“England does not look so different from Scotland.”
One was born to power, the other was born to fight. Mary Queen of Scots takes us back to 16th Century England where newly widowed Mary Stuart (Saoirse Ronan) returns to claim her throne. Margot Robbie plays Elizabeth, the Protestant Queen. With Stuart’s return, Elizabeth’s reign is threatened.
Watch the powerful women fight for love and country in the first trailer. Josie Rourke makes her directorial debut and Beau Willimon pens the script for the film due out on December 7.
To the people complaining / questioning Robbie’s casting : give the girl a break.
First off, we haven’t seen the performance, she could be a revelation in the role for all we know.
Second, while she may not be the obvious choice for the role, the producers clearly didn’t mind securing one of the most in demand young actresses in the biz.
Third, give the woman some credit because the truth is in a rather short period of time she delivered excellent range from scorsesian blonde femme fatale (The Wolf of Wall Street) to tragic devout virgin (Z for Zachariah); entertaining psycho (Suicide Squad); flapper with post partum depression (Goodbye Christopher Robin) and even a damaged redneck figure skater (I, Tonya).
Long story short : the film AND her performance may disappoint but until the film is seen, Robbie deserves the benefit of the doubt. She earned at least that much.
P.S. I think Ronan came
off very strong in this trailer, too. Not sure yet how the film will turn out but to me the performances look damn promising for now.
Looks less like an Oscar contender and more like an Teen Choice Awards contender.
This is a tired subject and there’s nothing that is intriguing in the trailer. I doubt that this will be much of a contender, at most best actress for Ronan. I wont check it out unless the reviews are stellar.
Kind of wish they’d gone with someone else for Eliz.I, perhaps even Joely Richardson- except she’s a bit mature for the part. Looking forward to it anyway. Ronan has had very few misfires-hopefully this will prove to be a good one.
Well, Elizabeth I was 54 years old when Mary was executed, so I think your idea of casting Joely Richardson would have, indeed, been inspired. The part does call for a certain mature actress – Robbie is totally wrong for this role.
It seems to me that they weren’t really aiming for historical accuracy here, but it looks fantastic nonetheless. They did do some effort to make Robbie appear slightly older.
Off-topic: both High-Life and the new Kawase (which I didn’t even know starred Binoche) will play in San Sebastian so they are ready and most likely going to Venice. They also both got synopses which I don’t think have been released before:
High-Life:
“Deep space. Beyond our solar system. Monte and his infant daughter Willow live together aboard a spacecraft, in complete isolation. A solitary man, whose strict self-discipline is a protection against desire –his own and that of others– Monte fathered the girl against his will. His sperm was used to inseminate Boyse, the young woman who gave birth to her. They were members of a crew of prisoners: space convicts, death row inmates. Guinea pigs sent on a mission to the black hole closest to Earth. Now only Monte and Willow remain. And Monte is changed. Through his daughter, for the first time, he experiences the birth of an all-powerful love. Willow grows, becoming a young girl, then a young woman.”
Vision:
“Jeanne leaves for Japan, in search of a rare medicinal plant. During this trip, she meets Tomo, a forest ranger, who accompanies her on her quest and guides her on the traces of her past. 20 years ago, in the forests of Yoshino, Jeanne lived her first love.”
….in other news.
Mission Impossible:Fallout reviews just dropped and some critics are heralding it as the best action film since The Dark Knight and Mad Max: Fury Road. RT and MC so far are through the roof. I’d love more well-crafted, critically hailed action or sci-fi major studio releases to break through to a Best Picture nomination… and maybe this year Black Panther will – but it would be awesome if this became a huge cultural touchstone and got noticed as well.
I like history a lot, so I am looking forward to this. I enjoy Ronan and Robbie’s performances in general, esp. in Brooklyn and Wolf of Wall Street/I, Tonya.
They weren’t sisters and Elizabeth did not rule Scotland.
Robbie looks miscast.
Just re-issue the 1971 Vanessa Redgrave / Glenda Jackson effort…that has aged better than this trailer.
I agree with you, Doody. Glenda Jackson would have been nominated in 1971 for her role as Elizabeth I (had she not been equally as good in another great film, “Sunday, Bloody Sunday”). She had to settle for two (yes, two!) Emmys for her superlative work on that great television series “Elizabeth R”. I’m unsure as to why they cast Robbie as Elizabeth I . . . . there are many other actresses who could cut their teeth into this role. Ronan does look the part, although I believe the real Mary, Queen of Scots had dark hair. That kind of historical inaccuracy always bugs me in film. Having said that, I hunger for cinematic interpretations relating to Tudor history – and this movie I will definitely see when it is released.
Looks beautiful. Disagree with the Debby Downers.
Same I think it looks great … and pre-1920s or so period pieces typically either do absolutely nothing to excite me, or otherwise make me overwhelmingly skeptical, so I was surprised I liked this trailer, even though it came off as almost absurdly rushed and messy
I dig how it looks and I think the acting seems strong.
The movie has Chris Dickens, Academy award and BAFTA winning editor for Slumdog Millionaire, The cinematographer is John Matheson who won the BAFTA for The Gladiator and has 2 Academy Award nominations. Josie Rourke has directed dozens of plays. It may get zero nominations, but I like its chances.
Ronan – Lead
Robbie – Supporting
?? Has this been confirmed?
I assumed that will be the case and the trailer appears to back up such conclusion.
This is not a player. Please say it ain’t so.
This is a player.
I predict that it may be on everyone’s short list because of it’s credentials, as awards seasons starts, but will fade as better reviewed and fresher films emerge. It’s best shots are Actress (only because Ronan is so beloved; she’ll be the “5th” nominee if she makes it in), costumes and hair & makeup.
It was made by the producers of ‘Darkest Hour’. What could possibly go wrong?
Not a player in quality, but a player in sheer brute force awards bait. This year’s Darkest hour.
There are also two posters:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1657500b580f1cbbf2d81adb70e088bc852df5a0a75ab52f06c70471010e645f.jpg
As for the trailer, everything looks very well-crafted and the two performances seem good but this trailer is giving me certain vibes that generally one contender’s first trailer gives out every year: they’re at least presenting the narrative in a way that seems like it won’t work in the context of a two-hour movie. You have to present the complex situation in the beginning, the early co-operation, the downfall of the relationship, the build-up to the war, probably some actual war stuff and have some sort of resolution. All this while operating as a two-lead movie where each of the characters must feel like they have a lot of depth and flesh out the political climate of England in the 16th century in a way that builds meaning and the stakes. So either the movie’s notably over 2 hours (which I’d love but will most likely turn Oscar voters away), the film will focus on one part over the others and thus might easily have problems either in its beginning or ending, or will rush through everything to cover all the bases but will not be an actually good film because it just becomes like a Wikipedia summary of the story.
(In case anyone is wondering what the trailers that gave me this feeling from previous years were, they were Joy, The Founder and Molly’s Game)
Wow, this looks boring