"Camelot"

[sergebroom]

Last night, we watched the 2-hour premiere of Starz's miniseries "Camelot". My opinion? The actor playing Arthur looked like a reject from the "Twilight" movies. Overall... A shrug... Which should take some effort from something where Morgan is played by Eva Green - and not just because of the scenes where she was au naturel.

Comments

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

1. The actor playing Arthur was IN the Twilight movies, as the head of the VentrueVolturi. I didn't even SEE that installment and I know this. Why?

2. Because that same actor was Anthony in the Tim Burton Sweeney Todd movie, and I thought he was adorable there.

3. Nevertheless, in this show, he looked AMAZINGLY DIM. eternaleponine and I kept telling him he needed to CLOSE HIS MOUTH. No, not stop talking -- he needed to not have his jaw constantly hanging open.

4. I don't think I should be allowed to watch Arthurian things, because I keep arguing genealogy with the screen. And criticizing the costuming.

5. That sex scene with Lot and Morgan was perhaps one of the unsexiest sex scenes ever.

In conclusion, a resounding "meh," but I'll probably keep watching because Jamie Campbell Bower is awfully damn cute even when he IS acting incredibly dim.

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

I don't think I should be allowed to watch Arthurian things

Dare I ask what you thought of the Clive Owen version of the story? I liked it myself in spite of its flaws. But there are few of us who do, if I remember correctly. I'm not sure why. Sure there were historical inaccuracies, but most people wouldn't know one even if it bit them you-know-where. They did do some research about the era though, based on what my wife found out when she worked on a fantasy novel of hers. She wishes "The Eagle" had done well because then they might have filmed Sutcliff's own Roman-Britain interpretation of Arthur.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

Despite the presence of my adored Ioan Gruffudd as Lancelot in that one, I did not see it, because the lobby cards showing Keira Knightley as Guinevere in ridiculous bits of leather strapping made it clear to me that I'd be arguing loudly with the movie pretty much every minute.

My feeling on Arthuriana is "choose a century and stick to it," given the problems of dating the story anyway, what with Malory and Geoffrey of Monmouth trying to tell the story of a just-post-Roman war chieftain but putting it in their own idiom, and then Tennyson doing it over again in Victorian Pseudo-Medieval, and all the mucking about that's been done since. It helps not to dress the ladies in anything that can make me think of Slave Girl Princess Leia.

Another thing that gets me Very Very Annoyed is trying to smush Morgaine and Morgause into one character. Which this one did.

As I said. Really shouldn't be allowed to watch filmed Arthuriana. Give me a proper BOOK, so the author has space to justify and explain how they're choosing to portray the family relationships, so I'm not going "dammit, Igraine was Morgaine's MOTHER, and GORLOIS was her father, NOT Uther, and who the hell were they making her mother in this one if they've screwed that up, and WHERE IS MORGAUSE?"

Also, we rather missed Pellinore's dog.

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

In that case, I recommend staying away from Colin Firth and "The Last Legion".

I think that, if my wife ever needs some information about Arthurian lore, you'd be the person to go to. That being said, yes, books have more room to do things while movies have to compress things. I have this feeling that the current perception of the whole story owes a lot to John Boorman, for better and for worse. Yes, its depiction of costumes and armors was anachronistic, but I saw "Excalibur" not as a fantasy film, but as one about a legend. Not sure what I said makes sense.

Back to "Camelot" and the sex between Lot and Morgan... Yes, it was unsexy. Come to think of it, most of the sex in that show was unsexy.

For some reason, I want to watch "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" again.
:-)

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

But... but... Colin Firth! <3

I'm really, really not the person to go to about Arthurian lore. I'm too biased in favor of MZB's take. Elizabeth Bear knows it a million times better than I do. So does immlass, who FINISHED degrees in medieval history where I just started and flunked out. immlass also named her cats Lynette, Lionors, and, um, another Arthurian lady-name starting with L. She's way better at it than I am.

"Excalibur" was one of the first Arthurian interpretations I saw. I was noting the similarities myself. Not least in the telling of the Uther/Igraine story.

I couldn't resist, when they rode up to the castle and said, "Camelot!" saying back to the screen, "It's only a model."

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

Oh, Firth's film wasn't bad, but you'd find yourself griping at costumes: http://pics.livejournal.com/serge_lj/pic/0004p8q8/g24

I think I remember reading an interview with Boorman, back when "Excalibur" came out, and I think his original script was even longer, but he had to tighten things up. That being said, Cheri Lunghi as Guinevere had way more presence than the blond lady this series used, and she didn't have to go around naked.

As for your saying "It's only a model"...
What I said was "On second thought, let's not go to Camelot. It is a silly place."

[nerdycellist.livejournal.com]

My reaction to Boorman's Excalibur was:

But you can't DO that in plate armor!

I am sad to say I did not come by that knowledge first-hand.

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

You've always wanted to do it with a man-in-a-can? :-) That being said, maybe Uther had a hinged door set up for such occasions and for quick bathroom stops on the battlefield. Oh, and about one decade ago, Gabriel Byrne was doing an on-the-road show, and, when the audience asked questions, that subject came up.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

Maybe he unstrapped his codpiece?

Although, seriously, even when i was twelve, that looked pretty implausible.

Does it say anything about the movie that I don't really remember any other scenes?

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

Possibly. It might also say something about 12-year-olds.
:-)

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

Did you know that was Liam Neeson's first movie?

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

I did not! I may have to go back and watch it again, now that I'm no longer 12.

Still, though. Merlin's HAT. Dislike.

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

About MZB's "Mists of Avalon"... I never read the book, but I saw the miniseries, which was ok, but I'm not sure how faithful it was to the original. Anyway, I remember an interview with the late James Coburn (the Magnificent-Seven character who spoke the least), and he had originally bought the rights to the book and he wanted to play Merlin.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

The miniseries was sufficiently dreadful that fans of the book generally couldn't make it through. The book was THOROUGH about Roman/Saxon/Celt stuff, and comprehensive about genealogy (even though that's often contested, at least it justified its choices) and it dealt with Merlin's aging-backwards by making "the Merlin" an OFFICE and a TITLE held by several people over the course of the book, but... I think James Coburn would have made an excellent Merlin Taliesin (he would have been too old for Merlin Kevin). Of course, I know him best from his appearance on the Muppet Show, where he told Animal, "You don't want to bust up a chair like that... you want to bust it up like THIS!" and later tried to teach him to meditate.

[nerdycellist.livejournal.com]

I watched a one hour preview of this that aired after the last Spartacus miniseries (the amount of beefcake required to get me to ignore glaring anachronisms varies depending on time-period. I'm gloriously ignorant of Roman stuff.) I was singularly unimpressed in every way. While I thought JCB was awesome in Sweeney Todd, I found him to be a weasly little baby puke in Camelot. Also execrable - the costuming. I'm with Rikibeth - pick a period and stick with it. This was the worst mish-mosh of visibly polyester Xena rejects I have ever seen (notable was that this was the costume designer for The Tudors, which also had about a 300 year range in their costuming that was one of the reasons I couldn't watch it.) But all this I could ignore if it wasn't being set up as an incredibly two-dimensional White Hat vs. Black Hat. And don't think I didn't notice the subtext of Wimmins is Evil Whores or Nice Doormats. Bleah.

I have high hopes for A Game of Thrones. The casting is fab and the costuming seems to be consistent.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

Weasly little baby puke who COULDN'T SHUT HIS JAW! He's my mental casting for a character in my stories and I wound up yelling at him a lot. Luckily my housemate writes the stories WITH me so she was yelling right along.

And, oh lord, it was the Tudors' costumer? No wonder it was crap. I know not EVERYONE can hire Sandy Powell but it would be nice if they could hire people who aspire to her level. The Tudors was notable for making it impossible for me to watch Jonathan Rhys Meyers and Henry Cavill, both of whom are HIGH on my list of actors I will watch in anything, especially if they take their shirts off. They're both cast in my stories too. Making me unable to watch them is a FEAT.

When I'm yelling at the screen that you don't just RANDOMLY stick a pennanular brooch into a jerkin for decoration, they're CLOAK CLOSURES and by the way you've left that one OPEN... dear Lord.

[serge-lj.livejournal.com]

Did either of you see the miniseries based on Mary Stewart's books? It started with Roman Britain costuumes then, when Arthur is grown up, it's more sort-of medieval. Oh, and it had Sam Neill as Merlin, and that makes up for quite a few flaws.

[rikibeth.livejournal.com]

And Mary Stewart is a source I'm familiar with, and don't feel the need to yell at! I may need to check this out.