Arthur & Merlin (2015)

The Age of Commercialism

Excellent, smart action film.

I gave this film a 9 out of 10, because it was exactly what I expected it to be.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

ARTHUR & MERLIN is an indie-budget retelling of the Arthurian legends, in which the heroic Arthur and Merlin must join forces to tackle an evil druid and King Voltigern. What I can say in this film's favour is that it's actually set in the Dark Ages unlike most Arthurian retellings, so it looks good; the costumes and wooden huts all have that air of authenticity to them. Unfortunately the film itself is clumsily plotted and quite boring, lacking the most basic elements of structure and narrative to make it remotely watchable. The cast give bored performances, there's no attempted characterisation, and the story just drags and drags.

The story of King Arthur has been told many times, beginning as early as 1904 ("Parsifal"). Usually they focus on the adventures with his knights - "Knights of the Round Table (1953), "King Arthur" (2004), "The Last Legion" (2007) – or the romance – "Lancelot and Guinevere" (1963), "Camelot" (1967). Occasionally there is a focus on Merlin – "Excalibur" (1981), "Mists of Avalon" (2001), "Merlin's Apprentice" (2006).FWIW – my favorite is "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" (1975), but putting that one aside as an exception, I enjoyed "Excalibur" the best.King Arthur has been played by Mel Ferrar (1953), Brian Aherne (1963), Richard Harris (1967), Graham Champam (1975), Nigel Terry (1981), Malcolm McDowell (1985), Sean Connery (1995), Edward Fox (1997), and Clive Owen (1997)Merlin has been played by Nicol Williamson (1981), Edward Woodward (1985), Michael Byrne (2001), and Ben Kingsley (2007). My clear favorite here is Nicol Williamson.The film Arthur and Merlin is a fanciful imagination of how Arthur and Merlin came to meet. It strays considerably from the traditional legend, but there is little fact to base the legend on, so why not this story?The film is a low budget British production, and some people may find it hard to understand some of the dialogue. The actors are relatively unknown to U.S. audiences with the possible exception of David Sterne who plays the King prior to Arthur.Locations were good and the costumes were excellent. The atmosphere of Medieval England is well done here, probably as a result of the low budget.The writer-director is Marco van Belle and this is his first full length film. He does a capable job for a first outing, and some of the plodding might have been avoided with a little more experience. Yet with no cgi and very few special effects, and without showing a breast or using a dwarf, he manages to sustain interest.FWIW – This looks like the show was intended as the pilot to a series, and many of the segues are TV style.Bottom line – a nice addition to the story of Arthur and Merlin.

The story line is awesome. It's not your normal sword in the stone story. It strays in almost every way it can while keeping the same character names.Cinematography is okay. It's no Lord of the Rings. It tries its best to be but you can tell the budget suffered here.Directing is okay. Director had a good vision of the story and did well with what he had to deal with.Acting is TERRIBLE (Yes! I meant to shout. TERRIBLE! It's TERRIBLE!)..... This movie should get a bigger budget, and better actors, and be remade. I'd see it.

How to be fair to this movie? Is it a story or is it a movie? I know, dumb question. But as a film, it seems like a student project. That's okay, cause it focuses on story. The acting is suggestive of a play rather than a movie. I would give it ten stars as a narrative. It's a wonderful story. It works as a celtic myth, if such things appeal to you. Ten stars as a play. It could be done at the high school level, it could be off Broadway. But the critics are correct in that it basically takes no advantage of the film medium. It didn't "need" to be a movie. You could read the plot easily in book form. This is or is not a problem - depending on your personal preferences. My suggestion: If you read a book when it first comes out, you'll like this. If you wait for the movie - you won't.