The world of film loves mining halls of folklore and legend for stories, and one of those oft-traveled halls belongs to King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table. But which Arthurian movies are the best? Which are emphatically the worst? How do we make those judgements and why? These are not the questions that plague our era, but they sure do bug us from time to time, and so we have decided to rank the lot.
We should mention that it is fairly impossible to include every Arthurian movie on account of there being so many, and the fact that plenty of them are relatively inaccessible. So we have assembled a basic master list that includes films that are easy to find and watch. We have ranked them worst to best and included some helpful criteria to that end.
Ranking Criteria: We have decided to rank each movie according to three basic standards because life is more fun that way.
- Grails—How the story chooses to tackle (or ignore) Holy Grail questing and legend within the plot.
- Round Tables—How the story handles politics and romance.
- Excaliburs—How the story deals with action and magic.
And here is our very careful, very thorough ranking! The most thorough. The thorough-est.
10. Prince Valiant (1997)
Loosely adapted from the humorous comic book strip of the same name, Prince Valiant is about the side characters in Arthurian legend. Squire Valiant, masquerading as Sir Gawain, must retrieve King Arthur’s sword Excalibur from Vikings led by an exiled Morgan le Fay.
Grails: No Grail quest here, everyone’s too busy journeying to Thule (a.k.a. Scandinavia) to do battle with evil Vikings.
Round Tables: The filmmakers really force the love story between Valiant and Princess Ilene, which is entertaining only to watch Stephen “Vampire Bill” Moyer and Katherine “Izzy Stevens” Heigl act out the rules of chivalry. Though Valiant (pretending to be Gawain) goes on about knights not being allowed to feel anything, and Ilene is engaged, their misadventures nonetheless bring them together. Yet the only interesting moment is when Ilene gives Valiant her ring to bring to her princely fiancé, ostensibly to prove that she is alive—only for her fiancé to reveal that Ilene said she would remove the ring only if her heart no longer belonged to him.
Excaliburs: Even though the plot revolves around Excalibur falling into the wrong hands, the logic doesn’t quite track. In a rehash of the original legend, the sword embeds itself in the stone floor of the Vikings’ throne room, to be pulled out by only the most worthy. Yet the person who is able to wield it is not Sligon, the Viking who stole it, but his unstable and psychotic brother Thagnar. It would appear that Morgan’s plan was less about handing Excalibur to someone new than to simply taking it away from her brother Arthur. Back in Camelot, the king is bereft without his sword (which he feels has “abandoned” him) and is all but ready to hand over control of his kingdom to anyone else. If that’s all it took to destroy the dream of Camelot, then maybe Morgan should have been allowed to succeed. —Natalie
9. Merlin and the Sword AKA Arthur the King (1985)
Modern-day Camelot enthusiast Dyan Cannon travels to Stonehenge, breaks away from her tour group, and falls into a shadowy netherworld, where she meets Merlin and Niniane. They create a mystical slideshow of their lives at Camelot, and watch as Arthur, Lancelot, and Guinevere are all undone by lust/Mordred/Morgana le Fay/destiny. This one inspires so many questions! Why is there a Limbo universe underneath Stonehenge? Why is Dyan Cannon fondling Stonehenge and murmuring sweet nothings to Merlin? How the hell could Malcolm McDowell make a boring Arthur? What on earth was Candice Bergen thinking? Couldn’t they have found a better dragon puppet?
Grails: The Grail becomes important in the last two minutes of the film, when an Astral Projection of Merlin tells Lancelot to ditch Guinevere and go on a Holy Quest to atone for his repeated adultery.
Round Tables: Lancelot and Guinevere fall in love at first sight…but only after Arthur refuses to allow her to be co-ruler, and also sends Lancelot to rescue her from Evil Pict Liam Neeson rather than doing it himself. Guinevere initiates the affair, which, according to Lancelot, brings about the fall of Camelot. This despite the fact that Morgana’s been plotting against Camelot the whole time, and, oh yeah, Mordred stabs Arthur to death with Excalibur. Yeah. Totally Guine’s fault. Also: this film includes the tale of Gawain and Dame Ragnelle, who is enchanted to look like a pig until Gawain’s love and respect for her breaks the curse.
Excaliburs: As far as knightly action goes, I have attended Renaissance Festival Living Chess Games that were better staged and fought than the action in this film. Arthur already has Excalibur, but doesn’t make a big deal about it. Later, Lancelot is able to wield Excalibur to defeat the dragon puppet Morgana unleashes through her magic. While Merlin and Niniane are both powerful magicians, Morgana is able to condemn them to HengeLimbo. Merlin and Niniane are trapped beneath Stonehenge for a thousand years until Dyan Cannon suggests they might be able to escape through the power of LOVE. When this works, they fly back to Camelot, ignoring Dyan Cannon’s desperate pleas for them to take her with them. —Leah
8. King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)
This charged action-fest from Guy Ritchie is the latest attempt to put Camelot on the big screen, bringing Arthur of the street (Charlie Hunnam) into the fold after being orphaned due to family trauma. His magical sword Excalibur grants him superpowers to defeat his evil uncle, Jude Law. And in case any of this imagery is too metaphorical: Jude Law is building an enormous tower. As he grows more powerful, the tower grow ever higher. And the only thing that can cause the tower to collapse is (A) Arthur’s mighty sword and (B) an enormous snake.
Grails: No interest in Grails this time around…these lads are probably scared they’ll get cooties from anything as feminine as a Grail. Lots of magic instead. Lots.
Round Tables: Not much romance here. In fact, pretty much the opposite of romance, even if Arthur clearly has a crush on his mage pal. The politics are all family oriented, with Jude Law causing tyrant problems and killing people to gain fancy magical powers. There’s a resistance within the kingdom against his rule, but they’re so much canon fodder as far as the story is concerned. And the knights have a very Merry-Men-in-Sherwood-Forest vibe.
Excaliburs: It’s a Guy Ritchie film. Action is the sole reason for its existence. Unfortunately a huge portion of that action is devoted to abusing and murdering the majority of the female characters present in the film. Oh, and Arthur runs a brothel? But it’s okay because he makes certain that the women working there don’t get beat up too bad! He’s kind of a mobster who extorts money from his fellow city-dwellers, and he calls men who annoy him “honeytits,” which is definitely an attribute the world has been waiting to see in the king of Albion. He runs Camelot like a frat house by the end, where the pledges are what count because he’d “rather have friends than enemies.” Round Table all the way, bro. Oh, and in case you were wondering? Excalibur is so huge, you need two hands to wield it. And once you use two hands? Your dead dad might just tell you the magic was inside you all along. There is a lot of magic, of course, most of it bound up in tropes from other fantasy narratives that the world knows quite well, from Lord of the Rings to Narnia. It’s eighteen kinds of wrong, but it clearly doesn’t want to be right. —Emily and Leah
7. First Knight (1995)
Look, envisioning Lancelot as a sort of vaguely Han Solo-ish lone wolf with a squinty charm isn’t the worst idea… provided you cast someone with the charisma to pull it off. That person is not Richard Gere. It is especially not a Richard Gere who can’t be bothered to even try a British accent. Set in Arthur’s later years, First Knight tries to smash together love triangle nonsense with a story about a scowling dude who wants to be king, with middling-at-best results. (Jerry Goldsmith’s swoopingly overwrought score does its very best to build a sense of grand romance, but is fighting a losing battle.)
Grails: What grail? This story has very little interest in mythology. Mostly it just borrows the names from Arthurian stories.
Round Tables: Guinevere (Julia Ormond) agrees to marry Arthur (Sean Connery, 35 years older than Julia Ormond) largely in order to protect her home. On the way to Camelot, she meets Lancelot (Gere, 16 years older than Julia Ormond), who is immediately far more into her than she is into him. Politically speaking, there’s a nasty former knight named Malagant roaming about setting fire to villages; he wants to be king, of course. None of the romance is very convincing, particularly given that upon their first meeting, Lancelot pretends he wants to rape Guinevere (as a tactic to get her away from a kidnapper) and later insists he knows when a woman wants him. Go away, Lancelot. Lance-not. Also everyone in Camelot wears blue, which, in this era of color-coded dystopias, is rather disconcerting.
Excaliburs: There is nothing magical about this movie. However, there’s one briefly gorgeous action sequence when Arthur sets a trap for Malagant and his forces. As Malagant burns an empty encampment, Arthur and his knights ride out from the woods. It’s dark, but the light from the fires glints off all their shiny armor (the horses even have mane armor! Which makes sense, if you think about it). It’s the most enthralling moment in the film… until mere moments later, when the night scene is inexplicably bright. Lancelot also has a nifty swordfighting scene or two—nothing flashy, just a touch of deft choreography. —Molly
6. King Arthur (2004)
A gritty attempt to update Arthurian legend by adding a dose of realism (i.e. what if Arthur had actually been a real person, what would that look like?) The realism is somewhat sidelined by Keira Knightly’s Guinevere appearing in a leather-braided tube top.
Grails: Grails do not exist in gritty real-world legends. How dare you suggest such a thing.
Round Tables: There is some romance. Arthur (Clive Owen) and Guinevere like each other a whole lot, and he frees her pagan Celtic person from Catholic immurement, which is awfully nice. They get married at the end of the movie. There is a faint suggestion that maybe Guinevere and Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd) could like each other, but the film leaves off the whole love triangle plot. We have Mads Mikkelsen as Tristan, but there is no Isolde because real-world legends only have room for one romance, dammit. (Or you could just decide that this is a proto-Hannibal/Will Graham situation, since Hugh Dancy is ably playing Galahad.) The politics are all there because in this version Arthur is a Roman who is fighting at the end of Rome’s occupation of Britain. He and his knights have served their fifteen years in the Roman army and are expecting to be relieved when they are given one last big mission to travel north of Hadrian’s Wall and grab a few people who are very important to Rome. This eventually leads Arthur to make friends with the Woads so that they can beat back the Saxon threat, and a bunch of his knights die in the process.
Excaliburs: There’s no magic in the story, obviously. All of the faux-historical leanings in this retelling are there to prop up a metric ton of action. Guinevere herself has been restyled to better resemble Queen Medb or Boudica more than the Guinevere of Arthurian legend. Despite its desire to bill as a more “realistic” version of what Arthur might have been, it is such a hodgepodge of resources that it morphs into its own brand of fiction, failing to resemble historical accuracy in the slightest. Sure, there were Romans and Saxons and Celts who fought each other in Britain at one point, but that’s about all the care that was taken. Which is a shame, because a carefully conceived “historical Arthur” could make for a very interesting story… it’s just not one the filmmaker’s want to tell. —Emily
5. Sword of the Valiant (1984)
The second attempt by writer/director Stephen Weeks to adapt Sir Gawain and the Green Knight into a film—the first was released in 1973, but this second version found a (slightly) larger audience. Gawain himself is played by Miles O’Keefe, of Tarzan, the Ape Man fame; the director had hoped to cast Mark Hamill in the role, but the producers were not overfond of the idea. The film also features Peter Cushing, John Rhys-Davies, and Sean Connery as the Green Knight.
Grails: Not much to be said about the Grail in this one. There’s a lot of questing, but none that pertain to religious artifacts of any kind.
Round Tables: Politics is thin on the ground in this particularly story, although it does begin with Arthur scolding his knights for getting too comfortable and not being more active in their knight-ness. There is a fair bit of romance, though; Gawain falls for a mysterious lady, who keeps gifting him magical stuff that keeps him out of trouble—a ring that transports him, a cloth that prevents the Green Knight from being able to cut off his head. This poor woman is kidnapped and carried off and then liberated by a Baron, and it’s all very complicated.
Excaliburs: So much action and magic. Every action and magic. The whole story starts because of the Green Knight (can we talk about the fact that the world is convinced that Sean Connery belongs in Arthurian legend? maybe he’s the real Merlin) challenging Arthur’s court to a game that turns out to be rigged; he gives young Gawain one chance to behead him, then gets one chance in return. Trick is, he can reattach his head, and Gawain obviously cannot. He gives the kid a year to solve a weird riddle in lieu of death, so Gawain’s whole journey is supposed to be about figuring out that riddle. Instead he ends up fighting lots of people and getting magicked around. He does defeat the Green Knight in the end, with a little help from his fancy magical lady friend, who gives him that unbreakable kerchief to protect his head. But she has secrets of her own, and ends her role in the story by turning into a dove and flying back to Lyonesse. Tough break, Gawain. —Emily
4. The Sword in the Stone (1963)
In Disney’s animated take on T.H. White’s The Once and Future King, absentminded wizard Merlin takes orphan Wart (a.k.a. Arthur) under his wing and teaches him how to be a good king by transfiguring him into a bunch of animals, all in preparation for Arthur eventually retrieving Excalibur.
Grails: Seeing as this focuses just on Arthur’s boyhood, there’s absolutely no talk of grails, holy or otherwise. In fact, the only significant vessel is an animated sugar cup.
Round Tables: Arthur’s still an orphan, but his true lineage doesn’t play into the story at all; no Pendragons to be found here. Nor does Guinevere come into play, though there is a messed-up scene in which Wart, transfigured by Merlin into a squirrel, attracts the attention of a flirty lady squirrel. Despite his attempts to explain that he’s a human, it’s not until he’s transformed back that she gets it—and she recoils, chittering in horror and sadness. Because lady squirrels mate for life, and now she has no mate, and why exactly was this cruel interlude necessary to the story?
Excaliburs: While there’s a promising moment with Wart assembling a dummy horse and jouster for Kay to practice with that shows the boy’s ingenuity, we never see him get to apply his dream craftings to anything real. He doesn’t even live vicariously through Kay, as he’s demoted from his brother’s squire after Merlin interferes with Wart’s chores. But in terms of literal Excaliburs, the movie gets there in the last 20 minutes of the movie (taking its sweet time ::grumble::), when Wart realizes with horror that he’s left Kay’s sword at the inn. With the building closed, he reaches for the closest substitute: the mysterious sword in the stone in the middle of the town square. Down comes the radiant light and Disney-esque “ahh”ing, and next thing we know, Wart is King Arthur. —Natalie
3. Excalibur (1981)
I saw Excalibur for the first time a few years ago, at the Met, which might be the best way to watch it, as it is very long and at times slow, and the distractions of the modern era are many. That said, it’s also very Arthurian, and is long enough to include even Uther (Gabriel Byrne? Really?), who becomes king and then makes a very stupid decision: He absolutely must sleep with the Duke’s wife, Igrayne, who dances like a glorious ren faire maiden of ye olde 1970s. Arthur is begotten, and the story goes from there, following familiar ground involving Guinevere, Merlin, Morgana (a mashup of Morgan le Fay and Morgause, played by a stunning young Helen Mirren), Lancelot and the rest. This is all the good stuff; the less good stuff is that much if not all of the dialogue appears to be looped, which gives everything a stilted, distant feeling that director John Boorman probably meant to be mythic. It is about as magical as Merlin’s silver bald cap.
Grails: Yes! We’ve got a grail quest! Excalibur twists the Fisher/Wounded King up with Arthur, who is the land and the land is him. After the affair of Lancelot and Guinevere, Arthur makes a very bad choice involving his half sister; he and the land suffer, and the Grail quest begins. The eerie things Percival encounters on his quest are some of the movie’s most memorable images, including a spooky young Mordred in golden armor.
Round Tables: From Uther’s opening bad idea to Arthur’s connection to the land, Excalibur foregrounds a mythical sort of politics that makes each individual’s choices resonate on a larger scale. Arthur doesn’t know who he is until he pulls Excalibur from the stone, and there’s a suggestion that perhaps his ordinary upbringing will make him a better ruler than his father (Merlin set this scenario up, after all, and wizards always think they know best). But all the characters are driven by their desires in believable ways, from horny Uther to Morgana (who keeps herself young, the better to ensorcel knights) to guilt-stricken Lancelot to Gawain (Liam Neeson, looking like a red-faced, bearded baby) who is prodded into stirring the political pot. Though the romance is less convincing, Arthur’s heartbreak over Lancelot and Guinevere rings true—it has as much to do with brotherly love for Lancelot as it does his marriage.
Excaliburs: Excalibur is here for your battle needs: Castle-storming! Mace-waving! Jousting! And blond-haired sparkle-armored Lancelot on a white horse! Magically speaking, the sword Excalibur glimmers with green light; the lady of the lake makes a few appearances; Merlin gets caught in crystal; the land blossoms the moment Arthur drinks from the grail. And there’s what I can only describe as a puny fake Stonehenge! It is possible to kind of conceptually love a movie yet never want to watch it again? —Molly
2. Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975)
I’m assuming I don’t have to sum this sucker up for anyone on this site. As with all Python, the extra fun aspect is going back as an adult and discovering that there’s a well-made, meticulously researched movie under all the silliness.
Grails: The Grail Quest is granted to Arthur by God Himself! Pretty snazzy. The Quest includes Galahad’s stop at a castle full of temptresses, angry French people who don’t want the Brits stealing their Grail mythos, and even the detail from Malory’s Mort D’Arthur that Sir Bedevere is the Last Knight Standing during Arthur’s final siege.
Round Tables: Arthur and his Knights refer to Camelot as their home base, but they also decide not to go because (as Richard Harris would no doubt attest) “it is a silly place.” We never see a Guinevere, and its worth noting that in Spamalot Lancelot ends up with Prince Herbert.
Excaliburs: Arthur wields supreme executive power because some watery tart threw this sword at him. The knightly action is surprisingly good—the battle with the Black Knight is of course especially memorable. There is no Merlin, no Mordred, nor Morgana, but we do get TIM THE ENCHANTER, who seems like a powerful magical presence. —Leah
1. Camelot (1967)
The film version of the beloved Lerner and Loewe musical, adapted largely from a piece of T.H. White’s The Once and Future King. Responsible for every 60s lounge singer recording their own rendition of “If Ever I Would Leave You.”
Grails: No one cares about grails here at all. Like if they could negative care, I’m pretty sure they would.
Round Tables: This story largely revolves around romance and political maneuvering. Guenevere (Vanessa Redgrave) loves Arthur (Richard Harris can sing!??), but she also loves Lancelot (Franco Nero), and Lancelot loves Guenevere and cares deeply for Arthur, and Arthur adores them both, and no one wants to hurt anyone, and everyone hurts each other. The result is that Arthur almost has to burn his wife at the stake (he’s been advocating rule of law for his Camelot to function, and that is the law for adultery… which seems like maybe a bad law to have in your very fair and noble kingdom of equality), and then has to battle his dear friend and destroy his kingdom. Guenevere feels bad for causing so much trouble and becomes a nun. All of this is the result of political machinations on the part of Mordred, who’s mad that Arthur won’t recognize his legitimacy as a son. If you’re into the fated romantic aspect of Arthurian legends and the idealism of the Round Table, this is where it’s at. If you love musicals, it’s even better.
Excaliburs: There is very little magic here, though Merlyn does make an appearance when Arthur calls on him for advice at the opening. The action of the story is largely a framing device; the musical starts and ends with Arthur on the battlefield, about to fight against Lancelot and his cohort. But there is also jousting! Guenevere gets Lancelot to joust three other knights because she doesn’t much like him at the start. It’s pretty great. Also, you can’t really get a better show of ego than Lancelot’s opening number, “C’est Moi.”
Out of all the options we have in this list, Camelot has many of the hallmarks that people love about Arthurian legend—the Round Table, the political upheaval, the ideology of Camelot, the love triangle. It is also lifted from one of the most popular retellings of the story. All of these aspects, combined with some truly sumptuous design, give it the top spot. —Emily
* * *
So… the greatest versions of Arthurian legend on film are a musical and a comedy. Which brings us to one very important conclusion:
No one has made the great Arthur film this world deserves. Yeesh.
Prince Valiant isn’t a “humorous comic book strip,” it’s a serious adventure comic strip published in newspapers, one full-color strip per week for the past 80 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Valiant
Its first film adaptation was in 1954 and starred Robert Wagner as Valiant, with James Mason and Janet Leigh. There was also an animated TV series adaptation in 1991, which had sophisticated, adult-oriented writing and a terrific voice cast, but terrible animation.
And how is Monty Python and the Holy Grail not at the top of this list?
A fun aside for the Arthurian Legend is “That Hideous Strength” by C.S. Lewis. It is the third book in his Space Trilogy and has the protagonist from the earlier books **Spoiler** becoming the Pendragon and Arthur’s heir in the fight against evil. It even features Merlin. And how he describes Merlin in that book implies that he is an Istari, possibly Radagast himself.
What about Mists of Avalon, or NBC’s miniseries Merlin? I really liked both of those, although of course they’re not perfect. But Sam Neil and Isabella Roselini in an epic love story spanning a lifetime? Give me all of that.
I’d place Excalibur (1981) at #1, and King Arthur (2004) at #2. I like the historical realism of King Arthur as a left-behind Roman soldier, even if there are many historical inaccuracies. I guess I’d put Camelot at #3, except I’ve never forgiven Vanessa Redgrave for her rewrite of the lyrics to “Simple Joys of Maidenhood.” (She objected to “start a little war”.)
There’s a very popular fan theory regarding the squirrel (called at times “Hazel”) from Sword in the Stone. Long story short is that she’s an enchanted Guinevere. Otherwise, that part is quite possibly the saddest bit of film that doesn’t involved children/puppies/kittens dying.
@2. I totally need to give that book another chance. I got about 50 pages in before I was like “this is so boring” and went on to something else. It sits still on my green shelf, daunting me, daring me to read it.
@5 aethercowboy, I felt the same way when I read it the first time. It starts very slow and lays a lot of ground work for the story, but once it takes off it doesn’t let up.
@3, The NBC Merlin mini-series is my favorite version of the Arthurian legend! They take some liberties, yes, but overall it *feels* more accurate to the legends of the time period than most of the other versions.
If we are going to bring tv series into this then I nominate Doctor Who’s “Battlefield”. The Doctor is Merlin, Arthur is just a (dead) pawn in “Merlin’s” battle with evil supervillainess Morgana, Mordred is a slimy creep, Excalibur is a trap, and the Brigadier shoots the anthropomorphic personification of nuclear war in the head with a silver bullet.
And that is only half of it.
Monty Python is all the Arthur lore the world needs. Ni!
In “Excalibur” knights wear that shiny plate armor everywhere – even in bed. Even when entertaining company in bed. The ladies don’t seem to mind. Some kind of fetish perhaps?
Helen Mirren is GORGEOUS and wonderfully EVILLLLL!
Re THE SWORD IN THE STONE, it occurs to me that a great candidate for the next Disney “live action remake” would be this–ideally, an even more detailed adaptation of THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING.
#7. Richard Gere doesn’t do a British accent for Lancelot? Why should he? Lancelot was French.
If we were including plays along with movies, I might put the Broadway “Camelot” with Richard Burton, Julie Andrews and Robert Goulet as #1, on the strength of the cast recording. But there’s no way I’d rank the film “Camelot” above “Monty Python and the Holy Grail.” I never really came to care about the characters in the movie. (I care about the characters in the Broadway musical just from hearing them sing.) And it annoyed me that Lancelot had an Italian accent. Oh well, Hollywood thought, he’s European, he has the accent of a Romance language, it’s all the same.
@13 – Fair point. But he still wasn’t American!
I assume the list will have to be rewritten when Transformers: Last Knight comes out.
Off that list I’ve only seen three of them, and my favourite has to Excalibur. Mostly it’s the classical music used in it. O Fortuna by Carl Orff still makes me think of horses riding into battle. My main complaint with King Arthur is Keira Knightley just doesn’t work for me a Guinevere. Or even as a warrior princess for that matter.
@15/Molly Templeton: Well, of course, people in Arthurian times wouldn’t have had national accents anything like the ones we have today, or even spoken languages comprehensible to us. So a modern French accent would be just as incongruous for Lancelot as a modern American accent.
Thank you for proving that the memory I have of Sean Connery playing a headless green knight was real and not a fever dream from childhood.
I also think the Sam Neil as Merlin one was the best. So much cool world building for magic.
Excalibur would be number 1 for me. Camelot wouldn’t even make my list. Hate it.
Excalibur should be number 1, it shouldn’t even be up for debate. Good choice for number 2 tho.
You mention Excalibur and neglect to mention that Patrick Stewart played Guine’s daddy Leondegrance? And no mention of Nigel Terry as Aurthur? And an early appearance of the late Robert Addie as Mordred grown up, who went on to play Sir Guy of Gisbourne in the Robin of Sherwood series. (Addie was one of the few actors cast in such epics who actually could ride a horse. He played polo before getting into acting.)
Definitely missing THE MISTS OF AVALON on your list. ,-)
@3: I came to the comments specifically to thank the writers for *not* including the Mists of Avalon miniseries. So horrible.
No love for ‘The Lost Legion’, which succeeded where ‘King Arthur’ failed in presenting a Roman-centric vision of the legends?
Merlin with Sam Neil is one of my favorites!
I still randomly sing this song from King Arthur (2004): “Land of bears and land of eagle. Land that gave us birth and blessing. Land that called us ever homewards. We will go home across the mountains. We will go home, We will go home, We will go home across the mountains. We will go home singing our song. We will go home across the mountains. Hear our singing, hear our longing. We will go home across the mountains. We will go home, We will go home. We will go home across the mountains.”
And the look of longing on Hugh Dancy’s face. Great scene.
Nice list. I’m a big fan of 2004 King Arthur, but I get why it is only at number 6. And if you look at the cast list, it’s fairly impressive who they got to play each of the “knights.”
I remember Excalibur 1981 through a rather nostalgic lens, but I would also list that as one of my favorites.
Unfortunately, the conclusion is correct. There is still no proper Arthurian film we deserve. I submit, however, that the best King Arthur story is Fate/Zero and it’s sequel, Fate/Stay Night: Unlimited Blade Works. There’s Grails, there’s Excaliburs, pretty interesting politics, and dwells on the question of ‘What Is Kingship?’ and why is Arthur considered such a good king if his reign ended in tragedy and betrayal.
You sure left out a lot. King Arthur movies go back way farther than 1967. Some are great and other pure trash, but if you want to weigh them against each other, they deserve to be recognized, most notable omissions:
Knights of the Round Table, 1959; Robert Taylor, Ava Gardner
Lancelot and Guinevere, 1963; Cornell Wilde, Jean Wallace
Sticking with only English language films is doing this list a disservice– there have been some excellent French adaptations over the decades.
The NBC Merlin miniseries is near the top of my list.
I’m glad that The Last Legion failed to make the cut. It could have been so good and wound up being so very bad instead. It was a tragic waste of the material, the opportunity, and Colin Firth.
Like with so many things, it shocks me that there is no good Arthurian adaptation extant today (I don’t count the recent BBC Merlin TV series as a good adaptation). It would make a perfect setting for an AMC or FX series, and would have potential on a premium network like HBO or STARZ. For that matter, Netflix could do an amazing job of it.
The NBC miniseries Merlin has always been my favourite.
@32 — Any in particular you’d suggest? (Ideally, ones that are available with English subtitles …)
@5: Understand why you’d be bored and give up. The only thing that kept me going was that I *loved* the two previous books in the trilogy and *had* to find out what had happened to Ransom. I was bored and uncomfortable throughout, and yet it taught me several useful lessons that have come in handy throughout the following 50 years!
I agree with those who rank Excalibur at no. 1. It’s not perfect and frequently shows it’s budget limitations, like all that backlit fog at the final battle to disguise how few knights there were. Also at that battle, I thought it had an amazing musical score, not realizing till years later that they were using Wagner.
1981 Excalibur gets my vote for the best.
Conclusion. Do yourself a favour and read Mallory, and/or Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival
@5: I found THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH to be the weakest of the Space Trilogy. PERELANDRA was an absolutely beautiful book and coming off of that into the unnecessarily long THS was tough.
A good list. Having written some “best list” types of articles myself, I should refrain from saying anything, because it’s alway irritating when you have to read about entries you forgot or that should have made the list, BUT… the NBC Merlin miniseries should really have made that list. It’s not an obscure or seldom seen adaptation; It was picked up by a number of networks, so there is no excuse for omitting it. It was beautiful with great performances by Sam Neil, Martin Short and many other actors. It certainly could have taken the Miles O’Keefe version’s place. Also, personal choice, no other adaptation will ever remove Excalibur off the top of my own list.
No love for A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court?
I imprinted on The Crystal Cave book series 45 years ago. It follows Merlin from a boy into his old age, Arthur into his 30’s. So many of these are far too campy for my liking. If pressed, I’d vote for Monty Python, then “Merlin” w/ Sam Neill and Isabella Rossellini.
I wrote an Arthurian novel a few years ago, which meant I read a ton of books and watched as many Arthurian movies as I could to research it. There’s really no choice: Excalibur is the top version, flaws and all, because it tells the entire story, grounds itself in the myth(s) (there’s no central text, after all), and presents image after image that could be inspired by both Waterhouse and illuminated manuscripts. Arthur was never meant to be an historical figure; he inhabits a netherworld, and Excalibur shows that beautifully.
That said, Robert Bresson’s Lancelot du Lac and Eric Rohmer’s Perceval deserve places on this last far more than shoddy TV movies like Prince Valiant and Merlin and the Sword.
Prince Valiant, the comic strip, was quite serious and an enjoyable read.
Still waiting for the great Arthurian movie. Until then, Excalibur the favorite, along with Sword in the Stone and Monty Python. Love Camelot as musical with Julie Andrews and Richard Burton, but disliked the movie. Bad casting and all those close-ups. Favorite book will always be The Once and Future King, but also liked Mary Stewart’s Merlin saga beginning with The Crystal Cave. And Malory, of course.
Excalibur #1 for me. The armor in the first half is amazing: it influences how I see armor even now. Nicol Williamson was brilliant as Merlin, and the mythos was treated with reverence. Monty Python #2 because of course it is. Tomorrow I might swap these two. For the most part, none of the rest of these movies matter much to me.
Perhaps the world of film has let us down up to now, but I would argue that the Merlin miniseries starring Sam Neill did an exceptionally good job of capturing most of the Arthurian elements within it. In fact, if filmmakers are really invested in producing a great Arthurian film, then a new television miniseries, perhaps produced for Netflix, would probably be the most effective option.
Oh, come on. Most, if not all, of these movies are tosh. Except that Excalibur gets redeemed by its reverence for the Matter of Britain, the choice of music, and that wonderful and gorgeous cast. (Uncannily, Patrick Stewart hasn’t aged a single day since then. And Helen Mirren and Liam Neeson, who have aged, are even more beautiful now.)
And of course Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Definitely that. Probably the movie I have watched most times in my whole lifetime –and I’m a chronic re-watcher and re-reader. It is the gift that keeps on giving…
The Mists of Avalon is just so bad. A pity, really, because the book is probably the BEST Arthurian reimagining of all times, bar none.
I was surprised Excalibur didn’t rank #1 here. It is one of my favorite films of all time, ridiculous armored love-making and over the top magic sequences and all. First of all, it is DRIPPING with gorgeous cinematography. The scene where Arthur is rejuvenated and rides though a cherry orchard–fantastic. The musical score–breathtaking use of Wagner, particularly Tristan and Isolde. And Excalibur contains the same love triangle as Camelot: Arthur, Guinevere, and Lancelot all love each other and don’t want to hurt each other but there’s fate and stuff, and Guin’s going to be burned at the stake for adultery unless Lancelot can prove her innocence in single combat with “I have a particular set of skills” Liam Neeson. At this point, Guin and Lance haven’t gotten it on yet, but once he wins the battle, she’s like, grateful, plus Merlin (Nicol Williamson, who is delicious) has to use their love as some mojo to save Lance from a mortal wound he took from Neeson’s Gawain. Merlin casts his spell–with Arthur’s OK mind you–and Guin and Lance go off in the woods together. Arthur discovers them in post-coitus slumber, thinks about killing them, but instead shoves Excalibur into the ground between them and stumbles away to bed his half-sister Morgana (yes, the inimitable Helen Mirren), begetting Mordred. In Arthur’s defense, Morgana has magicked herself into looking like Guinevere, just as Merlin magicked Uther into looking like Morgana’s dad so Uther could bang Igraine (so like, what goes around comes around). Arthur and the land fall into a funk; Lance goes mad, and Guin becomes a nun (just like in Camelot). How can anyone not love all that juicy soap opera stuff? Oh, let’s not forget the special Easter egg of a young but already bald Patrick Stewart playing Guinevere’s dad (even though he was probably not that much older than Cheri Lunghi at the time). I truly adore this movie and even love the oft-stilted dialog and can quote several scenes off the top of my head. Here’s a favorite bit, from when Arthur visits Guinevere at her convent before going to fight his final battle against Morgana and Mordred:
Guinevere: I loved you as king, sometimes as husband, but one cannot gaze at the sun too long.
Arthur: Forgive me, my wife, if you can.
Guinevere [pulling Excalibur out from under her bed]: I kept it.
So clearly, my enthusiasm for this film is boundless. :)
I would rank Excalibur as #1. Hands dow
Arthur understanding and tolerating the Guin/Lance affair is a modern interpretation. In the old Romances he is FURIOUS and understandably. For literally decades he – Arthur – has been dismissing hints and outright accusations against his wife and friend partly because they were coming from enemies with no credibility and partly because he TRUSTED Guinevere and Lancelot. Then suddenly he discovers that his enemies have been right all along, that his best friend and his wife have been betraying and lying to him all these years – well how would you feel?
“Knights, Squires, . . . ., prepare for battle!” That’s all I need.
Thank you for an interesting list. Personally, I don’t think the King Arthur (2004) movie should have even made the list, but everyone’s got their personal preferences. :)
One of the things I find fascinating is how far from the original stories a lot of these movies are – Excalibur and First Knight both feature armor that didn’t exist in Arthur’s Britain, or for that matter reality (except maybe at tournaments?). Armor is an expensive thing to own. Most wore chain mail at best. What always struck me about Excalibur is the dream like quality of the film. It’s the one movie that’s the most filled with light – and not just from all that shiny plate armor either. I think Monty Python and, despite my dislike, King Arthur are closer to the earlier stories.
While I agree that Merlin with Sam Neill is an excellent mini-series (even if the follow up movies are really awful) and I love to rewatch it now and again, I think it’s important to point out that it really isn’t about *Arthur*, but *Merlin* and how his relationship with magic and the old ways change and evolve over time. Arthur’s part is relatively brief in the story.
@random22 in comment #9: Battlefield is an excellent update to the mythology (and one of my personal favorite Seventh Doctor stories), even with the really liberal reassignment of names (Lake Vortigern?), Avalon as an alternate dimension, and terminology. Typical Who logic there. LOL
One of my favorites was not specifically Arthur and his round table buddies but, I feel, next to Excalibur, it had the best dramatic Arthurian atmosphere: “Knightriders” by George A. Romero, 1981. (No, not the series with KIT, the talking car.)
A young Ed Harris plays the Arthur (a.k.a. King William) surrogate, with Tom Savini as a very male Morgan who is William’s main rival. Oh, and they are a traveling troupe of motorcycle jousters (cue the Renn faire)! I saw this as teen and recently re-watched it for the first time since. The movie holds up though many things are a bit laughable, including an infamous cameo by Steven King. Ed Harris really carries the heart of the Arthurian credo, so much so that he’s borderline psychotic but in the most chivalrous way. If you haven’t seen it, I encourage you to look for it. Friends of mine were definitely weirded out by all the motorcycle stuff but at least the horses got a break for a change, eh?
Also, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, forever!
How is it the BBC series ‘Merlin’ isn’t getting any love?
Yep, Richard Harris could sing. In fact he did the song “MacArthurs Park” that was released in “68. (most people know the song from Donna Summers version) that actually was released and and charted quite high in the US and Europe and also won a Grammy.
My favorite King Arthur movie? Hands down it would be Excalibur. That movie just hit a sweet spot for me with the incredible visuals and casting. Yes, the lack of a proper budget shows, but for me it just can’t be beat.
I will freely admit that BBC’s Merlin holds my heart in this genre. In all of its cheesy, homoerotic, vast liberties taken glory.
Yes, Richard Harris can sing, and he’ll always be my King Arthur, for his kindness to a starstruck 17-year-old, many years ago.
Excalibur for number 1.
I’m with Sharon 100%. Excalibur is the best mythic Arthur film ever made, and King Arthur (2004) is the best historical treatment. I totally disagree that it is a “hodgepodge” of history – Arthur is psuedo-history to begin with. They did research with the idea of Sarmatians being the heavy cavalry knights (right down to the scene on the ice with their eastern bows out ranging the Saxon ones!), and even the religion had historical context, using Palagius as Arthur’s preferred inspiration. Very well done indeed.
@fuzzipueo, Just a couple of points. The first is that plate armor was not limited to jousting. Certainly Jousting armor was a specialized form of plate armor, but it was used on the Battlefield as well (And in part is demonstrated by how weapons changed in the late middle ages to deal with plate armor). Sure, the peasant levy wasn’t going to wear it, but professional soldiers would get the best armor they could get.
As for the comments about the Arthurian movies being anachronistic is kind of missing the point. If Arthur was historical at all, he lived in late antiquity, in the late 5th or 6th centuries. But his story was adapted time and again by different authors in different times and places. The Arthur of the Welsh Mabinogion is very different than the one of Monmouth’s Historia, and finally there is the Arthur of medieval romances, reachings his height with Chretien De Troyes and being capped off with Thomas Mallory’s Morte D’Arthur (which kind of caps off our notion of Arthur in plate armor.
This list exempts the great NBC miniseries Merlin starring Sam O’Neill, and the TNT miniseries adaptation of Marion Zimmer Bradley’s Mists of Avalon starring Julianna Marguiles, Angelica Huston, and Joan Allen, and as such is not even worth engaging with on it’s merits. (Which are terrible)
I’d put Monty Python top, closely followed by Excalibur. I know it seems odd to put the comedy on top, but they knew exactly what they were sending up. Remember, the Pythons met at university and at least one of them has a degree in English lit. I first saw the film when I was at uni, studying Arthurian romance and laughed my head off; you can laugh even if you’re unfamiliar with the mythos, but it’s much funnier if you do know it.
Excalibur I love for its sheer beauty. And by the way, Nigel Terry and Cherie Lunghi went on to play lovers in a rather silly but entertaining medieval T show called Covington Cross, in their middle age…
Merlin And The Sword was not very good, but I give it a point for including the medieval romance story of Sir Gawain and the Loathly Lady, which no other movie has. You do realise it was where Chaucer got his Wife of Bath’s Tale? The original has the spell broken cause Gawain has learned that what women want most is to have their own way, and lets his new wife decide whether she is to be beautiful by day and ugly by night or the reverse. And apparently, she is the only woman Gawain ever loves…
My third choice is King Arthur, though I should agree that I would love to have seen Sam Neill play Mary Stewart’s Merlin. The only version I’ve seen was a children’s TV show, Merlin of the Crystal Cave, with a young actor called Michael Einter in the role.
OK, While I agree there is no Proper King Arthur Movie yet. EXCALIBUR still rides at the top of the list for me.
So much so that I actually have it on LASERDISK. Yes, I have a working player too.
Monty Pythons version was a fun movie and I also keep it on hand in ever changing formats.
@12–YES. If Disney’s so keen on live-action remakes, let them do one of Sword in the Stone that’s a bit truer to the original book (well, as much as any adaptation can be since the stand-alone version is quite different from the revised version that’s part of the complete Once and Future King). Then, follow it up with adaptations of the rest of TOaFK and you could have a fantasy trilogy on par with LOTR–that is, if they could acquire the rights for the rest of the story back from the Lerner and Loewe estate.
(I say “trilogy” because I think that’s how it would work best. Face it, not all that much HAPPENS in The Queen of Air and Darkness besides the establishment of the Table and the conception of Mordred–it’s mostly just establishment and backstory for what’s coming later. Hell, the most important points in TQoAaD were summed up in a few SENTENCES in Camelot. So you could have the Sword movie, a second one that combines The Queen of Air and Darkness with The Ill-Made Knight, and a third focusing on The Candle in the Wind.)
At least it would be a better visualization of Arthurian legend than the Guy Ritchie thing that’s out now…from what I hear, all that does is shoehorn the story into action-movie tropes. I mean, really, MARTIAL ARTS IN A KING ARTHUR MOVIE?!
And if you like Camelot the musical but don’t think the 1967 version did it justice…the 1981 revival, also starring Richard Harris, was filmed and broadcast on HBO, and can be found on YouTube. Harris looks a bit old for someone who’s supposed to start the play as a twenty-five-year-old and end it as not much more than forty (the play covers a lot less time than TOaFK), but he pulls it off well, and the supporting cast are excellent. The script has been revised somewhat from the original (published) playscript…it takes the movie’s tack of starting at the final battle and playing it in flashback. (That does address one of the complaints leveled at the original version–that the first act was mostly light-hearted and the second act too much of a swerve. Doing it this way lets the first act play in the shadow of what’s to come.) It also ditches that stupid Morgan Le Fay scene in favor of Mordred’s confrontation with Arthur in the forest from the movie, changing it from a spell cast on a passive and helpless Arthur to a battle of wills and philosophies.
Yes, Richard Harris can sing! He actually released 4 albums and had a #2 U.S.hit in the late 60’s with Macarthur Park (later covered by Donna Summer).
Another vote for Excalibur to take the top spot. I agree too that it seems almost unbelievable that there was no mention of Patrick Stewart!
@69, I love the ’81 revival of Camelot which I saw first and so was bitterly disappointed by the movie
Also, everyone here forgot that Ciaran Hinds was also in Excalibur, playing Sir Lot. He looks fabulous then and, like Dame Helen Mirren, and Mr. Neeson, looks fabulous today!
The correct #1 Arthurian movie is in the picture at the top of the column: Excalibur (1981).
Monty Python and the Holy Grail could be a tie at #1 but I would put it just off to the side as it’s a parody but its general excellence transcends and a very good case can be made that it’s shooting locations and general atmosphere are among the best.
I’d like to chime in for Knights of the Round Table (1954) with Robert Taylor as Lancelot, Mel Ferrer as Arthur, and Ava Gardner as Guinevere.
Monty Python gets my second vote.
@72–When my high school English class read The Once And Future King, our teacher showed us the 1981 version, not the 1967 movie. It was then that I really fell in love with this musical. (I’d heard the movie soundtrack a couple months before, but hadn’t taken to it at first. After seeing this, I went back, listened again, and liked it better.)
Excalibur was number one for me–how in the name of God it didn’t get Best Costume that year and Gandhi did instead, I have no idea. Mordred’s armor alone outranks all the bedsheets combined. But I have a soft spot for The Sword and the Stone, if only because of the Wizard’s Duel with a truly unique approach to basic transmogrifcation.
Still, I also like the Merlin miniseries quite a bit, if only for Martin Short as Frick (he should have gotten an Emmy for the scene where Morgause, I think, dies in his arms). And the way he stared down people at the end who caught sight of his pointed ears (“Grandma was an elf, we Don’t Talk About It”).
The Arthur series by Stephen R Lawhead would make a great film adaption.
How is Excalibur not number 1?
It has everything!
I’m appalled that Camelot gets so much love; the script keeps Guinevere as the conniving little unprintable-from-the-start that T. H. White made her, in complete denial of every previous and subsequent treatment of the story. And “Stubby” ‘s complaint about Excalibur showing up late in the Disney version is nonsense; the story is about Arthur’s childhood, which is the one place where White could make up material (because there’s practically nothing prior to go on) instead of stomping all over the story out of misogyny.
Funny, that’s not how I read White’s Jenny at all.
What about the British BBC production of Merlin of the Crystal Caves based off of Mary Stewart’s books? I still am hoping for a DVD version of that one.
Much depends on precisely how one defines one’s parameters here. Not all Arthurian movies are King Arthur movies (witness the number of cases where Merlin is the primary POV character), and then there’s the question of theatrical movies vs. made-for-TV films vs. TV series.
Even so, I’m a little surprised that no one at all has yet mentioned the animated Quest for Camelot, from Warner in 1998. It’s definitely more of an Arthurian film than a “King Arthur” story (not surprisingly, having been loosely based on Vera Chapman’s The King’s Damosel). And it is not likely to make anyone’s top-five or even top-ten list of all time best Arthurian movies. But it did have a very strong voice cast, and it was in fact a theatrical release rather than a small-screen project, and as such it deserves to be included on any list purporting to be complete.
I just saw my very first movie about this all…King Arthur The Legend of the Sword (and I LOVED it!). I came to this page to read about what to watch next. I am so very very far behind and I love movies! This has never been a movie I thought I would enjoy, but after seeing the newest version, I think I’m totally into it. Now, with what movie do I start with first?? The First Knight seems like a good one to continue with…or perhaps “Camelot”. I really just don’t know. I did miss the romance part of it with “Mage” and King Arthur. Makes me hope there’s a second movie for sure. The sounds and music during all the action was GREAT, and I think Richie did an awesome job for us “newbies”… I loved the round table as well. But, like I said, I’m new to all of this and yes, so many of these movies are not easy to get, if at all anymore. I hope I am making the right choice here….I’m also contemplating starting with “Excaliber” … So much confusion! I thank everyone for their comments and for who made this page possible for me to read.
What about Quest for Camelot? It doesn’t focus on Arthur, but there’s magic, music, Excalibur, romance, and politics all in a kid friendly package. Also, let’s not forget Gary Oldman as the bad guy, Eric Idle as one head of a two-headed dragon, and Jaleel White as a rooster with a blade for a beak. A-ma-zing!
I forgot to mention, for tv shows, there is an old UK tv show called Knights of God (starring Patrick Troughton, the bloke with the curly hair from Blake’s 7, and those two actors who specialise in looking sinister on cue) which is inspired by the Arthurian Mythos, mainly from the Welsh tradition. Its pretty good. A post-apocalyptic UK, with a semi-fascist military-religious order in charge and the “true king” who the people would rally around to be free in missing or hidden.
Available to watch on the internet from the usual places, but nowhere legally because nobody knows who owns the rights since the production companies involved all went broke (more than once, too) and lost all the paperwork.
Oh boy, Pat Troughton with a beard and Gareth Thomas playing to type!
As my psychic has told me to direct a influential movie I will conduct this Artur exemplar! Promised.
@88 If you want a Welsh rebel-figure, why would you have gone anywhere except Gareth Thomas? That isn’t knocking him, he played those roles perfectly.
Excalibur #1. Rest can fight for #2…don’t care.
Nigel Perry by far. It cost him his career while Patrick Stewart and Liam Neesom excelled. His portrayal of King Arthur was so beyond timeless that even Alec Guiness chasing people away as Obi Won can’t compare to the sacrifice he made for his career.
Nigel Terry. The movie was hard to distinguish between reality and fantasy. He was so good as King Arthur it made you remember that the armor and weapons of the late Middle Ages depicted in the movie were current to the fantasy John Boorman created.
92. wmichaels: “Nigel Perry by far. It cost him his career …”
Don’t think I know that story. Would you elaborate please?
excalibur should be #1
this is why i really wanna go into film-making — so i can finally make the king arthur movie we DESERVE. a four-movie adaptation of the once and future king. it’s my favorite book in the whole world, and it deserves to have a better adaptation than the sword in the stone — which was a direct adaptation of the first part of the book, sans all of the deeper meaning. i’m just so glad that i’m not the only one foaming at the mouth for a really, truly GOOD king arthur movie.
Aside from Monty Python, I really haven’t cared for any Arthur films enough to rewatch them, let alone rank them.
As for books though, Arthurian legend is one of my favorite stories, and I’ve read pretty much every retelling I can get my hands on. The VERY BEST is always going to be Bernard Cornwell’s Warlord Chronicles. I’m always so surprised that so few people have read it. It’s so beautifully done. Cornwell is one of the best historical fiction authors out there and, to me, this is his best. It’s got a very gritty, real feel. Plenty of romance and intrigue, a lot of action, and Merlin is a druid rather than wizard, and most of his magic is tricks. I cannot say enough about this trilogy. It’s beautiful, it’s so bittersweet and heartbreaking at times, and I’ve cried every time I’ve reread it. The titles in the series are:
1. The Winter King
2. The Enemy of God
3. Excalibur
Do yourself a favor. Enjoy.
Merlin mini-series with Sam Neill and several other notable actors. A great take on the Arthurian legend.
Excalibur. And it’s not even close. I demand Ridley Scott remake this as a trilogy!
Have to have EXCALIBUR as #1. There are just so many things John Boorman got *right* – that still hold the film up now – 37 years later. I know it is flawed in terms of time(s) technology(?) = armour and so on.
But it has SO much else, I can’t begin to list all the positives.
It has put me off anything else, as I see them as poor substitutes (and even avoid them now). I am a child of its time I suppose.
A modern twist. Disney’s, “A Kid in King Arthur’s Court.”
SWORD OF LANCELOT, Cornel Wilde as an outrageously French Lancelot, great sword fights, great battles ending with the villain getting literally chopped through the shoulder to his breastbone… nuff said.
> There’s a very popular fan theory regarding the squirrel (called at times “Hazel”) from Sword in the Stone. Long story short is that she’s an enchanted Guinevere. Otherwise, that part is quite possibly the saddest bit of film that doesn’t involved children/puppies/kittens dying.
“Hazel” can’t be an enchanted Guinevere because squirrels mate for life and, well, Guinevere doesn’t.
There’s a better fan theory that has “Hazel” as the one “person” who could have saved Arthur. Arthur’s two big mistakes were having a child with Morgana and marrying Guinevere. If Merlin had made Hazel human AND she managed to marry Arthur, Guinevere would have been a non-issue as far as Arthur is concerned. Hazel might also have kept Arthur out of Morgana’s bed.
The problem with trying to create THE Arthurian movie is that The Matter of Britain is just too BIG and too intricate to be fitted into any single film without losing far too much; it would be like trying to make a Marvel movie in which every single bit of Marvel comics was meant to be packed into a single film without any prequels or sequels to give it context.
It would (and has been) Madness, but occasionally a Magnificent Madness.
Certainly the only sensible solution that occurs to me would be the creation of an ongoing series (cinematic or television) that would allow the Legend to be told at length, though one suspects this would be a Big Lift for any studio or other production company; a little of King Arthur & Camelot can go a long way, after all. (-:
p.s. I won’t try ranking the films, but so far as soundtrack goes (and honourable mention to Mr Hans Zimmer & to CAMELOT):-
(3) Knights of the Round Table = When it comes to HIGH CHIVALRY you can’t go wrong with Miklos Rozsa (one could simply say ‘Epic History’ and be equally accurate); the only thing that keeps this old favourite from ranking higher is that I love other soundtracks EVEN MORE (both other Arthurian soundtracks & those by Mr Rozsa).
(2) Excalibur = Absolutely gorgeous soundscape by Mr Trevor Jones that only loses points for ‘cheating’ by including works from other composers; alternatively eerie, splendid and unearthly by turns.
(3) First Knight = Mr Jerry Goldsmith remains the Man, the Myth, the Legend when it comes to cinematic soundtracks for Good Reason; this is most definitely my favourite of his scores, for the simple reason that ’tis Chivalric Romance incarnate (also because I started reading the myths of Arthur & Camelot at an early age and stumbled onto this film not too long thereafter; it’s formative effect on my youthful tastes in soundtracks & Arthuriana cannot be understated).
@107/ED: “Certainly the only sensible solution that occurs to me would be the creation of an ongoing series (cinematic or television) that would allow the Legend to be told at length, though one suspects this would be a Big Lift for any studio or other production company; a little of King Arthur & Camelot can go a long way, after all. (-: “
There have been a number of TV series based in Arthurian lore, including fairly straight takes like the 1956 The Adventures of Sir Lancelot (starring future Doctor Who companion William Russell) and Starz’s short-lived Camelot, more revisionist takes like the Smallville-inspired Merlin from 2008, and various animated series like The Legend of Prince Valiant and King Arthur and the Knights of Justice.
Like or not ‘Excalibur’…Nigel Terry IS King Arthur! End of debate. Comparing the film to a musical and a comedy just shows how we need not listen to Molly and her puny opinions. She couldn’t appreciate sliced bread if she was addicted to peanut butter!
Has nobody watched Merlin (the amazing TV series)? It’s pretty freaking awesome! That’s all that I need to say.