Images

jonathanraychapman:

Excalibur Movie Observations

I went back and watched Excalibur the other day with a friend and I have some observations about it.

First, the fight scenes just have not aged well at all.  I guess they were good for its time, but these days they just come off feeling cheap.  I’m willing to give that a pass though, since the whole epic feels like a stage production anyways and part of that sort of thing is a suspension of disbelief.  This is especially true when magic is carried out – with the audience having to believe that smoke is the breath of the dragon.  And there’s the charm of making – which is seemingly the only incantation magic-users know.

Second, despite my complaints (which more are forth-coming), the Merlin character is sort of my definitive version of the character.  He’s not simply a stuffy old man that slings spells from time to time.  At times Merlin is wise and at times very foolish – being very self-aware of his condition.  His story is not the focus of the movie, but it does add some credence to what would otherwise be a jumble of plot.  This Merlin is very representative of the legend of the character – a half-human, half-devil that’s alone in a world and seeks companionship with a desire to make the world a better place.

Third, some of the exposition scenes come off as a bit over the top (seemingly rushed) and don’t lend themselves to the story being told.  Take the interplay between Guinevere and Lancelot (the main conflict).  Forgetting what I know about the legends, I couldn’t really understand the motivations of Lancelot in this movie because – based on what I’m being shown – he’s acting directly against his feelings.  I keep having to make up scenes in my mind where he reflects on how he’s smitten with love or something.  It’s simply not said or hinted at why he’s doing what he’s doing.  It would make more sense if there was an evil spell placed on him – since he’s seemingly acting without just motivation.  And don’t tell me that Love affects people in that way; this is just sloppy storytelling.

The same is sort of true of many of the characters and maybe it’s a product of the time the movie came out.  These days, when we have a movie about a Greek demi-god (i.e. Clash of the Titans), they are given time for character development.  We start to see their motivations and they become far more real and interesting for us.  First Knight (with Richard Gere as Lancelot and Sean Connery as Arthur) got right what Excalibur got wrong. That movie slows down and really just focuses on the part of Alfred, Lord Tennyson’s important parts of Idylls of the King (which Excalibur is undoubtedly based upon).

I’m not saying that Excalibur is a bad movie.  It’s a classic and there’s a reason it holds a place in my small movie collection.  It’s got this ambitious stage-production quality to it that I admire.  But, as I mentioned, it has this shallow side as well.  It’s certainly not for everyone – especially in this day and age.

Btw, I need the movie poster on my wall somehow.