‘Mary Queen of Scots‘ is the story of a famous and unhappy queen, a story well-known in the British space where it is part of the respective national histories and in the German-speaking cultural space, especially due to Schiller’s play which is taught in schools. The film by Swiss director Thomas Imbach, released on screens in 2013, is the first of three films dedicated to this historical figure made in the last decade. Another one was released in 2018 and the third is still in production. Imbach chose as a source the biography written in 1935 by Stefan Zweig, but starting from a historical book (Zweig is considered the master of narrated history) he made a very personal film, which focuses on the character of a woman who lives her life passionately and loves in the context of the political and religious conflicts in which she is involved. It is a bold cinematic bet, the result of which is destined from the start to please some and to please less others. I confess that I belong to the first category. I liked the film, but I can also understand the arguments of those who ended up watching disappointed.
Queen Mary lived 45 years, out of which the last 20 were spent in the more or less gilded captivity of her cousin Elizabeth I, ending wit the execution of the one who may have had more rights to claim the throne of England than the queen on the throne. The film traces the first 25 years of Mary’s life, using flashbacks inspired by the letters she never sent to the queen she never had the opportunity to meet. In these 25 years of active life Mary had time to wear or claim the crowns of three kingdoms (Scotland, France and England), but also to be a widow three times. Above all, however, she had time to live a tumultuous life and to love, to get involved with passion in political intrigues but also to make enough mistakes that she would eventually tragically pay for.
Director and co-writer Thomas Imbach chose to focus his story on the personality and feelings of the woman who was one of the most tragic figures in the history of England. Camille Rutherford‘s acting performance seemed very inspiring to me. She is an actress that I do not remember from other movies, and this is actually an advantage, because her face is fresh and I am not influenced by other roles. Thomas Imbach‘s approach is in line with the trends in many British historical films of the last decade (‘The Favourite‘, the series ‘The Tudors‘) to use the historical background as a pretext for reinterpretations of history, with characters who behave and act more like our contemporaries than as characters of their time, and with a minimalism in production that tries to preserve authenticity but does not make of it a goal. In the case of this ‘Mary Queen of Scots‘ the result is a strong personal drama and a feminist plea about the fragile balance between personal life and public duties. However, the events described in the film also had a strong impact on British history, on the power relations between Scotland and England, between Catholics and Protestants. The son of the unfortunate Queen Mary became James I, the first king of England and Scotland. Those who do not know history may be confused, and it is not from here that they will get the information that they are missing, but the tragic figure of Mary Queen of Scots, as it appears in this film, will be hard to forget.