Mary Stuart's (Saoirse Ronan's) attempt to overthrow her cousin Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie), Queen of England, finds her condemned to years of imprisonment before facing execution.Mary Stuart's (Saoirse Ronan's) attempt to overthrow her cousin Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie), Queen of England, finds her condemned to years of imprisonment before facing execution.Mary Stuart's (Saoirse Ronan's) attempt to overthrow her cousin Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie), Queen of England, finds her condemned to years of imprisonment before facing execution.
- Nominated for 2 Oscars
- 8 wins & 31 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I only watched this movie because my wife likes historical costume drama's. The history of Mary Stuart was the subject I thought that would be interesting but the more I watched it the more I had the feeling this wasn't an accurate telling of facts. For example I really doubt there would be a Black lord or an Asian countess at that time in England. Add on that the rather boring repetitive story telling and you get just a mediocre movie. The main actresses Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie didn't do a bad job but the inaccuracy of the story just made Mary Queen Of Scots a movie I will forget everything about it in a week.
Just watched the movie... and ohhhh my lord, I didn't think it was going to be that bad! With all the talent involved, I expected at least something entertaining...but nope...a stinker it is, and it stinks to high heaven!
I mean, I knew going in that this was supposed to be one of those re-imagined historical pics, taking creative licence, a lot of it actually, but not this freaking much?!
It tries to be both a live-action play and an historical epic...and ends up being neither.
On the meagre plus side, Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie are good, it's the movie surrounding them that sucked. Also the cinematography is beautiful. And that's it.
Think of "Mary, Queen Of Scotts" as "King Arthur Legend Of The Sword" and the recent "Robin Hood" without the action set pieces...can we please stop making these damn "woke" versions of historical movies and just try to make a good movie instead?!
4 out of 10.
I mean, I knew going in that this was supposed to be one of those re-imagined historical pics, taking creative licence, a lot of it actually, but not this freaking much?!
It tries to be both a live-action play and an historical epic...and ends up being neither.
On the meagre plus side, Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie are good, it's the movie surrounding them that sucked. Also the cinematography is beautiful. And that's it.
Think of "Mary, Queen Of Scotts" as "King Arthur Legend Of The Sword" and the recent "Robin Hood" without the action set pieces...can we please stop making these damn "woke" versions of historical movies and just try to make a good movie instead?!
4 out of 10.
My God the historic inaccuracies are beyond... sorry guys but in those days Scotland nor England had the bast empire they later had during Victorian Era...seems the movie is confusing Isabel 1st with Victoria...where did all the black Nobles came from?...my God...I give it a 4, i'm deducting 2 just for the destruction of History confusing the young.
Soarise Ronan is NO Vanessa Redgrave and Margot Robbie is NO Glenda Jackson. This is such a weak, denatured telling compared to the more glorious 1971 version; and yes, admittedly it was based on Maxwell Anderson's play. But it was precisely Anderson's language that gave the 1st go-around such dramatic fireworks. This one is a lame, telegrapher version that tailors the story to the camera; and similarly, panders to PC-ness by casting so many minorities in the Scot and English courts. REALLY? It is so distracting and a travesty on history and does a disservice to the paying movie-goer by feeding into that "casting diversity" BUT WHOLLY FALSE Representation, of historical fact. The hairdos of the 2 queens are quite silly and again, dressing all the men in BLACK and just giving color to the queens' costumes betrays such self-conscious techniques that they are all doing these FOR THE CAMERA, not in the interests of historical accuracy. Quite disappointing.
It's only my love for Saoirse Ronan and Adrian Lester that I kept it on. It was Disney-fied in the casting area as there were no people of colour as nobleman or indeed in the court at that time. Mary's accent is not accurate as she was raised in France. And they didn't all wear black. It was like rowan atckinson's black adder. The subject matter is intense as extreme misogyny meets religious hypocrisies! Well
Shot and acted by ALL.
Did you know
- TriviaThe first time Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie saw each other in character was during the scene where they meet for the first time. They rehearsed separately, and Robbie's scenes were completed the day Ronan began hers.
- GoofsDarnley wasn't exiled to Kirk o' Field, he was sent there with the pox, for medical quarantine.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Front Row: Episode #3.3 (2018)
- How long is Mary Queen of Scots?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Las dos reinas
- Filming locations
- Aviemore, Highland, Scotland, UK(on location)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $16,468,499
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $194,777
- Dec 9, 2018
- Gross worldwide
- $46,712,809
- Runtime
- 2h 4m(124 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content