Rating: 
Summary: Not worth watching if you like good movies
Review: This is awaful beyond anything about Merlin that I've ever witnessed. As one of the worst Arthrurian scripts ever written, it isn't helped much by the wooden acting. And, regarding Martin Short's "chinaman" act by a previous reviewer... As if things weren't bad enough, Steve Baron had to shoot himself in the foot by being insensitive towards asians with inane racial stereotypes, which by the way, had their origins in how whites/europeans viewed asians in the 19th-20th century. There was never any opium trade w/China back in the 5th century!!! Even when insulting people of other ethnic backgrounds Baron is unable to get his historical facts straight! Instead of wasting your time with this crap, go and see Excalibur...a masterpiece and the best Arthurian film ever made!!!
Rating:
Summary: What a Load of Rubbish.
Review: Why people value this rubbish is beyond me. Most Welshmen and Welshwomen alike feel that this movie is an insult to the "real" Merlin who is highly regarded as a national hero here in Wales. MERLIN is also very racist and offensive to people of Asian descent. My boyfriend who happens to be chinese was quite put off by Martin Short's "chinaman" stereotype at the beginning of the film.... and, never at any one time has there been an ensemble of the highest paid stars acting poorly together in the same movie... probably something to do with the shoddy directing of Steve Baron. Add that to the poorly written script and you have the pile of cow dung called MERLIN. Why people like this I can't explain... most likely they're the same bunch that thought Milli Vanilli was the best musical group ever. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a sequel by Hallmark... MERLIN 2: Sorcerers in Outer Space.. this time with Martin Short mocking people of African descent with shoe polish and having sex with Klingons.
Rating:
Summary: Not good at all
Review: One of the worst, if not the worst of Arthurian films. Those who have given it a good rating and complain about the bad reviews... Try reading the books and/or watch "Excalibur" and you will begin to see the bad scripting, acting, anachronisms, etc.,.. in Merlin. FYI if anyone hasn't already noticed, Merlin has been boycotted by the Arthurian Society of Britain, similar to what christians did with Martin Scorcese's "Last Temptation of Christ". The Arthurian Society of America is also seriously considering similar actions, and have suggested that anyone interested in Arthur/Merlin to go and see "Excalibur" instead.
Rating: 
Summary: This is a great movie.
Review: What else is there to say? It was a incredible movie for those interested in magic and mysertery. It may have had some poor acting, but it is made up for with a wonderful script!
Rating: 
Summary: It's not as bad as everyone seems to think
Review: It seems to me that noone cares about the film itself when they're reviewing it, they just want to either A) attack the negative comments or B) attack the positive comments.I missed most of the TV showing, but the DVD has something like 3 hours of film, so considering commercials et al, I assume it's relatively well intact. The film itself was rather bland, it attempts to combine so many things that it forgets where it was going, turns around, does something else and then adds in a 5 minute follow-up to close the situation. The acting wasn't totally horrible, and the special effects weren't totally exceptional, but it made a nice, average movie.
Rating:
Summary: Merlin is not good at all.
Review: You can probably guess by now that I didn't like 'Merlin', but that's not what I'm here to argue about. I think it's hypocrisy that a good number of the POSITIVE reviewers have accused NEGATIVE posters of being "NARROW MINDED", and yet they themselves are angered when there are views expressed here other than their own. As a matter of fact, I have yet to see one NEGATIVE review here that goes beyond the criticism of Merlin to trash any of the POSITIVE reviewers. NOT A SINGLE ONE. If I don't like something that you do and vice versa, well, then we are both entitled to our opinions. But to go out of your way to persecute others just because they don't agree with you, and to close yourself off to the possibility that there might be more than one opinion here......Well, I wouldn't know what else to call that other than "NARROW MINDED-ness".
Rating:
Summary: Another Camelot Movie, another reason not to make them...
Review: While a big fan of the Arthurian legends I failed to enjoy this movie at all. Helena Bonham-Carter, as per normal, was fantastic, but I don't know where Isabella Rossellini learned to act. I began to wonder what at all Merlin would see in her. The main character (Merlin) ran around saying the rather poor lines in a New Zealand accent while silly Martin Short stuck to his American one. Maybe with a different Merlin this movie would have worked. Arthurian movies should estrict themselves to Merlin-like concepts, where we know it is a complete farce, but are enjoying it too much to care.
Rating:
Summary: Not the best version of Arthurian mythology.
Review: This movie looked so promising on the commercials (despite having Helena Bonham-Carter in it) but when it finally aired on TV, I found that ALL the good things I'd seen on the commercials were it. Don't get me wrong, I love the Arthurian legend, and I enjoy reading/seeing different versions and interpretations of it. This interpretation was not well done. There are so many intriguingly dark aspects of the legend--love, betrayal, magic, incest, lies, etc. I don't think this version benefits from being "DISNEYed-up" because it robs the story of much of its depth. Sam Neill made a dismal and unbelievable Merlin, and the movie fell far short of its potential.
Rating:
Summary: Unimaginative and lacking
Review: Unimaginative because the producer had to borrow parts of the storyline from several modern day movies, most notably "Pretty Woman" -- according to various sources I've read. Lacking in character development, because we don't know that much more, if not less, about Merlin than we would traditionally have. 30 minutes was wasted on a romance that never developed much all the way through to the end. That's 30 valuable minutes which could've been used to improve other parts of the movie, or the rest of the movie to be exact. 3 hours later, the viewer is left wondering "What was the fuss all about?" A waste of talent and film on a storyline which would not have seen the light of day were the executives at NBC not drunk all at once.
Rating:
Summary: An insult to King Arthur's mythology
Review: If you enjoyed this movie it's because you never heard of King Arthur's story before. Or because you hated it and want to make fun of it. It's even worse than 'First Knight' in some ways! Everything in this version was wrong: concept, story, script, dialogue, characters, acting, cast (miscasted some actors, wasted others), effects, unfunny jokes, anachronisms, talking horses... Stay away from this piece of crap. Or, better, buy all the copies you can find and burn them. All thinking persons in the world will be grateful. And if you want to see a true great movie about Arthurian legends, check John Boorman's 'Excalibur', and enjoy a masterpiece. If I were somewhat involved in the making of this 'Merlin', I would be really ashamed of myself.
|
