Average Customer Review:
 ( 110 customer reviews )
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
200 of 208 found the following review helpful:
 two fantastic movies finally arriving on DVDJul 16, 2007
By Charity Bishop
"Film Fanatic"
I was so glad to hear that both films were being released as a duel set. "Anne of the Thousand Days" and "Mary Queen of Scots" are independent enough to stand alone, but even more charming when watched back to back, since the latter references minor details in the former.
"Anne of the Thousand Days" is the story of Anne Boleyn and how she was pursued by Henry VIII at the cost of his marriage and the fate of England's understanding with the Catholic church. It is both a charming retelling and one that has a particular bite to it, particularly as Anne's world starts to fall apart when Henry's eye is cast upon the beautiful Jane Seymour. For a late sixties production, the value of filmmaking is excellent; the costuming is absolutely gorgeous, and the performances are memorable. If nothing else, Anne's final speech to her husband while imprisoned in the Tower of London will linger with you -- that it will be their daughter, Elizabeth, who is remembered for her reign.
"Mary Queen of Scots" does not deal merely with the title lady, but also her cousin Elizabeth, whose performance is beyond brilliance. It does dally a bit with the facts but no one really cares since it is presented in such an interesting manner. There are some gruesome aspects that seem a bit startling in contrast with the beauty of the film, but nevertheless it carries quite an impact, and the chance to see Mary and Elizabeth head to head in a couple of different scenes is well worth your time. I particularly liked the depiction of Elizabeth as something of a jealous, temperamental woman, since she was known for her tantrums, just like her dear father.
I pre-ordered this the moment I learned about it, and look forward to viewing both films in all their former glory. And if you're anything like me, a fan of the Tudor generations, you'll want to add it to your collection as well.
54 of 55 found the following review helpful:
 THE QUEEN WHO RULED WITH HER HEART AND LOST HER HEAD...Sep 28, 2001
By Lawyeraau
This is a stunning period epic, though not historically accurate. Then again, these historical dramas seldom are. Nonetheless, Vanessa Redgrave, in the title role of Mary Stuart, the first Queen Regnant of Scotland, is luminous. She plays the beleagured Scottish Queen to perfection, at times skittish and capricious and, alternately, commanding and royal. Patrick McGooghan is marvelous as her bastard half brother, the dour Earl of Moray, who is coldly implacable in his ambition and desire to sit upon the Scottish throne. Nigel Davenport is excellent in the role of the virile and sexy Earl of Bothwell, whom he plays as a man of some integrity, who, while ambitious, is loyal to Mary, whom he loves. Glenda Jackson is magnificent in the role of Elizabeth I of England, imperious, wily, and intelligent, a master of political intrigue and statesmanship. Timothy Dalton strikes the only discordant note, as his portrayal of the dissolute Lord Darnley is one dimensional and falls flat, leaving the viewer to wonder what Mary saw in him in the first place.The film begins with an idyllic scene in France, which shows Mary with her then husband, Francois, the King of France. He dies a premature death, and there being no love lost between Mary and her sharp tongued mother-in-law, she returns to her native Scotland, where she is Queen in her own right. When Mary, a staunch Catholic, arrives with her retinue in Scotland, she is given a most unroyal and barely civil welcome by her half brother, the Protestant Earl of Moray, and the Lords of the Congregation. She is also repudiated by the Calvinist reformer, John Knox, who denounces her in no uncertain terms. Mary is surprised by his vitriolic attack, as she is quite progressive for her time and believes in religious tolerance. She is all for worshipping according to one's own conscience. The terms of her reign, however, are finally made clear to her by her half brother, whom she, understandably, hates by now. She, an anointed Queen, is to be a puppet, and he, the power behind the throne. Meanwhile, Protestant half brother dearest intrigues with the Protestant Elizabeth I of England. She is concerned about Mary, a Catholic Queen with a legitimate claim to the English throne, as her own kingdom has some unrest between Catholics and Protestants. As a direct result of the intrigue, Mary makes a most unfortunate marriage to the dissolute Lord Darnley, a handsome but morally weak noble with a proclivity for insalubrious activities. She soon provides Scotland with an heir, but her marriage to Darnley is doomed and sets off a chain of events from which would follow murder, regicide, and a second marriage to an ambitious Scottish border lord, the Earl of Bothwell. This event is ultimately the catalyst for an enforced abdication by Mary and exile to England, where she is under house arrest for nineteen years. Her son and husband denied her, this most unhappy of women is finally caught in an intrigue with Catholic English lords. Elizabeth I reluctantly orders her execution upon a finding of treason. In the end, however, it is Mary, who has the last laugh, as Elizabeth I is childless, and Mary's son, James, would one day ascend to the English throne, being next in the line of succession.
46 of 47 found the following review helpful:
The Life, Loves, And Tragedy Of The Beautiful Queen of ScotsApr 08, 2003
By Simon Davis
"Mary, Queen of Scots", despite its occasional diverging with historical fact has always been a favourite history drama of mine. Being as fascinated by Tudor and Stuart history as I am I was always bound to love this lavish production but it is the lavish production, beautiful location photography in France and Scotland, exquisite costumes and historical attention to detail that always intrigue me. They all come together in an engrossing chronicle of the story of the tragic young Mary, Queen of Scots from her early years of a priveledged existence at the refined French court, through her years of personal rule in Scotland to her abdication and then her nineteen lonely years as Queen Elizabeth's "unofficial" prisoner in England till her execution for treason. Here is a historical legend if ever there was one.
The production boasts a stellar cast of seasoned British acting greats and in particular alot of the film's majesty comes from the brilliant playing of the two leads in their only meeting on screen Vanessa Redgrave who plays Mary and Glenda jackson repeating her Emmy Award winning interpretation of Queen Elizabeth 1 from her earlier stunning BBC mini series "Elizabeth R". Nominated for an Academy Award as Best Actress for her performance here Vanessa Redgrave has never been more luminous than in her playing of the romantic young Queen torn from her comfortable surroundings at her beloved French court for an uncertain future in the Protestant dominated far north of her native Scotland. She is at turns innocent, wily, stunningly beautiful, and unfailingly brave and optimistic, in short a perfect representation of the fascinating real life historical Queen. Glenda Jackson matches her every step of the way as her rival and enemy and ultimately her goaler and executioner. Her's might be the smaller of the two roles but she is magnificent in her scenes and makes all the recent portrayals of Queen Elizabeth seem very pale in comparison. I wont spend alot of time debating the fictional events that are woven into the story here but I will say that this film must first be viewed as part fact, part fiction, and there is no point in getting upset of some of the scenes included here. First and foremost a lot of discussion is always spent around the two meetings between Mary and Elizabeth in the film. As any avid reader of the history of this period will know, despite the fact that both women's lives were torturously intertwined for many years they never actually met. That said and done these two scenes in "Mary, Queen of Scots", showing the two women meeting are superb and the sparks ingnited between Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson add up to wonderful acting and drama. Here are two extremely gifted actresses in roles totally suited to their characters and they achieve memorable work together.
The film is rich with other stunning performances as well. Ian Holm is first class as the tragic Riccio, Mary's private secretary who pays the ultimate price for his loyalty to her. Timothy Dalton an actor who I have long admired excels as the vain and beastly Darnley, Mary's second husband who helps lead Mary to her eventual ruin. Nigel Davenport plays the Earl of Bothwell more as a roguish cavalier than as the uncouth adventurer that Bothwell was in real life. Nevertheless his acting with Vanessa Redgrave in the scenes just prior to Mary's abdication are matchless in their romantic passion. Patrick McGoohan plays James Stuart the wily illegitimate brother of mary with just the right levels of malice and superficial grace. At the English court the British acting talent is just as much on display with veteran Trevor Howard portraying a superb Sir William Cecil, Elizabeth's cunning Chief advisor and Daniel Massey, who just prior to this role had made a great impression portraying Noel Coward in "Star!", plays Robert Dudley, Elizabeth's supposed lover for most of her reign.
The production is blessed with sceneic views that will take your breath away and the overall production has a wonderfully lavish look about it as befits such a sweeping historical saga. I've always enjoyed this drama and if you appreciate fine acting despite the divergence from historical fact then this production cannot be bettered. Certainly it gives a sympathetic view of Mary's life and career but I feel where possible all the elements of her fascinating character have been included. I highly recommend this very dazzling production of "Mary, Queen of Scots", to all lovers of history and those that admire fine acting.
71 of 77 found the following review helpful:
gripping drama, if slightly embroideredAug 01, 2000
By a reviewer in Bethesda, MD.
"Mary, Queen of Scots" is an enthralling and colorful film, with strong performances by Vanessa Redgrave in the title role and Glenda Jackson as the formidable Queen Elizabeth I. Regretfully, the filmmakers couldn't resist the temptation to embellish history by staging a face-to-face meeting between the two monarchs (which never actually occurred), but that's the only complaint I would offer. If you're interested in the intersecting fortunes of the Tudor and Stuart dynasties, played out against a backdrop of court intrigue and explosive passions, then this is a film you won't want to miss. I note some inaccuracies, however, in the reviews posted by Amazon.com's Marshall Fine and customer Katharine Williams. For example: Mr. Fine writes that Mary "claims the Scottish crown from her mother upon her death," which gives the false impression that Mary's mother was the previous sovereign (whereas Mary's mother was simply Regent of Scotland until Mary reached the age of majority; Mary officially became Queen of Scotland during her infancy, as the only surviving legitimate child of King James V of Scotland). Also, Mr. Fine states that Mary, a Catholic, "runs up against religious prejudice" from her Protestant cousin, Queen Elizabeth I of England (not true; Elizabeth tolerated both Catholics and Protestants in her realm, and she did not engage in religious persecution). Rather, the enmity between the two queens stemmed primarily from political considerations (after all, Mary fomented instability in England by encouraging the plotters who wanted her to seize Elizabeth's crown!) and also, inevitably, from the personal rivalry that existed between the only two female sovereigns of the day: Mary and Elizabeth, related by blood and presiding over neighboring kingdoms, were naturally curious about -- and intensely competitive with -- one another. Finally, Ms. Williams, in her otherwise very intelligent and thoughtful comments, describes Mary as "Queen Regent" of Scotland (no such title ever existed: one may be Regent, or Queen, but not both simultaneously). Instead, Mary was "Queen Regnant" -- meaning that she was a monarch in her own right, as opposed to being a king's consort. Also, Ms. Williams says that Mary was "Queen Claimant" of England -- again, there has never been any such title. (Clearly, Mary DID attempt to claim Elizabeth's throne, so one should simply describe her as a "claimant" -- a statement of fact, but not a title in itself.) For anyone who wonders about the basis for Mary's claim to the English crown, Mary was the granddaughter of Margaret Tudor (sister of England's notorious King Henry VIII, who was Elizabeth's father). The kingdoms of England and Scotland were finally united at Elizabeth's death, when Mary's son (already King James VI of Scotland) became King James I of England.
37 of 41 found the following review helpful:
Don't be put off by the production date!!! Gorgeous film!Jun 25, 2007
By Catherine Swinford
This is a beautifully done and fairly accurate movie about the short-lived romance of Anne Boleyn and Henry Tudor. The costumes are wonderful, if not altogether accurate for the period. It is one of the best movies done about the Tudor scandal, though it only covers Anne's story. My only question is this: Why is Catherine of Aragon ALWAYS cast as a modern hispanic woman??? There are several portraits of the lady, all showing her to have been a pale red-head. Spanish royalty of that period were very aryan, thank you very much, all you casting directors out there!!!
See all 110 customer reviews on Amazon.com
|
based on 110 reviews
