, by assuming her throne as queen of Scotland, strikes terror into the heart of Queen Elizabeth I. After languishing in jail for 18 years at Elizabeth's command, Mary is offered a pardon if she will sign away her throne. Will she accept the deal, or die instead?
Cast
Accuracy
The film does not keep close to the historical truth, portraying Mary as something of a wronged martyr and her third husband, James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, as a romantic hero. While true that Bothwell was a well known scoundrel his last marriage to Mary was genuine. Regarding Mary's historical status the false imprisonment by Elizabeth I and Anglo protestant intrigue in Scotland did undermine her more legitimate claim to not just the throne of Scotland but more so to the throne of England making her a dire threat to Elizabeth I.
Reception
Contemporary reviews were generally positive. Frank S. Nugent of The New York Times wrote it had a "blend of excellence and mere adequacy." He wrote that the film had "depth, vigor and warm humanity" but had scenes which "lack the vitality they possessed in the play", and considered Hepburn's characterization of the title role rather too soft in comparison with the historical Mary. Variety praised the "extra-strong cast" and Ford's "sure-footed" direction. Hepburn's performance was described as "not really Mary Stuart but rather Katie Hepburn. And that is all in the film's favor because it humanizes it all and makes it that much more nearly acceptable." However, the review also found the film too long and the ending too sad, and conceding it could not end any other way without "completely corrupting history." "Impressive historical drama finely acted and produced with all-around distinction", reported Film Daily. Motion Picture Daily called the film "a splendidly powerful drama" with a "sincere, intelligent and genuine" performance by Hepburn. Russell Maloney reviewed the film negatively in The New Yorker, writing that despite its high production values, "it has little or nothing to do with Maxwell Anderson's play. Any other historical drama of the period could have been sandwiched in between these scenes and it wouldn't have made a bit of difference." Of Hepburn's performance, Maloney wrote that she had "the cards stacked against her from the very start, because pageantry naturally interferes with characterization." The film is highly regarded by a few critics today, but in its time was a box-office flop, making a loss of $165,000. This was Katharine Hepburn's second flop in a row causing her to being labeled "box office poison" in the late 1930s, leading to her move to MGM for her comeback in The Philadelphia Story.
