This movie has tons of historical inaccuracies, but the acting, the pacing, the script and cinematography is actually quite good. If it weren’t a historical movie that should’ve been derived from facts, I’d say it’s a great film. Plus, Saoirse just aces whichever project she’s on. She never disappoints.
It's a slave to political correctness. It does no one good. Sticking in loads of black actors with no regard to actual history doesn't tell the truth of history. Should we have white actors playing slaves in America then? Would black people think that would be ok? I thought Ronan acting weedy. Go watch Glenda Jackson & Vanessa Redgrave to see the real deal.
@@waynemcleod6767 I doubt you've even seen the film. A film must be judged and critiqued by its filmic qualities, its filmic truth, not so-called "historical truth." Apparently you don't see too many movies.
Mary was 44 years old when she was executed and she didn't have a Scots accent, she was raised in France so French was her first language. She and Elizabeth never met in their entire lives.
Well, in the movie, Elizabeth said that no one should know they met. And there’s no historical record of meeting, so there’s a chance they did met, but didn’t tell anyone.
She also was a far weaker monarch than Elizabeth. She was dethroned casually and with great ease because she had no power. They made Elizabeth absurdly pathetic in this movie to give Mary some slight semblance of being badass, when in truth she was a fraction of the monarch Elizabeth was. The things that happened to Mary would NEVER have been tolerated by Elizabeth. She was just a better, stronger queen with ACTUAL power, whereas Mary was pushed around by other people to the very end. Mary couldn't even handle Scotland and she wanted England?! This movie angered me. Making a strong queen weak so a weak queen could look strong, smh.
@@MsAggie78 Mary's problem was she was essentially a foreign princess. And this is a time when people did not want foreign rulers. Especially when she was Catholic and the country was protestant. Plus she had not enough knowledge of the country she was ruling. She was going to be Queen of France and have a regent rule in her place so they didn't raise her to be a Scottish Queen. That and she was a bit of a hedonist, which impacted her judgement.
I mean as women age some become more insecure and try and preserve their youth. Even if the world sees beauty in the person it doesn't mean that they see it.
@@GoGreen1977 same thing: the family name of Stuart came from Steward, which was their job description as stewards of the Scottish throne (similar to LoTR's Stewards of Gondor)
To all who have a problem with the historical correctness of the film: In the film’s closing titles include the usual disclaimer that “some of the material has been fictionalized.” So historians should not and must not be upset by the film’s changes to what actually happened. So please do not shun the film for what they decided fitted the story best.
@@whitephoenixofthecrown2099 yeah I agree that there should be more disclaimers saying so. Its not clear untill the end of the film and its in one of the small messages in the closing titles that no one actually reads.
They have also talked about in interviews etc that the meeting between them is based on real letters, but that a meeting is better for dramatical purposes
Just another way of twisting history. What's the point of being somewhat accurate throughout the film then switch it up at the end? By having them not meet in person it shows more animosity between the two as if they couldn't stand to be in the presence of one another.
@Steve Meikle why the double standard? Art is art. Meant to entertain and get people thinking about it’s themes. Shakespeare wasn’t accurate. Are you going to throw a fit about the art he produced?
I did as well, so much so that I found myself a little disappointed that they didn’t Sequel. There was enough material in my opinion for a second movie, the Babington plot, the details of Mary’s confinement, not to mention elizabeth’s diplomatic relationship with James XI (Mary’s son). I saw a Very informative documentary titled the last days of Mary Queen of Scots, it wasn’t just Elizabeth that betrayed her (allegedly, Mary may have actually been guilty), but Mary also must’ve felt betrayed by her son when he sent her a letter siding with Elizabeth with regards to her incarceration.
I could have accepted all the changes they made in the movie, even had the two queens become best friends, lovers who ruled great Britain together. But this hairstyle of Mary.. can't take it seriously
Go research. Hairstyles are correct & at least they got that right. Go to your local portrait gallery to study hairstyles thru the centuries. Many high class women were bald due to the use of lead in face creams & they wore wigs as Elizabeth & Mary did in their 'older' years (old being 40).
i feel like saorise should have been elizabeth and margot should have been mary. i feel like margot has a seductive attractive face and saorise has the thin, noble face of elizabeth
@@pjincho compared with the Francois Clouet portrait of Mary Q of S, Saoirse looks much more similar to Mary than Elizabeth and more like Mary than Margot.
@@TheSeraphimofextasy Really the color of someone’s skin makes it a joke. You know when Shakespeare was casting men in the roles of women it wasn’t a joke, when the theater started doing colorblind casting it wasn’t a joke, so the fact that you can’t ignore someone’s skin tone, someone who I might add is in a supporting character and doesn’t really have that big role in the film by comparison to the leads....🤔 kind of says something about ya. By the way Hollywood has been casting white people in non-white rolls for generations, I never heard you guys complain once.
Actually, they have found a fair amount of proof that there were some very respected members of the royal shut the Mary Rose that were black. We don’t know the full history, but there have been several studies on it and it’s fascinating. Would recommend having a look
what nonsense, Mary wasn't kept in a prison cell. She was housed at Fotheringhay Castle as a Queen, and executed there, not in the Tower of London. Even she had been imprisoned in the Tower she wouldn't have been in a jail cell. Elizabeth would never have allowed it.
Although this film has details that could be controversial and not historical, it is a great film that invites us to carry out a deep investigation. I think the intention of the producers is an attempt to reconstruct a story that we may never know how it really was. I loved the video and subscribed to the channel.
The problem is whenever people watch period pieces they’re expecting pitch perfect accuracy. What they keep forgetting is that these are the arts. It’s not about teaching us something It’s about using drama and imagery to articulate stories from the past and make a human connection with persons from a different time. And unfortunately many of these individuals who expect “Accuracy“ keep forgetting that even back in the Shakespearean era, William Shakespeare used dramatic license all the time. Yet despite all of it being an embellishment it is still regarded as one of the highest art forms and it absolutely is. Yet modern day artists are constantly being attacked for any liberties they might be taking. And there are a lot of double standards. For instance the casting of minorities in this film. It’s called colorblind casting, and the audience is supposed to be smart enough to know that the characters their depicting were Caucasian. They are just being played by another demographic. It doesn’t constitute an effort to rewrite history. It certainly never was when is it originated on the stage years ago. And it’s unfortunate. Because there is evidence to suggest Cleopatra was not Caucasian yet there was never any moral objection to her being depicted by Elizabeth Taylor (who gave a master class performance do not get me wrong). The point I’m making is when we’re talking the arts there is a time and a place for colorblind casting and a time in a place for accuracy. The big underlining question is is it art and is it powerful, and does it articulate the intended human connection. For me this movie checked all three boxes.
for me those scotish noblesman in scotland and british noblesman in the english court understimated both Mary and Elizabeth, they were the ones that conspired the rivalry between the two queens , accuse of crimes she never did and defame her character to have her dethrone and was used as pawn by King Phillip of Spain to force Elizabeth to reculentely and unwilling have her executed and she lived with that regret, all because they didn't want a woman ruling both england and scotland, but they lost in the end for yes they may have helped kill mary stuart and yes elizabeth died without giving birth to a heir and not becoming married but they didn't destroy the believes and legacy of this two awsome woman and that King James was that man carried that legacy that know in present time House of Moubattian Windsor carries as they rule the UK side by side with the parliment formed by the kingdom's people, so amazing that Mary nor Elizabeth did not gave those men in their royal court the satisfaction of seeing them defeated and ruined but instead they saw two women who faced death fearless,confident and bravely as they know that they have conquered all their foes, have found redemption of past mistakes and are hopefull for the future of the realm will be good hands
This film, though it has a lot of historical inaccuracies has been one of my faves. Mary was chanting/praying "Hail Holy Queen" in Latin before she was stumbled by the waves on the shore.
the costumes may not be glamourous and pininterest type like in Reign but here, they are so well done and memorable....thats one thing i like of this film maybe this film did not fit the YA trope we see in tik tok or social media like love triangles and perfect beauty
I really love English history!!i ve watched all movies but still hard to understand who was from which house...too many houses too many names...but from the little i know i really loved Elizabeth A'...must have been an extraordinary woman!!! Love from Greece
Mary's execution was a hideously botched affair. It took two strokes to kill her. When the executioner held up her head, it fell from the wig she was wearing. It rolled on the ground, and her lips kept moving for fifteen minutes. The crowd fled in horror.
Anyone decent should 'flee in horror' from murder! And, about 13 seconds (or less) is the medically accepted time for the brain to react to trauma of that magnitude, before it completely loses consciousness through blood loss. Ample time for the eyes to register shock, prompting the mouth to open wide, seeming to form speech. When in shock yourself, from viewing something like this, about 13 seconds can be a long time!
I can understand people's frustrations with inaccuracies, but I do think that those same people could do with being less uptight and nit-picky with every little thing. Just enjoy the film. It isn't claiming to be the be all and end all of knowledge on the subject.
I think they should have cast someone with darker hair and complexion. Robert Dudley was called the "Gypsy" for his looks. He had a much more imperious appearance, at least that's how he looks in his portraits and what was written about him by his contemporaries.
I am directly related. My 13th great aunt is Mary Fleming, her mother is my direct Grandma. My father is Byron Fleming Gaines.. The Fleming carried over to the USA.
The leeway in historical artistic license is surprising. I assume that soon we will have a films claiming that Shakespeare, Mozart, and Beethoven were all Africans.
Funny how it's that that bothers you and not the inaccuracies in the story or costuming, or sets. I wish bigots would just come out and say what they mean instead of pretending they care about accuracy in fictional accounts that play with fact willy nilly, to begin with. Just say you like your fiction cis, white, and straight and be done with it.
@@Ceares Having a black actor in the role of an important courtier during 16th century IS INACCURATE. It does a gross disservice to history. BTW ... I doubt you'd express such a cavalier attitude if they'd cast a white man as Shaka Zulu or Nelson Mandela.
I know they're trying to be all politically correct. But I don't think they had Asians or African-Europeans in nobility then. Also Mary spoke with a French accent
You are correct in one thing-her accent. However, people of color existed in medieval and Renaissance Europe. There are writings and paintings of POC of all classes.
I believe they did because of Henry the 8thd marriage to Catherine of aragon. She brought over black nobles. Otherwise I don't think they would been there. Not sure about the Asians though.
@@cyde1345 "Black Nobles", "way back when" ... where are you getting that from? Who was a black noble in Spain? You might be able to argue the Moors, before they were pushed out, but 16th century England? You're living in fantasy land.
@@chelseawritesbooks8763 There were Europeans in Africa at that time as well trading, but like people of color in Europe at that time, the numbers would be so miniscule, it wouldn't even register a percentage point. And certainly no person of color would be in an advisory position to a European monarch anymore than a White person would be in the court of Imperial China. It just would not happen.
I think this is the only movie Saoirse was on that critics didn’t really love. Was this her latest project? I hope not.. I hope Little women was because that was one of her greatest work!
I'm not sure who the mother is of this James, but Mary did have an illegitimate half-brother ruling for her until she returned from France. And he did eventually act as regent for very young son after she ran off to England. He was assassinated at some point, though, not too many years later, if my memory serves me right.
Es el hermano ilegítimo de María, Jacobo, but, era ilegítimo, ya que nació fuera de un matrimonio y nunca fue reconocido como hijo, fue más bien enemigo de María, ya que lidero rebeliones protestantes encontra de ella, por lo tanto fue exiliado de escocia y volvería para 1567 para ser el regente de su sobrino el rey Jacobo. Hijo de María, de tan solo 1 año de vida.
Uggh. I Googled looking to read the opening text of the movie and this (on my phone) is no more legible than the movie text. TV and movie producers really need to format their onscreen texts (texts, subtitles, phone and computer screens) so they too, can be visible on any screen, and remember that not everyone is viewing on a 50-inch tv. Smart TVs should have the capacity of reducing font size of movies the same way phones do, if the reason for this recent font size reduction by producers has been because people complained the texts were too large.
As soon as I saw 'Holyrood Palace' and heard Mary's Scottish accent, I knew this film was a fantasy and could only be watched as such. A shame, as some things were excellent. More attention to the historical detail and this could have been something special.
I found a copy of the script the latin is a prayer. "Salve, Regina, Mater misericordiæ, vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamamus exsules filii Hevæ, In te Domino confido..." It translates to "Hello, Queen, life, sweetness and our hope. To you we send Eve; I trust in the Lord ..."
After the Ave Maria the Salve Regina is one of the most popular Catholic prayers to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The opening is usually translated 'Hail, Holy Queen, mother of mercy, hail our life, our sweetness, our hope...'
I think the movie is suggesting that they could have met in secret, if they really did ever meet in real life we could of possible never have known because it was a secret. Its historical fictiony, its not a documentary.
@@athak31 Costumes and historical events incorrect. Plus Mary was brought up in France so she should have a French accent really. Obviously accents have changed since then but she wouldn't be Scottish x
I much prefer "Mary, Queen of Scots" starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson. While it still takes dramatic license with some aspects of history, I think it's far superior in the acting, costumes, and characters.
Elizabeth is a good politician and everyone can see that mary is a loose cannon and unpredictable. Any sensible statesman would definitely eliminate her.
Elizabeth didn't want to sighn the papers to behead her she refused them 3 times. When she had no other choice she scribbled her signature without looking at the paper. You can see in other papers she writes her signature always very carefully and neatly. But on the execution papers for Mary it's written sloppy and with an almost dry pen. So she must have been been reluctant to actually make this happen. Ofcorse Mary of Scots only did what she felt was right in her heart. But Elizabeth needed to pretect herself from the same faith. And by making Mary's son the next heir to the throne you can see she never wanted to go so far as it had to go.
@@sahaferz yes all of this. And no I'm not English and I didn't get the watered down version of English history but the brutal version (each school tries to soften up the history of their own country)
I don't watch these movies as they are WOKE, which means STUPID. Let's make Nelson Mandela a CAUCASION and how about turning Queen Nefertiti into a Blonde-haired Scandinavian woman? STOP TRYING TO CHANGE HISTORY. If you're so dying to feature Black People in films, JUST MAKE A MOVIE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE.
The 1971 movie starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson - with a very noteworthy performance by Timothy Dalton, is superior in every single way, including insinuating the sad fact that "Queen" Mary was never loved by Scotland, and was, in fact, a very, very silly little girl prone to infatuation and fantasy and utterly not a match, in any way, to Elizabeth 1.
People moaning about historical inaccuracies?? Read a book for your knowledge not a blockbuster movie. It's not ment to be an accurate portrayal. Grow up
What if the history books you've been taught, report the wrong history deliberately... what if movies we see that don't match up w historical reports, are actually the real accounts of history?
So Mary, queen of scots deserved England more than queen Elizabeth because her father didn't deserve the crown, after the death of their elder sibling Arthur ,the crown should have been given to Margaret Tudor as she was elder than Henry, so as the granddaughter of Margaret Tudor, Mary, queen of scots deserved it more.
Mary queen of Scots and Queen Elizabeth never met /Elizabeth’s lady in waiting Bess Hardwick was white not Chinese / Queen Elizabeth’s courtier Lord Thomas Randolph was white not black/ Mary Queen of Scots did not have a black lady in waiting/Queen Elizabeth and Mary were never friends. There’s 5 historical inaccuracies. There were people of colour during the Tudor period and Elizabeth would have employed some black servants and musicians but non rose to the rank of courtiers or advisors. It is historically important to include black people in the film but to portray them in such roles was to change history.
Great acting and some good moments. However, I found the pacing to be problematic and the deviation from historical record kind of made the whole point of a historic film moot.
Si, a isabel la describían de cabellos largos y pelirrojos, María estuardo en realidad era de cabellos castaños rojizos, no pelirroja, por lo tanto es mito de que era pelirroja, es que la ponían de cabello pelirrojo por que la tachaban de prostituta, ya que se cree que se acostó fuera del matrimonio y asesino a su marido, por lo que le dieron la espalda el pueblo de Escocia e incluyendo a los católicos.
@@Xerxes2005 I also think upon further reflection that the darkness at Mary’s court was supposed to articulate what happens to her in the future. She is a tragic figure after all. It Along with the fact that she’s wearing blue all the time is supposed to symbolize how she is set in her ways and reflects a commitment to tradition and the past (i.e. the Catholic Church). Whereas Elizabeth’s court is bright and she is dressed in multiple colors but predominantly gold. Symbolizing change and the Golden age.
@@antmagor They also like to picture Scotland as this harsh, backward country, like in Braveheart where William Wallace lived in a hut made of mud and wore blue war paint, when he was really a nobleman... So now the castle is in a cave... As for the blue, I never saw it as a Catholic colour. It was the colour of France though, and Mary had been Queen of France (if only for a short time).
We most surely and saliently know THERE WERE so factually noted Black Tudor figures. Learn about John Blanke, who trumpeted under King Henry VII and King Henry VIII. Learn about Katalina de Motril, who served Queen Catherine of Aragon. Learn to recognise and respect noted Black British figures of the past and present, who most surely and saliently must be represented. Even if there were not any noted Black Tudor figures, which we most surely and saliently know THERE WERE, wonderful Black actors need to be paid and recognised for their excellent dramatic talent and abilities (like anyone else) so they should not be excluded for more convinienced viewing. It is inequitable and impractical. Earning a living is much more important than enjoying a viewing.
The Serpent Queen's Mary Stuart is, I believe, far more accurate. Her religious fanaticism caused her self-righteous and downfall. Saoirse's Mary is a modern take on a religious person.
It doesn't. It's virtue signalling at the expense of real history. Liberals want to believe some fantasy that never was there a time in world history when it was any less diverse than today.
This movie has tons of historical inaccuracies, but the acting, the pacing, the script and cinematography is actually quite good. If it weren’t a historical movie that should’ve been derived from facts, I’d say it’s a great film. Plus, Saoirse just aces whichever project she’s on. She never disappoints.
It's a slave to political correctness. It does no one good. Sticking in loads of black actors with no regard to actual history doesn't tell the truth of history. Should we have white actors playing slaves in America then? Would black people think that would be ok? I thought Ronan acting weedy. Go watch Glenda Jackson & Vanessa Redgrave to see the real deal.
Like the homosexuality
Nobody can accuse Hollywood of letting something trivial like historical accuracy ruin a historical movie.
@@sunshinejewel2952 Do you mean Darnley? Check out Lady Antonia Frazer's definitive biography, MARY,
QUEEN OF SCOTS.
@@waynemcleod6767 I doubt you've even seen the film. A film must be judged and critiqued by its filmic qualities, its filmic truth, not so-called "historical truth." Apparently you don't see too many movies.
Mary was 44 years old when she was executed and she didn't have a Scots accent, she was raised in France so French was her first language. She and Elizabeth never met in their entire lives.
Well, in the movie, Elizabeth said that no one should know they met. And there’s no historical record of meeting, so there’s a chance they did met, but didn’t tell anyone.
She spent her first 8 years of life in Scotland.
Argentocoxos: No, she was 5 when she went to France.
She also was a far weaker monarch than Elizabeth. She was dethroned casually and with great ease because she had no power. They made Elizabeth absurdly pathetic in this movie to give Mary some slight semblance of being badass, when in truth she was a fraction of the monarch Elizabeth was. The things that happened to Mary would NEVER have been tolerated by Elizabeth. She was just a better, stronger queen with ACTUAL power, whereas Mary was pushed around by other people to the very end. Mary couldn't even handle Scotland and she wanted England?! This movie angered me. Making a strong queen weak so a weak queen could look strong, smh.
@@MsAggie78 Mary's problem was she was essentially a foreign princess. And this is a time when people did not want foreign rulers. Especially when she was Catholic and the country was protestant. Plus she had not enough knowledge of the country she was ruling. She was going to be Queen of France and have a regent rule in her place so they didn't raise her to be a Scottish Queen. That and she was a bit of a hedonist, which impacted her judgement.
Elizabeth 1998 it is and forever be the best Elizabethan movie ever. Cate Blanchett, what a queen!
Yes!!!
But it was all bullshit , like half the stuff in the movie never happened , at least they condensed the none fiction in this right ?
@@thedukeofswellington1827 so exactly what I just said
Totally agree!!!
Elizabeth R is much better than that movie. Seriously check it out.
“Nor would I have a commoner be King, were we not expecting an heir”🤣😂
That was rather savage.
I seriously read your comment exactly the moment this line was being said.😂👌🏻
as much as i want to love this movie, it's hella hard to believe Margot Robbie is insecure about her looks. i mean good grief.
Ikr even with the hooked nose prosthetic shes still gorgeous with her eyes cheekbones jawline and lips
@@RH-td7vc ngl i liked her aquiline prosthetic nose in this lol. thought it made her look regal af. 7:55: what do i see? A GORGEOUS WOMAN lol
I mean as women age some become more insecure and try and preserve their youth. Even if the world sees beauty in the person it doesn't mean that they see it.
Elizabeth was self-conscious about her looks after she had smallpox & was left covered in scars.
Bro, she looked like Pennywise and Ronald McDonald's lovechild, there's no way you think she looked good here! 😂
"You may tell Scotland that we wish to love the Stewards as our kin, but they must love us in return." So regal.
Stuarts, not "Stewards".
@@GoGreen1977 same thing: the family name of Stuart came from Steward, which was their job description as stewards of the Scottish throne (similar to LoTR's Stewards of Gondor)
For some reason the music and moment her brother kneels in front of her.. I watch again and again. X
@Lauren K. I do think he looks very handsome in that scene though.. Hehe
Me too
To all who have a problem with the historical correctness of the film: In the film’s closing titles include the usual disclaimer that “some of the material has been fictionalized.” So historians should not and must not be upset by the film’s changes to what actually happened. So please do not shun the film for what they decided fitted the story best.
I agree but they should have put at in the beginning and at the start of every trailer some people might think it's accurate
@@whitephoenixofthecrown2099 yeah I agree that there should be more disclaimers saying so. Its not clear untill the end of the film and its in one of the small messages in the closing titles that no one actually reads.
They have also talked about in interviews etc that the meeting between them is based on real letters, but that a meeting is better for dramatical purposes
Just another way of twisting history. What's the point of being somewhat accurate throughout the film then switch it up at the end? By having them not meet in person it shows more animosity between the two as if they couldn't stand to be in the presence of one another.
@Steve Meikle why the double standard? Art is art. Meant to entertain and get people thinking about it’s themes. Shakespeare wasn’t accurate. Are you going to throw a fit about the art he produced?
I dont care what the critics say, I really loved this movie.
So do i
Same sister same
I did as well, so much so that I found myself a little disappointed that they didn’t Sequel. There was enough material in my opinion for a second movie, the Babington plot, the details of Mary’s confinement, not to mention elizabeth’s diplomatic relationship with James XI (Mary’s son). I saw a Very informative documentary titled the last days of Mary Queen of Scots, it wasn’t just Elizabeth that betrayed her (allegedly, Mary may have actually been guilty), but Mary also must’ve felt betrayed by her son when he sent her a letter siding with Elizabeth with regards to her incarceration.
@@antmagor cool
Me too!
I could have accepted all the changes they made in the movie, even had the two queens become best friends, lovers who ruled great Britain together. But this hairstyle of Mary.. can't take it seriously
She’s was a BLACK moorish women her hair was very curly
@Duke Wang it’s the truth! Which is why Europe keep the moors hidden! They literally taught you ppl every thing
@@americanindian1403 Literally who are you? Just a troll?
Go research. Hairstyles are correct & at least they got that right. Go to your local portrait gallery to study hairstyles thru the centuries. Many high class women were bald due to the use of lead in face creams & they wore wigs as Elizabeth & Mary did in their 'older' years (old being 40).
@@americanindian1403 who was black moorish? Elizabeth & Mary? I don't think so. Go back to school. Millennials, good grief.
I forgot I was not watching the whole thing... I am disappointed.
I still have not seen the movie. I want to though. I loved Cate Blanchett in the Elizabeth movies.
Same :(
yeah euhm, ,, any idea where we CAN watch the whole thing??
i feel like saorise should have been elizabeth and margot should have been mary. i feel like margot has a seductive attractive face and saorise has the thin, noble face of elizabeth
I also did not understand the choice of actresses for their respective roles. The roles appear to be switched, lol
Saorise also looks a great deal like Elizabeth.
@@pjincho compared with the Francois Clouet portrait of Mary Q of S, Saoirse looks much more similar to Mary than Elizabeth and more like Mary than Margot.
@@vhufeosqap exactly
@@vhufeosqap i personally disagree and think saorise has a slimmer face like elizabeth
I doubt the english court was so multi-ethnic back then. . . really stands out
Haha right 🤣 cultural appropriation (Factual Erasure!) of history much
Exactly, this version is a joke.
@@TheSeraphimofextasy Really the color of someone’s skin makes it a joke. You know when Shakespeare was casting men in the roles of women it wasn’t a joke, when the theater started doing colorblind casting it wasn’t a joke, so the fact that you can’t ignore someone’s skin tone, someone who I might add is in a supporting character and doesn’t really have that big role in the film by comparison to the leads....🤔 kind of says something about ya. By the way Hollywood has been casting white people in non-white rolls for generations, I never heard you guys complain once.
Actually, they have found a fair amount of proof that there were some very respected members of the royal shut the Mary Rose that were black. We don’t know the full history, but there have been several studies on it and it’s fascinating. Would recommend having a look
Actually every European court had a couple of black nobles favored by European monarchs.
what nonsense, Mary wasn't kept in a prison cell. She was housed at Fotheringhay Castle as a Queen, and executed there, not in the Tower of London. Even she had been imprisoned in the Tower she wouldn't have been in a jail cell. Elizabeth would never have allowed it.
Although this film has details that could be controversial and not historical, it is a great film that invites us to carry out a deep investigation. I think the intention of the producers is an attempt to reconstruct a story that we may never know how it really was. I loved the video and subscribed to the channel.
The problem is whenever people watch period pieces they’re expecting pitch perfect accuracy. What they keep forgetting is that these are the arts. It’s not about teaching us something It’s about using drama and imagery to articulate stories from the past and make a human connection with persons from a different time. And unfortunately many of these individuals who expect “Accuracy“ keep forgetting that even back in the Shakespearean era, William Shakespeare used dramatic license all the time. Yet despite all of it being an embellishment it is still regarded as one of the highest art forms and it absolutely is. Yet modern day artists are constantly being attacked for any liberties they might be taking. And there are a lot of double standards. For instance the casting of minorities in this film. It’s called colorblind casting, and the audience is supposed to be smart enough to know that the characters their depicting were Caucasian. They are just being played by another demographic. It doesn’t constitute an effort to rewrite history. It certainly never was when is it originated on the stage years ago. And it’s unfortunate. Because there is evidence to suggest Cleopatra was not Caucasian yet there was never any moral objection to her being depicted by Elizabeth Taylor (who gave a master class performance do not get me wrong). The point I’m making is when we’re talking the arts there is a time and a place for colorblind casting and a time in a place for accuracy. The big underlining question is is it art and is it powerful, and does it articulate the intended human connection. For me this movie checked all three boxes.
for me those scotish noblesman in scotland and british noblesman in the english court understimated both Mary and Elizabeth, they were the ones that conspired the rivalry between the two queens , accuse of crimes she never did and defame her character to have her dethrone and was used as pawn by King Phillip of Spain to force Elizabeth to reculentely and unwilling have her executed and she lived with that regret, all because they didn't want a woman ruling both england and scotland, but they lost in the end for yes they may have helped kill mary stuart and yes elizabeth died without giving birth to a heir and not becoming married but they didn't destroy the believes and legacy of this two awsome woman and that King James was that man carried that legacy that know in present time House of Moubattian Windsor carries as they rule the UK side by side with the parliment formed by the kingdom's people, so amazing that Mary nor Elizabeth did not gave those men in their royal court the satisfaction of seeing them defeated and ruined but instead they saw two women who faced death fearless,confident and bravely as they know that they have conquered all their foes, have found redemption of past mistakes and are hopefull for the future of the realm will be good hands
Mary was not seasick, her ladies were. The hairstyles are ridiculous, they became popular in her son and grandson's time.
@Thomas Robinson Boy you need to do some research or something because those hairstyles literally existed in the 16th and 17th centuries...😂
@Thomas Robinson Ok that makes sense.
I love how the video ends. Elizabeth spots Robert and smiles with joy at the sight of her one true Favorite.
This film, though it has a lot of historical inaccuracies has been one of my faves. Mary was chanting/praying "Hail Holy Queen" in Latin before she was stumbled by the waves on the shore.
After watching Reign I can't deal with this.
Reign is bs
@@盧璘壽로인수 it’s a good show 😭 historically accurate? not really. but it’s amazing
go back to ur prom dresses
Reign is unwatchable
the costumes may not be glamourous and pininterest type like in Reign
but here, they are so well done and memorable....thats one thing i like of this film
maybe this film did not fit the YA trope we see in tik tok or social media like love triangles and perfect beauty
where is Catherine de Medici tho 🤔😂 iykyk
Back in France, where she was at this time..
the story of the film begins when Mary returns in Scotland, the first scene is her arriving.
Reign!
I really love English history!!i ve watched all movies but still hard to understand who was from which house...too many houses too many names...but from the little i know i really loved Elizabeth A'...must have been an extraordinary woman!!! Love from Greece
More Scottish than English
Stuart and Tudor and the last building is Longleat House.
R.I.P. 7th Marquess of Bath.
Saoirse Ronan is such an amazing actress 💖👏👏
Mary was 5 when she was sent to France. Hardly an "infant".
She be some queen @ six days or a week old according to the stuff about the real Mary
Infant means young child...
Mary's execution was a hideously botched affair. It took two strokes to kill her. When the executioner held up her head, it fell from the wig she was wearing.
It rolled on the ground, and her lips kept moving for fifteen minutes. The crowd fled in horror.
Her lips didn't keep moving for 15 minutes omggg you people will say anything. 🤭🤣
Talk about getting the last word.
@@KabbalahSherry if you read reports and letters from that time it's a very interesting read.
I think people just said that to gossip, I doubt that happened
Anyone decent should 'flee in horror' from murder!
And, about 13 seconds (or less) is the medically accepted time for the brain to react to trauma of that magnitude, before it completely loses consciousness through blood loss. Ample time for the eyes to register shock, prompting the mouth to open wide, seeming to form speech.
When in shock yourself, from viewing something like this, about 13 seconds can be a long time!
I can understand people's frustrations with inaccuracies, but I do think that those same people could do with being less uptight and nit-picky with every little thing. Just enjoy the film. It isn't claiming to be the be all and end all of knowledge on the subject.
Agree! And this is one of the "more" accurate portrayals, much more accurate than ex Reign and Tudors.
A person is not going to enjoy a film because another person commands them to.
@@Himaryous Hi there. I am not commanding anyone to do anything. You are free to take or deny whatever advice is given.
@@Himaryous😢 I need to be upset and whine and cry go away don't tell me to be happy 😭😭😭😭 grrrrrrrrrrr 👹👹👹👹👹
I just came here to gauke at the wonderfully sweet yet rare glimpses of Dudley, aka Joe Alwyn.
I think they should have cast someone with darker hair and complexion. Robert Dudley was called the "Gypsy" for his looks. He had a much more imperious appearance, at least that's how he looks in his portraits and what was written about him by his contemporaries.
They had some crazy hair gel in their times.
I wonder how they traveled from France to Scotland by small boats
You take small boats from the ship to the shore.
Hollywood and Netflix - never let fact get in the way of a good story
Do you not know what a movie is? It's a vehicle to tell a story. Watch a documentary if you want accuracy.
I see Mary went the scenic route from Leith to Edinburgh.
I am directly related. My 13th great aunt is Mary Fleming, her mother is my direct Grandma. My father is Byron Fleming Gaines.. The Fleming carried over to the USA.
The leeway in historical artistic license is surprising. I assume that soon we will have a films claiming that Shakespeare, Mozart, and Beethoven were all Africans.
You will be shocked by this @1010Huey Channel 5 is doing a dramatization on Anne Boleyn played by a black actress!
Funny how it's that that bothers you and not the inaccuracies in the story or costuming, or sets. I wish bigots would just come out and say what they mean instead of pretending they care about accuracy in fictional accounts that play with fact willy nilly, to begin with. Just say you like your fiction cis, white, and straight and be done with it.
@@Ceares Having a black actor in the role of an important courtier during 16th century IS INACCURATE. It does a gross disservice to history. BTW ... I doubt you'd express such a cavalier attitude if they'd cast a white man as Shaka Zulu or Nelson Mandela.
@@ryan7864 Yep.
@@Ceares We'll just make Winnie Mandela a Blonde haired blue eyed slim woman in Mandela's next film, you won't have a problem with that, right?
I know they're trying to be all politically correct. But I don't think they had Asians or African-Europeans in nobility then. Also Mary spoke with a French accent
Yeah, they actually had Black nobles way back when, especially in Spain.
You are correct in one thing-her accent. However, people of color existed in medieval and Renaissance Europe. There are writings and paintings of POC of all classes.
I believe they did because of Henry the 8thd marriage to Catherine of aragon. She brought over black nobles. Otherwise I don't think they would been there. Not sure about the Asians though.
@@cyde1345 "Black Nobles", "way back when" ... where are you getting that from? Who was a black noble in Spain? You might be able to argue the Moors, before they were pushed out, but 16th century England? You're living in fantasy land.
@@chelseawritesbooks8763 There were Europeans in Africa at that time as well trading, but like people of color in Europe at that time, the numbers would be so miniscule, it wouldn't even register a percentage point. And certainly no person of color would be in an advisory position to a European monarch anymore than a White person would be in the court of Imperial China. It just would not happen.
👑Mary Stuart queen of scots 👑
No❤️
Yes
@@lovepower4899 You should read her true story. Oh, my God, I forgot you're a biased person. You don't care about history. Truth
I am of her blood line.
The "moors" were not prevalent at court.
Moops
The Straggletag George Costanza and the bubble boy
Of course not ... this was virtue signalling.
I think this is the only movie Saoirse was on that critics didn’t really love. Was this her latest project? I hope not.. I hope Little women was because that was one of her greatest work!
yes little women was her latest .
@1:44 what did she say?
watchable film but would of been better if historicaly correct.
Accuracy is rarely the point when it comes to historical fiction because their main selling point is drama.
Who’s this brother? All of James V’s sons died before Mary was born and her half brother from her mother first marriage had died years before.
I'm not sure who the mother is of this James, but Mary did have an illegitimate half-brother ruling for her until she returned from France. And he did eventually act as regent for very young son after she ran off to England. He was assassinated at some point, though, not too many years later, if my memory serves me right.
This James is her half brother, the illegitimate son of James v and his mistress Margaret erskine
Es el hermano ilegítimo de María, Jacobo, but, era ilegítimo, ya que nació fuera de un matrimonio y nunca fue reconocido como hijo, fue más bien enemigo de María, ya que lidero rebeliones protestantes encontra de ella, por lo tanto fue exiliado de escocia y volvería para 1567 para ser el regente de su sobrino el rey Jacobo. Hijo de María, de tan solo 1 año de vida.
Thats James Stewart, 1st Earl of Moray. She also had other half siblings as well. Including a half sister.
Why do they print texts so small that they are unreadable? It's really annoying for those of us who have visual impairments
Um exuse me that is not adelaide kane
is this old england or some mixed raced fantasy version of it?
Uggh. I Googled looking to read the opening text of the movie and this (on my phone) is no more legible than the movie text.
TV and movie producers really need to format their onscreen texts (texts, subtitles, phone and computer screens) so they too, can be visible on any screen, and remember that not everyone is viewing on a 50-inch tv.
Smart TVs should have the capacity of reducing font size of movies the same way phones do, if the reason for this recent font size reduction by producers has been because people complained the texts were too large.
Mary with Scottish Accent ... IMplausible. She lived in France and would have learned English from an English tutor.
Wait...Did she have a Scottish accent?
No. She grew up in France. She didn't even speak a word of English.
@@isobelduncan She spoke French mostly and did English with great difficulty.
@@isobelduncan your correct she didn’t speak English ,she did in fact speak in Scots .
Where to watch for free? 😢
8:19 what am i watching now
Mulan?
As soon as I saw 'Holyrood Palace' and heard Mary's Scottish accent, I knew this film was a fantasy and could only be watched as such. A shame, as some things were excellent. More attention to the historical detail and this could have been something special.
Guys, is there anybody who can give Latin subtitles for me what Saoirse said? Start in 1:29
I found a copy of the script the latin is a prayer.
"Salve, Regina, Mater misericordiæ, vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra, salve. Ad te clamamus exsules filii Hevæ, In te Domino confido..." It translates to "Hello, Queen, life, sweetness and our hope. To you we send Eve; I trust in the Lord ..."
@@violacola OmL, Thank You so Much!!!!😭👍👍
After the Ave Maria the Salve Regina is one of the most popular Catholic prayers to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The opening is usually translated 'Hail, Holy Queen, mother of mercy, hail our life, our sweetness, our hope...'
this is the most historically inaccurate court of Elizabeth ive ever laid my eyes on. yesh
gosh u haven’t watch the golden age?
Is part of Holly Rood built into a cave? It's so rustic and beautiful
I think the movie is suggesting that they could have met in secret, if they really did ever meet in real life we could of possible never have known because it was a secret. Its historical fictiony, its not a documentary.
WHyyyyy does she have a Scottish accent!?! She was raised in France! AUHHH
They have an black actor in the role of a courtier in 16th century Europe ... you really think they're going to get accents correct?
we don’t even know historically what accent she had yall just assumed bc she was raised in france
I'm from Nairobi kenya and I'm surprised that they were black English men in medieval England
There were Moorish people in Europe but they were mainly servants.
that's right !!
Queen Catherine of Aragon had a black man in her retinue whose job was to play the ceremonial trumpet and who she paid so not a slave.
So many things wrong with this film. Elizabeth R starring Glenda Jackson is the best Elizabeth ever and the historical research was done properly
What wrong with the film?
@@athak31 Costumes and historical events incorrect. Plus Mary was brought up in France so she should have a French accent really. Obviously accents have changed since then but she wouldn't be Scottish x
I much prefer "Mary, Queen of Scots" starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson. While it still takes dramatic license with some aspects of history, I think it's far superior in the acting, costumes, and characters.
@@deb-1558 costumes were pretty accurate tbh
I love the girls but Margot and Saorise don't give off queen vibes tbh
5:18 Harley Quinn. XD
Elizabeth 1 was just awful for beheading her cousin, and history treats her as "good" and noble. This has always baffled me.
Elizabeth is great this movie is biased to Mary come on!
She beheaded her cousin because she tried to usurp the throne. And for that, she got the chop.
Elizabeth is a good politician and everyone can see that mary is a loose cannon and unpredictable. Any sensible statesman would definitely eliminate her.
Elizabeth didn't want to sighn the papers to behead her she refused them 3 times. When she had no other choice she scribbled her signature without looking at the paper. You can see in other papers she writes her signature always very carefully and neatly. But on the execution papers for Mary it's written sloppy and with an almost dry pen. So she must have been been reluctant to actually make this happen. Ofcorse Mary of Scots only did what she felt was right in her heart. But Elizabeth needed to pretect herself from the same faith. And by making Mary's son the next heir to the throne you can see she never wanted to go so far as it had to go.
@@sahaferz yes all of this. And no I'm not English and I didn't get the watered down version of English history but the brutal version (each school tries to soften up the history of their own country)
African courtiers in medieval England?, just more woke crap over riding history.
That’s Blackness Castle... not Holyrood!
They wouldn't have been able to use Holyrood. Plus it would've been vastly different at the time to how it is now.
Its a great movie regardless of the re-imagining... great soundtrack. I agree id have reversed the the queens ..
Everyone here complaining about “historical inaccuracies” should go watch a documentary instead.
I don't watch these movies as they are WOKE, which means STUPID. Let's make Nelson Mandela a CAUCASION and how about turning Queen Nefertiti into a Blonde-haired Scandinavian woman? STOP TRYING TO CHANGE HISTORY. If you're so dying to feature Black People in films, JUST MAKE A MOVIE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE.
The 1971 movie starring Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson - with a very noteworthy performance by Timothy Dalton, is superior in every single way, including insinuating the sad fact that "Queen" Mary was never loved by Scotland, and was, in fact, a very, very silly little girl prone to infatuation and fantasy and utterly not a match, in any way, to Elizabeth 1.
im 47 years old and i thought i was pretty sure i knew who my dream girl was, till i saw Saoirse Ronan as Mary Stewart. Heads over heels in love.
Saoirse Ronan does indeed look a lot like Mary queen of Scots.
Screw people who misrepresent history
its a historical drama u got urself into this
@@marishkaaaa-r0p ...What? Lmfao
@@clubsnatcher if u want history go watch a documentary
People moaning about historical inaccuracies?? Read a book for your knowledge not a blockbuster movie. It's not ment to be an accurate portrayal. Grow up
Who else took a screenshot of 5:20?
What if the history books you've been taught, report the wrong history deliberately... what if movies we see that don't match up w historical reports, are actually the real accounts of history?
What's with the black guy and the Asian chicken. A little historically inaccurate
It's historically fiction, accuracy isn't the point. The director even said she wasn't interested in making an all white period piece.
@@isobelduncan Mary Queen 👸 of Scots is not fiction,
@@isobelduncan The director was interested in virtual signalling.
She is my 13 great grandmother
Hey thats robert dudley.. isn't he little young
Love this movie
Saoirse Ronan is perfect as Mary
So Mary, queen of scots deserved England more than queen Elizabeth because her father didn't deserve the crown, after the death of their elder sibling Arthur ,the crown should have been given to Margaret Tudor as she was elder than Henry, so as the granddaughter of Margaret Tudor, Mary, queen of scots deserved it more.
Political correctness at its worst: trying to change history.
Liz Ion Where？？
Mary queen of Scots and Queen Elizabeth never met /Elizabeth’s lady in waiting Bess Hardwick was white not Chinese / Queen Elizabeth’s courtier Lord Thomas Randolph was white not black/ Mary Queen of Scots did not have a black lady in waiting/Queen Elizabeth and Mary were never friends. There’s 5 historical inaccuracies. There were people of colour during the Tudor period and Elizabeth would have employed some black servants and musicians but non rose to the rank of courtiers or advisors. It is historically important to include black people in the film but to portray them in such roles was to change history.
Also, according to every scholar-historian w/ subject expertise in Mary, she did not have a Scots accent, as she was raised in the French court.
@@lizion5926 they are not saying there was... they are just actors... its called "color-blind casting", its pretty common in English theater...
I couldn't agree more! This is history people tell the truth instead of trying to make a point!
Great acting and some good moments. However, I found the pacing to be problematic and the deviation from historical record kind of made the whole point of a historic film moot.
@3.5 That woman with curly hair, blue eyes and dusky skin is gorgeous as hell. Not too thin, not to fat😍😍😍
no era Ysabel Tudor la pelirroja?
Si, a isabel la describían de cabellos largos y pelirrojos, María estuardo en realidad era de cabellos castaños rojizos, no pelirroja, por lo tanto es mito de que era pelirroja, es que la ponían de cabello pelirrojo por que la tachaban de prostituta, ya que se cree que se acostó fuera del matrimonio y asesino a su marido, por lo que le dieron la espalda el pueblo de Escocia e incluyendo a los católicos.
Who's the cutie (guy) at 3.23?
Love this movie but I don't understand why the men were making out they thought it was Cruse
If I was producing this, for a laugh I would have had a cushion in the background with Live Laugh Love on it lol
I thought they did a fantastic job with the sets, but I’m a little curious does the interior of Holyrood really look like a cavern?
It's not Holyrood. It's Blackness.
@@isobelduncan Ah, got the wrong impression from when he said “how long are you planning to stay” and then she answered “in Holyrood?”
@@antmagor In the film, it is Holyrood. I think the cavern room was filmed on sets. The exterior scenes is Blackness Castle.
@@Xerxes2005 I also think upon further reflection that the darkness at Mary’s court was supposed to articulate what happens to her in the future. She is a tragic figure after all. It Along with the fact that she’s wearing blue all the time is supposed to symbolize how she is set in her ways and reflects a commitment to tradition and the past (i.e. the Catholic Church). Whereas Elizabeth’s court is bright and she is dressed in multiple colors but predominantly gold. Symbolizing change and the Golden age.
@@antmagor They also like to picture Scotland as this harsh, backward country, like in Braveheart where William Wallace lived in a hut made of mud and wore blue war paint, when he was really a nobleman... So now the castle is in a cave... As for the blue, I never saw it as a Catholic colour. It was the colour of France though, and Mary had been Queen of France (if only for a short time).
Can someone explain to me why there are black actors in this? It's not a fantasy film like the Witcher. It's supposed to be historically correct 🤦🤦
Not really, it's historical fiction. Their main selling point is drama.
We most surely and saliently know THERE WERE so factually noted Black Tudor figures. Learn about John Blanke, who trumpeted under King Henry VII and King Henry VIII. Learn about Katalina de Motril, who served Queen Catherine of Aragon. Learn to recognise and respect noted Black British figures of the past and present, who most surely and saliently must be represented. Even if there were not any noted Black Tudor figures, which we most surely and saliently know THERE WERE, wonderful Black actors need to be paid and recognised for their excellent dramatic talent and abilities (like anyone else) so they should not be excluded for more convinienced viewing. It is inequitable and impractical. Earning a living is much more important than enjoying a viewing.
The Serpent Queen's Mary Stuart is, I believe, far more accurate. Her religious fanaticism caused her self-righteous and downfall. Saoirse's Mary is a modern take on a religious person.
Black people as advisers at that time, seriously !?
Mel Gibson, Liam Neeson, Chris Pine, Saorise Ronan - so they don't cast Scottish people to star in movies about Scots?
The exception is Angus McFadyen!
doesn't matter
The music I vi IV V....what is this, rock 'n Roll? Who did the score? Come on!
3:19 Miley Cyrus?
Just another story. But I liked the music.
Is this Nicola Sturgeon, the Movie
Wow never knew Mary met Elizabeth in secret thats actually so cool
They didn't. The movie is dramatized history.
@kconley87 Why would the movie lie about something like this? Exactly...
Lol so multicultural 🙄😂
its literally just poc
This movie is ART
Didnt Mary grew up in France? She shouldnt have a scottish accent at all
Unless there is positive evidence, which I don't think there is, then the gratuitous "blackwashed" character does not really enhance the work.
It doesn't. It's virtue signalling at the expense of real history. Liberals want to believe some fantasy that never was there a time in world history when it was any less diverse than today.
😍
"Our Catholics must know that a Papist will never again sit on the English throne."
I did that.😂
I would hate to born around this time so much war and suffering killings