Bow to No One.

"She'll be here soon", says Bess (Gemma Chan), informing Mary (Saoirse Ronan) and the audience that the highly anticipated scene that discloses the secret meeting between Mary and Queen Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie) is about to commence. It was the promise of this scene that kept Mary Queen of Scots engaging and watchable; it was the scene that was going to finally allow Ronan and Robbie's acting forces to collide and stun. Unfortunately, the scene's best lines and most memorable moments were already shown in the film's advertising. Aside from this, Josie Rourke's directorial debut is incoherent, dull and overstuffed. 

Based on the book "Queen of Scots: The True Life of Mary Stuart" by John Guy, Beau Willimon's (House of Cards) screenplay is where this film falters: During the reign of Elizabeth I, Mary Stuart's rise to the Scottish throne threatens the Queen of England's power. Elizabeth and Mary's rivalry heightens as they fight to hold the most power. After all, there is only room for one Queen. Willimon turns a compelling and poignant historical tale into a jumbled and overloaded Oscar-bait period drama. Willimon attempts (and fails) to tell two different stories in the same film: 1) the life of Mary Stuart and 2) Mary Stuart vs Elizabeth I. Sadly, Willimon focuses predominantly on the former and sidelines Elizabeth I (she has occasional appearances throughout the film that disjoint the narrative). Mary Queen of Scots could have been a tense drama about the unspoken rivalry between Mary and Elizabeth (i.e The Favourite), but Willimon's script barely explores these gripping themes. 

Despite Josie Rourke's best efforts, Mary Queen of Scots would never have been a brilliant film because of its weak script. While it is great to see another film from a female director, Rourke's glamourous yet raw execution is overshadowed by Willimon's preachy and blatant feminist script. Mary has many lines about sisterhood and the power of women that are more obtrusive than they are empowering. Mary is also represented as a very progressive and accepting woman - she tells a homosexual man that he should not be afraid to be himself. It's always great to see LGBTQ+ representation, but an accepted gay man in Tudorian times? Bonkers. One thing that both Rourke and Willimon have in common is naivety. Rourke depicts a rather diverse Tudorian monarchy: there are people of many ethnicities working for the Queen. I'm sure that Rourke and Willimon had good intentions, but a period drama set during the 1800s probably wasn't the best way to make a political message about today's society.

Willimon's convoluted script has some pacing issues, particularly during the final 30 minutes. Mary Queen of Scots begins with Mary's execution before rewinding to tell the story of how that became her fate. As Willimon wanted to structure this story cyclically, Mary's execution is also the film's final scene. However, this finale isn't as dramatic or as moving as it should be. Just minutes prior to Mary's death, Elizabeth promises her that she will be safe in her captivity. The film then cuts to black and informs the audience of what happened over the next few years. This would have been a crucial point in Mary's life that the film fails to depict. Instead, the film rushes to its conclusion, erasing any built-up emotion. Editing is the one area that Rourke needs to work on; there are too many abrupt cuts to scenes that do not align and disrupt the film's flow (David Tennant’s rallying quickly became tiresome).

Although Mary Queen of Scots has some serious issues that detract from the film's enjoyment, Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie's performances are almost strong enough for these to be overlooked. Both ladies landed fresh Oscar nominations last year for their work in Lady Bird and I, Tonya. Their performances in Mary Queen of Scots may not be competitive enough for nods this year, but they are a reminder that Ronan and Robbie are two of Hollywood's most formidable and reliable actresses working today - even if they are speaking Old English jargon. Ronan's Mary Stuart is a feisty feminist who is determined to succeed Elizabeth I. Mary has everything that Elizabeth desires: beauty, youth and fertility. However, Mary's overconfidence in herself ("I shall produce an heir, unlike her barren self") does make the character slightly unlikeable, especially when Robbie's performance is so sympathetic. Mary is faced with a lot of trauma throughout her life (sexual assault, the abrogation of her child), but it is Ronan's performance that carries these key moments as the script does little to heighten emotions. Robbie's performance of Elizabeth I is understated - she isn't allowed to truly shine until her final scenes. As she did in I, Tonya, Robbie nails another fake smile - as Elizabeth makes her way to Mary's execution, the character has a brief breakdown that shows her vulnerability. Robbie's Elizabeth also has a sweet moment when encountering a newly born foal. Without Ronan and Robbie, Mary Queen of Scots would have been a nonstarter.

As soon as Saoirse Ronan's Mary Stuart connects with a young girl as she passes her on horseback in an early scene, I knew I was going to bow down to Mary Queen of Scots even if it was succeeded by a ghastly film. Josie Rourke's directorial debut lays the foundations for a great film - the costume design, hair and make-up and production design are faultless - but Beau Willimon's script is full of imperfections. Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie's talents are undeniable; they hold the entire film together. The strength of their performances is more empowering than Willimon’s moralistic script. With a different writer, Mary Queen of Scots could have been draping in Oscar gold come January 22nd.