Customer Reviews

Camelot

5 star:		(21)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I prefer fiction. I wanted something to do with the sword. I mean come on, were talking about excalibur here! The greatest sword there ever was. I prefer either a mystical movie such as Legend, or an action movie like DieHard. That's what I thought about it anyway.

Camelot made an impression on me over 30 years ago, and today, watching the remastered video, all the songs and lines come easily to me, yet I probably only saw it twice. Most reviews treat this film version unkindly, but I quite prefer Richard Harris as Arthur. In my mind, it's the greatest thing Harris has ever done, and his almost impish Arthur is appropriate for a boy-turned-king. He's neither too regal nor too arrogant, like some who have performed the role. He inhabits Arthur. I'd not have chosen Redgrave but she turns out to be luminous: by turns innocent, lusty, loving, and decent. Marni Nixon's dubbed singing works through her. Franco Nero's Lancelot is a sculpted icon of steel-eyed beautiful purity. Nero may not the greatest actor in the world, but he is endearing as Lancelot, and his physical loveliness in muscle, jaw, cheekbone and eye is probably unmatched for this role. The costumes are brilliant and gorgeous enhancements. (although a bit more real fur could have been used, back in the 60s!) The fact is, the score could not be more magnificent; the "natural" style singing is charming. Rather than focusing on "great" voices, we instead hear the intended core of each scene through "real" characters expressing themselves. These actors portray their roles gamely and truthfully as three people in love with each other. The entire production is a lush, bittersweet escape that infuses me with the sheer emotion and passion of ideals imagined and dashed. Love both lavished and betrayed is a sweet torment that this film tenderly displays to this viewer. I think it's highly underrated.

The film was remastered and hearing it on a AC-3 system is like watching it in 70mm with magnetic sound the way movies were once produced. It was great. The only thing that i don't like is why do they have to keep the word "Overture" at the beginning, are people really that stupid that they wouldn't know? There is no need for that, just a black screen with the music is all you need.

As with CAROUSEL, not many people liked the film version of CAMELOT. There were some superb actors in the cast, but only competent acting. The singing - in a "natural" style - toned down the grand tragedy aspect and as much confused audiences as alienated them. On initial viewing, the story and the songs are moving and impressive, but this is not a film that stands up to repeated viewings. The sets and costumes are singularly stunning - a combination of primitive and an emerging gold and jewel-encrusted aristocracy on the rise. The wide-screen version is the definitive one to own in that at least the grandeur of the spectacle and sweep of the action fill the eyes and ears when the dramatic content of a scene lets us down. Harris and Redgrave are quite fine. Nero can neither act nor sing but is a pretty Lancelot. Hemmings makes the most of his brief role as the destructive Mordred. This was Alfred Newman/Ken Darby's last scoring job for films and it won him his last Oscar. Also Oscared for Art Direction and Costumes. Additional nom for Cinematography. Worth seeing and even owning - but not one of the great film adaptations of a stage classic.

This is a beautifully moving film. Wonderful music. Worth the price just to see/hear Richard as he confronts his wife's betrayal with his beloved Lancelot. Great scene.

The three stars are for the gorgeous restoration done to this film (my gosh, it actually IS in color!) and it's soundtrack.
The theme of "might for right, justice for all" is my favorite thing about "Camelot"; as for the way the story is told in this film, um, well... On the plus side, Vanessa Redgrave is dazzling as Guenevere, and enjoys wonderful chemistry with Richard Harris (the scene of their first meeting is charm incarnate).
Also includes "making of/behind-the-scenes" documentary & footage of opening night premiere party including interviews w/Richard Harris, director Joshua Logan, and producer Jack L. Warner. More than worth the price(180 minutes of film + 47 minutes of above-mentioned extras).

This is the worst movie musical ever made.It's hard to believe
that this piece of junk was made by the same producer who did
the magnificent "My Fair Lady".I've read that Jack Warner spent
$18 million on the production.Yes,it looks good.But the script
is terrible-not that the show was great,anyway.And the entire
cast overacts badly.One critic called it "an appalling film with
only good orchestrations to recommend it".Well,he's right.At
least Alfred Newman and Ken Darby did a great job with the score.
Their work makes the soundtrack listenable.Other than that,a poor
script,atrocious direction(Vincente Minnelli and George Cukor
weren't available???),and SEVERE MISCASTING add up to a complete
misfire.Forget it-listen to the soundtrack CD or the Broadway
cast album and watch "My Fair Lady " or "Gigi" instead.

Awful, awful, awful. Overacting run amok in a silly, unnecessary movie. The worst part was that it looked like a lot of effort went into this film and how horrible was the effort. What a waste of time. AWFUL.