Sword of Lancelot

Rating:
Summary: 60'S HOLLYWOOD VERSION OF LANCELOT-GUENEVERE-ARTHUR
Review: Cornel wilde was sort of the bridge wetween Errol Flynn and Kevin Costner. He started out in swashbuckling adventures, then tried his hand directing epic movies, attempting to re-interpret each genre he tackles. Here he tackles the Arthurian romance/medieval epic with a focus on the suffering of passionate love against loyalty and duty.

One can say that a parallel of passions is played out here. Both Guenevere and Mordred want something they can't have, and Lancelot's duty to King Arthur is to deny them both. These two desires wind up working for each other, though in Mordred's case it's deliberate, Gwen's passion makes her not realize the danger she is putting the kingdom in.

Hollywood movies had gotten a little less stiff in how they portrayed romance and love scenes by this time, and Wilde takes advantage of it, giving the romantic leads a little bit more steam than they had in "Knights of the Round Table." It doesn't make the romance much more convincing, however. The trouble with many Arthurian movies is the unconvincing set up for the love between Lancelot and Guenevere ("Camelot" is a significant exception to this). The slightly stilted writing and silly French accent that Wilde puts on doesn't help.

There is plenty of sword-swinging action scenes. There's a joust, two battles, a fight through the castle, and a rescue. There is some innovation in the fight scenes; heads and body parts are cleaved, rather than sanitary thrusts to the armpit. Unfortunately, there is a degree of stiffness to the fighting and battles (unlike the love scenes) that detract from the drama. In the joust Lancelot sits on his horse, standing still, and recieves a lance with nary a quiver. Perhaps the pan-and-scan ("full-frame") presentation is at fault in some bits. In several battle scenes the figure in the center is the guy standing around like he doesn't know what to do. It also seems that some of the weapons, axes and maces, are too big for the one-handed use they are given.

The production design follows 11th-12th century styles of costume, armor, and architecture (mostly). This would match the period in which was written Geoffrey of Monmouth's "History of the Kings of Britain," the foundation of much of the Arthurian legend (ironically, Lancelot is not in that version). Unfortunately there is some stiffness here also. Certain pieces of costume and armor look clumsy and awkward, and of course the chain mail is all Hollywood fake stuff.

This film does have more appeal to fans of the genre than the average movie viewer. It is interesting as a transitional piece between "Knights of the Round Table" and "First Knight" ("Excalibur" is in a different league).

A bit of trivia: In one scene, Gwen talks about a bowman named Diccon. Diccon bowman was a charater in Henry Pyle's "Men of Iron," made into the movie called "Black Shield of Fallworth."

Rating:
Summary: Neither Flynn nor Havilland
Review: Mr and Mrs Wilde (Jean Wallace) suffer a lot, but all their suffering does not touch the heart. Mr Wilde is perhaps too old for this part and uses terrible intonations. Brian Ahearne as a King is very good. Fights are good with a lot of fighters. I recommend Flynn and Taylor epics instead of this. It is not bad, but something is lacking.