As a history buff, I understand many commentators' criticism of this film because it strays often and far from the facts - as, indeed, most "historical" films made in Hollywood do. If that kind of disregard for history bothers you, then this is probably not the movie for you. Other commentators have provided excellent historical "correction" and delineated the movie's plot; I refer you to their comments for such matters. I will only address the movie, itself, in my remarks.
If you require plenty of action in a film to entertain you, this one will probably fail to satisfy you. But if you enjoy costume dramas featuring political intrigue and ensemble acting then I highly recommend this movie. Although modern movie-goers expect verisimilitude in a film's sets and locations, I do not fault old films for being produced on studio sound stages and back lots. In 1936, when this movie was made, films retained a stronger connection to their roots in the theater, and were much less the modern art form into which they have evolved. This is not the least bit bothersome to me.
That said, I enjoyed the exterior scenes more than the interiors. When I watch depictions of Medieval and Renaissance times in old films such as this, I am constantly aware of 2 aspects of interior palace shots. The ceilings are incredibly high and never shown - they are nonexistent, of course. Also, the floors are so shiny - seamless, highly polished expanses! I bet a lot of spills occurred during filming! The palace scenes in this movie are no exception. Mary's apartments are suspiciously ornate and sumptuous for an old Scottish castle. Again, this doesn't detract from the movie, it is just an observation about the sets.
By contrast, the exteriors are more convincing. The set where the Scots people are harangued by John Knox (Moroni Olson) as they gather to welcome home their queen has the feel of an authentic castle (especially by comparison with the interiors). The nighttime setting and smoky torches create a very gloomy atmosphere in the castle courtyard. The same set is equally convincing during the clash between the conspiratorial Scots nobles and Lord Bothwell (Frederic March) who has come to Mary's timely rescue.
I admit (heresy of heresies!) that I am not a big fan of Kate Hepburn. However, here she is prettier and more radiant than ever. She delivers a nicely nuanced performance that evoked my sympathy.
Frederic March, however, demonstrates why he is one of the greatest actors in American cinema. Before I saw this movie the first time, I never would have believed that he could be convincing as a dashing, romantic hero in a historical costume drama. But he pulls it off superbly - what a remarkably versatile actor! The costumes, which he wears comfortably and convincingly, show off his broad shoulders to great effect. He is a very robust presence on screen. I loved seeing him in a role that was as big a change of pace as this one.
Likewise, I give extremely high marks to John Carradine. In his later career, he was more or less typecast as a cold, sinister bogeyman. But, along with his role in the classic, Stagecoach, this role shows that he had a much broader range. I enjoyed seeing him portray a much more emotional character than usual in this role. Like Hepburn, he portrays an interesting, conflicted character that evoked my sympathy.
Alan Mowbray also delivers a surprisingly superb performance that is very different from the roles he typically played - either a comic foil or a sophisticate in films depicting contemporary society of the '30's and '40's. His is not a large role, but it is important, and he comes across as a real sneak. I loved it.
I was disappointed by the fictitious meeting between Elizabeth and Mary. Unlike several commentators, I did not think it at all necessary. In addition, it is very predictable. I would have been much more satisfied if the movie had reflected that Mary was Elizabeth's captive for many years. During that time each may have fretted in her own way about a possible encounter. No doubt, contemplation of the ultimate fate of Mary of Scotland weighed heavily on many people for many years - including Mary, herself, and Elizabeth.
If you require plenty of action in a film to entertain you, this one will probably fail to satisfy you. But if you enjoy costume dramas featuring political intrigue and ensemble acting then I highly recommend this movie. Although modern movie-goers expect verisimilitude in a film's sets and locations, I do not fault old films for being produced on studio sound stages and back lots. In 1936, when this movie was made, films retained a stronger connection to their roots in the theater, and were much less the modern art form into which they have evolved. This is not the least bit bothersome to me.
That said, I enjoyed the exterior scenes more than the interiors. When I watch depictions of Medieval and Renaissance times in old films such as this, I am constantly aware of 2 aspects of interior palace shots. The ceilings are incredibly high and never shown - they are nonexistent, of course. Also, the floors are so shiny - seamless, highly polished expanses! I bet a lot of spills occurred during filming! The palace scenes in this movie are no exception. Mary's apartments are suspiciously ornate and sumptuous for an old Scottish castle. Again, this doesn't detract from the movie, it is just an observation about the sets.
By contrast, the exteriors are more convincing. The set where the Scots people are harangued by John Knox (Moroni Olson) as they gather to welcome home their queen has the feel of an authentic castle (especially by comparison with the interiors). The nighttime setting and smoky torches create a very gloomy atmosphere in the castle courtyard. The same set is equally convincing during the clash between the conspiratorial Scots nobles and Lord Bothwell (Frederic March) who has come to Mary's timely rescue.
I admit (heresy of heresies!) that I am not a big fan of Kate Hepburn. However, here she is prettier and more radiant than ever. She delivers a nicely nuanced performance that evoked my sympathy.
Frederic March, however, demonstrates why he is one of the greatest actors in American cinema. Before I saw this movie the first time, I never would have believed that he could be convincing as a dashing, romantic hero in a historical costume drama. But he pulls it off superbly - what a remarkably versatile actor! The costumes, which he wears comfortably and convincingly, show off his broad shoulders to great effect. He is a very robust presence on screen. I loved seeing him in a role that was as big a change of pace as this one.
Likewise, I give extremely high marks to John Carradine. In his later career, he was more or less typecast as a cold, sinister bogeyman. But, along with his role in the classic, Stagecoach, this role shows that he had a much broader range. I enjoyed seeing him portray a much more emotional character than usual in this role. Like Hepburn, he portrays an interesting, conflicted character that evoked my sympathy.
Alan Mowbray also delivers a surprisingly superb performance that is very different from the roles he typically played - either a comic foil or a sophisticate in films depicting contemporary society of the '30's and '40's. His is not a large role, but it is important, and he comes across as a real sneak. I loved it.
I was disappointed by the fictitious meeting between Elizabeth and Mary. Unlike several commentators, I did not think it at all necessary. In addition, it is very predictable. I would have been much more satisfied if the movie had reflected that Mary was Elizabeth's captive for many years. During that time each may have fretted in her own way about a possible encounter. No doubt, contemplation of the ultimate fate of Mary of Scotland weighed heavily on many people for many years - including Mary, herself, and Elizabeth.