Log in / Sign up
 
    Share this page

    Mary of Scotland

    Reviewed by
    pietroantoni@

    The 1930's was not a good decade for Miss Hepburn even though she won an Oscar for MORNING GLORY in 1933. She was labelled as box office poison as film after film was a disaster. In Mary of Scotland she gives a decidedly Hepburn performance, not at all as the regal Mary Queen of Scots. Her portrayal simply does not work. She is only good at portraying herself as compared to Bette Davis who threw herself into every role with abandon. Much better are Frederic March and real life wife Florence Eldridge as Elizabeth I.

    4
    HelpfulNot helpful  Reply
    pietroantoni@  10.8.2015 age: 36-49 14,551 reviews

    Show all reviews for this movie
    Note: The movie review posted on this page reflects a personal opinion of one user. We are not responsible for its content.

    Did you see ''Mary of Scotland''?

    There is a problem with your e-mail address and we are unable to communicate with you. Please go to My Account to update your email.

    How do you rate this movie?

    Select stars from 1 to 10.
    10 - A masterpiece, go, see it now
    9 - Excellent movie, a must see
    8 - Great movie, don't miss it
    7 - Good movie, worth seeing
    6 - Not bad, could be much better
    5 - So so, okay if you don't pay
    4 - Not good, even if you don't pay
    3 - Poor movie, not recommended
    2 - Very bad, forget about it
    1 - Worst ever, avoid at all costs

    Please explain. Write your comment here:

    Please choose a username to sign your comments. Only letters, digits, dash - or period. Minimum 4 characters.

    Your age and sex:

    We publish all comments, except abusive, at our discretion.