Rating: 
Summary: Alas, Poor Avalon!...
Review: The books were stunning, mesmerizing, enchanting... and utilmately essential. How long we had waited, how willing we were to embrace those who had taken up the task of portraying immortals!... And when at last the barge emerged from the Mists of time, I admit it - I wept! I wept for all that I remembered and all that I had lost - but most of all, I wept for all that I had hoped to regain that would now remain veiled from the world of men...
For all the beauty, for all the talent that came together to birth the tale, in the end it only half succeeds. While the opening adheres to Ms Bradley's intention, the second half of the film is such a drastic departure from anything depicted in the story, it is such a blow to the power of the very characters it purports to uphold that one must ask to what extent Ms Bradley's death was used to advantage by Turner Broadcasting. The profound symbolic meaning of the king-making rite on Dragon Island, the waning of Avalon's powers in the world, Morgaine's alliance with (and ultimate betrayal of) Kevin the Bard are barely mentioned in favor of battle scenes which are poor borrowings from the faded glories of "Braveheart" and "Rob Roy." To those who say, "At least it's something," I answer, "'Mists' is a sheep in wolf's clothing."
Rating: 
Summary: Disgraceful
Review: Let me start by saying that I read the book first and it instantly became my favorite novel. I eagerly awaited the release of this before it was even announced that it was going to be a mini-series (it was almost made into a movie before someone decided on mini-series for more time). I counted down the days once I found out TNT was going to air it. When the time came around, I was more disappointed and angry at this adaptation than I could have ever imagined. I do not think the movie was all bad. In fact, it would probably have been enjoyable had I never read the book. The trouble is, I both read and loved the book. The movie leaves out an incredible amount, develops nothing, rushes through, and changes some of the most important events in the book. I was amazed at how much I found myself barking at the television. I am not one who normally criticizes movies for not living up to the standard set by the writing. In fact, I tend to like the films more a good bit but this is an exception to any rule. I never thought it was possible to lose so much of a wonderful story in the transition to film.
Rating: 
Summary: Beautiful and enjoyable film!
Review: I have to admit, I saw the movie before I read the book, but I still think the movie deserves five stars. Even if the movie doesn't follow the book to the letter (and it doesn't), or doesn't include every last detail (and it doesn't), it is still an excellent movie! The visual effects and costumes are breathtaking. The characters are all flawed, which makes them more real to the viewer. If you have read the book already, bear in mind that the movie is BASED ON the book, not intended to retell it on the screen. BASED ON, meaning the film does take several liberties, but it is a film. There is no way the entire book could have fit into the script and in order to get the point across, liberties had to be taken.
Rating:
Summary: Bear In Mind--The MOVIE, Not The NOVEL
Review: If you've never read the perpetual favorite classic, you might want to give it a try before watching this effort which is *based* upon the same. I say this because (out of necessity) the film skims the cream off the milk, leaving a great deal of what makes the novel cut out, and also takes a few liberties with the novel. I went into viewing Mists having read the book many times, but keeping in mind that the film was NOT the book and I shouldn't expect it to be. Separating the two, Mists the film is as excellent in its medium as Mists the novel is in its medium. Breathtaking is the best word I can think of to describe the visual effects of this film. With opulent costuming (yet not terribly off for the era and location), wide open countrysides, and realistic settings, the film is a transport to Arthurian Britain. The three leads--Morgaine, Vivienne, and Morgause--are wonderfully portrayed and true to the novel characters from which they were created. I could genuinely believe, for the most part, that the cast were actually people right out of 5th century Britain. The outstanding part of the film in my estimation is how the Old Religion and Christianity are treated, both together and in competition to each other. I got a real sense of a land embracing two faiths. Especially noteworthy is how the reverence of the Goddess and the sanctuary of Avalon are presented in both beauty and logic.
Rating: 
Summary: ENLIGHTENING
Review: IF YOU LIKE THESE TYPE OF MOVIES OF THE TIMES OF KING ARTHUR AND SORCERY ETC. THEN THIS IS A MUST
THIS MOVIE I LOVED!!!
Rating:
Summary: Much More Than A Movie
Review: If you read the book first, you will be disappointed. I watched the movie on TNT three times before I ever read the book. I thought the movie was phenominal, until I read the book and realized how much they actually missed the point of the Marion Zimmer Bradley's story. They changed the ending and messed with some of the characters motives. Yet I watched it once more after I finished the book. Julianna Margulies performance as Morgain was beautiful. She really in my opinion hit the mark. Anjelica Huston also did a wonderful job, even if they changed the story. The character I was disappointed most with though Morguase, who wasn't evil in the book. Otherwise I rate this movie as the best I've seen. If you're really into the history and its fictional counterparts, this is a wonderful movie, even if it didn't follow the book and forgot to include the fair folk. Kudos to the actors and actresses and all involved for a great great movie.
Rating:
Summary: Not even correct history
Review: I just finished reading the Mists of Avalon and was so excited to see the Movie. I searched 4 different video stores until I found the DVD for rent. Thank goodness I didn't purchase this movie as I had thought I might have to do. I have to say, the scenes, the actors, and actresses were excellent, which is the only reason I'm giving this movie 2 stars. So many things were wrong with this movie, that I can't think where to start. Important scenes, whole charactors (such as Kevin the Bard) missing, and totally incorrect timeline make this movie a bust. From the begining of the movie to the end, nothing was the same as the book, Morgaine ending in a convent, PLEASE. Who cares about the message of the movie, when its not even close to where MZB wanted it to go. The better way to handle Mists, as a movie, would have been to make it a three part story. This way, you wouldn't have to rewrite history, not to menchion write in whole scenes that didn't exist, to hurry along. I would highly recommand you to read the book, enjoy this great story, and get a good laugh at the movie. I just watched it again and I stick to my orginal thoughts.
Rating:
Summary: oh ny God!!! This movie sucks!!!
Review: If you love the book or waited to watch this until after you read th final chapter, this movie will be a big, huge diappointment. I rented it based on reviews found here. Within the first 5 to 10 minutes it breaks from the book. To me it seemed that the only thing that they kept from the book were names and places. The dialog and backgroung were made up!
I don'trecommend watching this unless you plan to do so before you read the book. Then you can (maybe) enjoy the movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Enjoyable, but a waste of Bradley's genius.
Review: The original story of the 'mists of Avalon' is a colourful and extremely well written account of the Arthurian legend, from a female perspective. The epic book is inevitably technically and artistically difficult to even match. Considerations such as family viewing and editing do exasperate the potential of what is essentially an adult book with adult themes. Producing this film from an adult viewing standpoint would have greatly increased the power of the film. However, within their limitations TNT do produce an engaging, lavish and enjoyable story. If your standards have been heightened by reading the book, the film is an interesting if slightly unfulfilling comparison. If you have missed out on the book, the film is worth viewing on its own merit. The setting is an escapist's dream and the acting assured. The fact that Morgaine lacks the strange, unattractive and faerylike physique in the film, does jade some of the interest in her character inspired in the book. Anjelica Huston is also at physical variance with Viviane's original elfish physique, but the rare power in the actress's presence more than compensates for this. Some of the emotional chemistry in the film is stilted by a composure better placed in a Jane Austen piece as opposed to the Celtic Dark Ages. But aside from this, the piece boasts a strong cast. On the whole, the film is worth seeing just for the beauty of its setting and for its intriguing re-invention of the Arthurian legend.
Rating:
Summary: Never before could this be
Review: I appriaciate the view point taken from Morgaine for once, and this could possibly be the reason for its high esteem. It could also be because of the fresh new look at an old story. I have seen other movies depicting the events of the tale of king Author, the telling of Morgaine being a horrible witch and such, it just seemed like some stereotypical hollywood play back, instead of an in depth story, of personal dramas and fetes. This story rounds the characters out and expresses them and the topic at hand better than i had ever seen done before. It shines an understanding on Paganism that i love, and have also never seen such efforts made in a film. This is a wonderfully depicted story, with great actors that fill their role so well. It has definitely become one of my favorite movies.
|
