Mary (2024) (2026)

Emily Tsiao acknowledges the film’s sincere reverence and notes that it could prompt meaningful conversation about the birth of Christ with teens. However, it flags significant departures from the Gospel accounts—most notably the absence of the angel’s appearance to Joseph—and cautions that the film might not “give you a clearer picture of what it was like for the teenage girl to give birth to the Savior of the world.” The violent depictions of the Massacre of the Innocents and the near-stoning of Mary are highlighted as content concerns.

Peter T. Chattaway’s interview with director D.J. Caruso explores the film’s theological ambitions and its deliberate creative liberties. Caruso addresses the labor pains controversy—presenting it as an intentional choice to humanize Mary—and the sourcing from the Protoevangelium of James. Christianity Today noted that the film dramatizes not only the birth of Jesus but also the birth of Mary herself, following an ancient tradition well known in Orthodox and Catholic circles that says her birth was a miraculous answer to her parents’ prayers.  The publication’s title—”Hail ‘Mary,’ Full of Violence”—signals both appreciation for the film’s ambition and frank recognition of its tone.

The outlet assigns a Family Content score of -3, citing excessive violence, and offers a detailed content breakdown. Movieguide critiques the film’s significant departure from the biblical story, calling most of its events “extra-biblical,” and specifically flags the absence of any angelic direction to Joseph as a source of theological confusion. Movieguide notes that despite the jeopardy on screen, the film appears slow in many places—alternating between action sequences and lengthy filler.

Tyler Hummel finds the film “mostly dull and shallow,” arguing that it fails to differentiate itself from the crowded Nativity film genre while simultaneously generating enough historical revisionism and creative license to frustrate viewers who take the subject matter seriously. Geeks Under Grace credits the film with themes of trusting God and serviceable performances, but criticizes its cheap production design and cinematography, potentially offensive depictions for some traditions, and overall biblical revisionism.

Joseph Holmes, who has previously called for higher craft standards in faith-based cinema, offers a verdict that mirrors his assessment of The Last Supper: the film is reverent in intent but disappointing in execution. He concedes that for viewers who simply want a faith-affirming take on the Christmas story with a place in an increasingly secular media landscape, Mary may be just enough—but stops short of calling it the film the subject deserved.

Critic Amy Welborn writes that the film is a “highly selective mashup” of the Gospels with traces of a self-empowering theological framework. Welborn observes that the film’s version of Mary’s fiat feels not like a surrender rooted in her historic faith’s actual spirituality and practice, but a me-centered trust in a vague self-empowering promise—a spiritually selective, self-referential framework.

The film holds a 28% Tomatometer on Rotten Tomatoes score based on 18 critics’ reviews. Critics consistently praised Hopkins’s performance while finding the script underdeveloped, the pacing uneven, and the tone swinging between humorless piety and action-thriller excess. One critic described it as “a hodge-podge, a sort of overly reverent sword-and-sandals epic rich in awe-struck characters, Luciferian mischief and historical opportunism.” It currently holds a 36% Popcornmeter score.

The film carries a 5.3/10 rating, reflecting a split between faith audiences who found it moving and general viewers who found the screenplay weak and the pacing sluggish.

Metacritic critcs assign the film a score of 27 out of 100 based on six critics, indicating “generally unfavorable” reviews. The user score is 3.9, signalling “generally unfavorable”.