36. Mary Queen Of Scots; movie review

MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS
Cert 15
124 mins
BBFC advice: Contains strong violence, sex, sexual violence

I am thinking that when Mary Queen of Scots was lined up for award season, expectations were rather higher than its Oscar nominations for best achievement in costume design and hair and make-up.
So, why has Josie Rourke's film divided audiences and critics?
It could be down to the historical inaccuracies. There has been much talk of a fictionalised meeting between Mary (Saoirse Ronan) and her cousin, Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie) and Ronan's accent.
To be fair to Ronan who usually has a thick Dublin twang, her mastery of the Scots' lilt is very impressive.
The problem is that Mary was brought up in France and it is suggested that, despite her title, she spoke English like a Frenchwoman.
Let's park the trivia. For my money, Ronan impresses as the title character, managing to show the requisite layers of strength and vulnerability.
Meanwhile, Robbie has less screen time and her representation of Elizabeth is as a monarch who has more self-doubt than we might expect.
Indeed, we learned that she used thick white make-up as a veil because she had been stricken with a skin-scarring pox.
The story concentrates on activity north of the body where Mary's liaisons, at court and romantically, vex those vying for power.
Aside of Ronan's and Robbie's, there are some memorable performances, including David Tennant, behind a forest of a beard, as the bile-spitting Scottish Church leader, John Knox.
Meanwhile, talking of accents, Guy Pearce comes up with extraordinary David Attenborough-English as Elizabeth's advisor William Cecil who sets out to undermine Mary.
And then there are those playing for Mary's affections such as her second husband Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden).
All of the cast give it their best shot and, consequently, I am trying to pin down why Rourke's film falls short of its ambition.
Yes, its makers play fast and loose with facts in part and continuity is not its strong point (Elizabeth ages whereas Mary doesn't),
I was also a tad irked that it tries so hard to please diverse audiences that it includes actors from ethnic backgrounds when their real-life characters were not (Bess of Hardwick, for example).
I am all for diversity, but I was trying to imagine the outcry if key black people in history were played by white actors. We have surely moved on from Gandhi.


Reasons to watch: Great performance from Saoirse Ronan
Reasons to avoid: Historically questionable

Laughs: None
Jumps: None
Vomit: Yes
Nudity: Very briefly
Overall rating: 7.5/10

Did you know? As a Stuart, Mary had a strong claim to the English throne dating back to the Treaty of Perpetual Peace in 1502. Elizabeth did not have the same claim to the English throne. Many Catholics believed her to be illegitimate as they thought Henry VIII's marriage to Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth's mother, was illegal.

The final word - Saoirse Ronan: “Two things helped me to truly embody her. The costumes, definitely. More than anything, it was Wayne McGregor, who was the film’s choreographer. I had worked a little bit with movement before, but not to this extent. It really started to inform the emotions. Something came out in that rehearsal process with him. I found the essence of who I wanted Mary to be. That’s how I found her.”

Share this post