FILM REVIEWS—ONE AFTER 90 YEARS

I WAS DELIGHTED TO SEE THE HISTORY EXTRA FEATURE  “Ask the Experts: What’s the Most Inaccurate Historical Film?” What fun.

However, the flicks discussed there are all relatively recent ones, like Mary Queen of Scots, 2018, whereas my own movie affection is for much older fare, such as Turner Classic Movies’ recently broadcast Mary of Scotland, 1936. 

No big thing: Why not review both with tidbits gleaned all around? The latter flick is 90 years old, but, gee, I’m younger than that.

TCM describes Mary of Scotland as the “True story of two women—queens, cousins and mortal enemies—each devout in her belief that she is the savior of England.” 

Indeed, put “True” in quotes; sorta Hollywood true.

A Cast of Thousands; Seventy of Them Named. IMDb notes that Katharine Hepburn portrays Mary; Florence Eldridge, Elizabeth I. It lists 38 people in named roles, including two other actors I recognize: Fredric March and Alan Mowbray. And 32 others portray roles such as “boy in boat,” “soldier,” and “jailer.”

Wikipedia recounts, “Directed by John Ford, it is an adaptation of the 1933 Maxwell Anderson play, with Fredric March reprising the role of Bothwell, which he also performed on stage during the run of play…. Ginger Rogers wanted to play this role [Mary] and made a screen test, but RKO rejected her request to be cast in the part, feeling that the role was not suitable to her image.”

Gee, they’re telling me.  

Tracy Borman’s Review in History Extra. Tracy Borman is an author, historian, and broadcaster. She relates of Mary Queen of Scots, 2018, “As female sovereigns battling for survival in a male-dominated age, they had much in common. In other respects, they couldn’t have been more different. Put simply, Elizabeth ruled with the head, Mary with the heart.”

“The drama of their relationship,” Borman continues “reads like a soap opera: little wonder it has inspired generations of screenwriters…. As is so often the case, Mary is portrayed as a tragic heroine rather than the architect of her own downfall.”

My view about the 1936 flick agree with this. She asked for it; and she got what’s coming.

Elizabeth’s Stomach. Borman recounts, “A number of other inaccuracies are littered throughout the film, the most irritating of which is a scene in which Elizabeth stares wistfully down at her stomach, imagining herself pregnant. This flies in the face of compelling evidence that she harboured a deep-seated aversion to marriage and childbirth.”

I recall no such scene in the 1936 flick. Indeed, given its Post-Code era, any hint of this would have been strictly verboten. It wasn’t until decades later that pregnancy could be suggested, let alone discussed. 

 Mary and Elizabeth Never Met. Borman describes, “But the biggest inaccuracy of all is the scene in which the two queens meet. The whole point of Elizabeth and Mary’s relationship is that they never did meet—if they had, things might have turned out very differently. They relied on letters, ambassadorial reports and rumours to build a picture of each other and chart the treacherous waters of Anglo-Scottish politics and diplomacy.”

“Yet in the film,” Borman notes, “they come together (in an abandoned barn!) for a highly charged exchange during which they express vulnerability, jealousy and sisterhood. It might be the emotional climax of the film, but made me want to throw my popcorn at the screen.”

Ditto the 1936 flick, though I wasn’t eating popcorn at the time.

An Operatic Pause. There’s the Donizetti bel canto opera  Maria Stuarda based on Schiller’s 1800 play Maria Stuart. As I noted back in “A Theatrical Spin—And One Thing Leads to Another,” SimanaitisSays, June 14, 2022:  “Here’s an immensely complex tale in 67 Words: Mary had been tossed in jail on a bad rap of murdering her husband. In fact, it was because she had claimed Elizabeth’s throne. Elizabeth was Protestant (daughter of Anne Boleyn and serial nuptialist/monastery confiscator Henry VIII). Her cousin Mary was Catholic (daughter of James V of Scotland and Margaret Tudor, sister of Henry VIII).  Each knew God was on her side. Divine Right, don’tcha know.”

But then as Sir Peter Ustinov said memorably, “Opera rides the razor edge of absurdity.” By the way, in the Met’s Maria Stuarda, Mary “prays that England may be spared the vengeful wrath of God. Dressed in red, the color of Catholic martyrdom, she ascends the scaffold.” 

Mary of Scotland These Days. I’ve interspersed trailers from the 1936 flick here and there. There’s also Cecil B. Demille’s excellent radio production of Mary of Scotland performed on the Lux Radio Theater. 

Another option is Mary of Scotland, Parts 1-12. 3 unavailable videos are hidden. 

Last, there’s also a complete 2:03:28 Mary of Scotland 1936 at https://ok.ru/video/261637212835. From the .ru (and Russian for “Video”), I suspect it’s a pirated copy.

Let your conscience be your guide. ds

© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2026