Mary Queen of Scots 4K UHD (2018)

[Weirded Wonder]

Not a single Best Buy in my area received more than 2 copies. All of which were sold out. Guess I'll order online and have to wait. Oh well.

[DavePS3]

Liked it quite a bit! The exterior scenes are perfectly balanced whereas the interiors are pushed lighter. DV pops nicely, powerful score, awesome acting by all. Atmos pounds when it needs to. Very effective period drama.

[cynatnite]

I rented this first and I'm glad I did. Some of the performances were good, but the film overall didn't have much else to it. It's a hard pass for me.

Now, give me Glenda Jackson and Cate Blanchett on UHD. Those I will jump on.

[tyrok]

Originally Posted by Weirded Wonder

Not a single Best Buy in my area received more than 2 copies. All of which were sold out. Guess I'll order online and have to wait. Oh well.

Universal is usually pretty good about getting a restock in by Friday when this happens.

[TheBoss062]

None of my local stores were carrying copies, Walmart, Target, FYE, none of them. Best Buy had one copy left to grab.

[anthonyls]

I watched this last night (or should say I tried to...). What a mess historically. Pure fan fiction. Too bad... it might have been a good movie with the budget behind it. Unfortunately, it had the wrong director who wanted to make a politically correct movie for the Instagram/Facebook generation. Cleaning your bathroom might be a better use of your time.

[filmbuffTX]

I read an article/interview awhile ago where the director said that when she was in early discussions with the producers of the movie she told them that she was not going to direct an all white period film, and they were OK with that.

I didn’t go into this movie expecting a history lesson, I’ll read a book or find a documentary for that. I just wanted to be entertained and I was. They definitely played with some of the historical facts for dramatic effect. For example, I don’t think Mary and Elizabeth ever met face to face in person. Overall I think it’s a nice movie with excellent production and costume design. I really like the cast as well.

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

I watched this last night (or should say I tried to...). What a mess historically. Pure fan fiction. Too bad... it might have been a good movie with the budget behind it. Unfortunately, it had the wrong director who wanted to make a politically correct movie for the Instagram/Facebook generation. Cleaning your bathroom might be a better use of your time.

You wonder indeed why the bother to make period films if they are incapable of assuming the period's attitudes and mentalities (like, say, The Vvitch, which should be considered a benchmark on how to approach period films). the whole point of films like these or The Favourite is to push the agenda among those who are against it.

[Majoran]

Well it didn’t take long for the “agenda” crowd to come in. As filmbuff said, this was not a biography, but an entertainment piece. I was highly entertained and the cast, cinematography and costume work was excellent.

[anthonyls]

Originally Posted by Majoran

Well it didn’t take long for the “agenda” crowd to come in. As filmbuff said, this was not a biography, but an entertainment piece. I was highly entertained and the cast, cinematography and costume work was excellent.

True... so why not exchange the period swords for laser blasters instead. If we aren't going to even try to abide by a historical drama... let's just show whatever the kids wanna see. Hey, let's show everyone eating a vegan diet too... no meat on this set! And let's make Mary queen of Scot a man (who used to be a woman) who changes her (his) religion to Islam. Who then attacks Elizabeth (once they finally "fictitiously" meet) with a knife and yells, Allah Akbar!"

[Britnasty]

Originally Posted by Britnasty

My VUDU D+D copy came as well today and it was the Blu instead of 4K. Called in, the lady on the other end said they are aware of this widespread issue and would add me to the list of people.

An update for those who faced the same issue:

Vudu will issue you a full refund and remove the UHD digital copy from your library. The Blu-ray is ours to keep. If you want the UHD you will have to re-order and the correct disc will ship. However, it’s $7 morenow.

[Crow]

Don't waste your time with this over-produced dribble.
Watch the 1971 version with Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson.

[bigbadwoppet]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

True... so why not exchange the period swords for laser blasters instead. If we aren't going to even try to abide by a historical drama... let's just show whatever the kids wanna see. Hey, let's show everyone eating a vegan diet too... no meat on this set! And let's make Mary queen of Scot a man (who used to be a woman) who changes her (his) religion to Islam. Who then attacks Elizabeth (once they finally "fictitiously" meet) with a knife and yells, Allah Akbar!"

It didn't take long for the apologists of revisionism to defend this trash. If they only want entertainment, how do they get around these films without being hit on the head by the agenda pushers? I guess you cannot produce brain damage if there isn't much brain to damage to start with.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

True... so why not exchange the period swords for laser blasters instead. If we aren't going to even try to abide by a historical drama... let's just show whatever the kids wanna see. Hey, let's show everyone eating a vegan diet too... no meat on this set! And let's make Mary queen of Scot a man (who used to be a woman) who changes her (his) religion to Islam. Who then attacks Elizabeth (once they finally "fictitiously" meet) with a knife and yells, Allah Akbar!"

Same applies to a lot of modern WWII-based movies nowadays

[pottyaboutpotter1]

The issue is, no film based on true events has ever presented itself as historical fact. It's always an issue of taking different accounts from history and then constructing an entertaining and narratively satisfying story out of it.

As so much of recorded history is untrustworthy (conflicting and/or unreliable sources for example), we can't say with any certainty what sort of person someone was, what exactly happened to them, what their feelings were etc. We only have the facts of their stories. Basically, filmmakers are taking history and various events in a famous figure's life and using them to construct a connected and satisfying narrative.

Mary Queen of Scots is based on a biography written by John Guy, in which he went in depth into various sources to try and present the most complete picture of Mary's life, but the film still makes many changes and alterations to present a more narratively satisfying story for audiences and condense Mary's reign into a two hour film. The film didn't even invent the notion of Darnley (Mary's husband) being gay/bisexual; the previous 1971 film also included this and some biographies say Darnley had relations with men (where he is believed to have caught Syphilis). Guy has also stated that Darnley's affair with Rizzio is "true to history" and not one of the liberties with history the film took. (Side note: If I'm perfectly honest, I'm always baffled when people claim a character in a historical film being gay is historically inaccurate like homosexuality is only a modern invention, because that notion is entirely ridiculous, plus it's not as if we have proof that Darnley was definitively gay or straight or bisexual).

To get annoyed about a film being historically inaccurate is a bit of a pointless thing to do, because films rarely present themselves as true history. Filmmakers often have to make the decision to make a better film than a more historically accurate film; what may be historically accurate might not make for an entertaining or narratively satisfying film.

[TheBoss062]

Originally Posted by anthonyls

I watched this last night (or should say I tried to...). What a mess historically. Pure fan fiction. Too bad... it might have been a good movie with the budget behind it. Unfortunately, it had the wrong director who wanted to make a politically correct movie for the Instagram/Facebook generation. Cleaning your bathroom might be a better use of your time.

Okay. I laughed at that last statement.

Originally Posted by filmbuffTX

I read an article/interview awhile ago where the director said that when she was in early discussions with the producers of the movie she told them that she was not going to direct an all white period film, and they were OK with that.

I didn’t go into this movie expecting a history lesson, I’ll read a book or find a documentary for that. I just wanted to be entertained and I was. They definitely played with some of the historical facts for dramatic effect. For example, I don’t think Mary and Elizabeth ever met face to face in person. Overall I think it’s a nice movie with excellent production and costume design. I really like the cast as well.

Well correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t that racist? What if she had said that she wouldn’t direct a movie with an all black cast? Is that somehow okay?

[filmbuffTX]

Originally Posted by TheBoss062

Well correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t that racist? What if she had said that she wouldn’t direct a movie with an all black cast? Is that somehow okay?

No, I don’t think it’s racist. I think that the director made an artistic choice in how she wanted to cast her film.

[RockyIII]

Originally Posted by Majoran

Well it didn’t take long for the “agenda” crowd to come in. As filmbuff said, this was not a biography, but an entertainment piece. I was highly entertained and the cast, cinematography and costume work was excellent.

What was the specific agenda in this one?

[pottyaboutpotter1]

Originally Posted by TheBoss062

Well correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t that racist? What if she had said that she wouldn’t direct a movie with an all black cast? Is that somehow okay?

Colour-Blind casting has been a thing for ages. It's not racist, it just means the director will cast whoever they think is best suited for the role regardless of race. It's employed most on stage, but films use it quite regularly too.

[filmbuffTX]

Originally Posted by pottyaboutpotter1

Colour-Blind casting has been a thing for ages. It's not racist, it just means the director will cast whoever they think is best suited for the role regardless of race. It's employed most on stage, but films use it quite regularly too.

The director’s background is in theater so that makes perfect sense.