development.
Besides the general questions that surround the historical aspects of the film (because it would take literally pages to unpack it), it can’t be forgiven that even if it were just complete fiction it is still a badly plotted film. It drags you through two hours with little understanding given of time periods. You’d be forgiven for not realising the events span around 25 years because it’s not clear from the film that Mary ages at all. Long, drawn out and unnecessary horse rides pad out the runtime, making up scenes that feel entirely worthless by the end. The whole thing feels like a lesson in anti climax as you watch a film that has told you how it will end (while avoiding showing you why it ends that way at all) and has showed you almost the whole final scene you are waiting for in the trailer.
The acting is fine, a charitable person might even say good considering the script and direction they were given, and the costumes are amazing but I can’t in any good conscience suggest seeing this film. If you don’t know the history is does you a dangerous disservice of misinforming you, if you do know the history you’ll be driven mad as you internally scream at the screen and if you watch it as a work of fiction you’ll be bored stiff. There are most certainly better to films in the cinema to be watching right now.
