Made on the cheap, as lively as it is grimy, this little-seen film is surprisingly effective...for once the most likely period of Arthur's legendary existence is portrayed in the gritty and grubby way it must surely have have been. If you're looking for a lovely and romantic Hollywood version with colorful costumes, plumes, armour and beautiful ladies (set in a never-was gallant and chivalrous century anywhere from the 12th to the 14th) this Arthur is not for you. There is no Round Table (only a daring plan to unite deadly, traditionally squabbling enemies.) There is also no Lanceclot and Guenivere. But there is an actually plausible contest to pull the sword from the stone which is crucial to Arthur's plan. Though this film is on a rather small scale and an all too apparent smaller budget, it succeeds where larger and more expensive efforts have failed. It gives a lot of down to earth character to these legendary men and makes them understandably human and believable. Tobias makes a great young Arthur, but Gothard should have been given more and Blessed a bit less. He tends to dominate the film in his crude portrayal of Mark of Cornwall. It is surprising that this film didn't spawn an immediate sequel. It would have been interesting to see this kind of earthy realistic treatment of some of the later events in Arthur's life.
10 Reviews
Low budget account of the "true" adventures of King Arthur.
Sorsimus17 April 2003
The "true account" of the tribal wars of ancient England. In minuscule budget.
King Arthur fights saxons, picts and whatnot in this watchable little flick. Lots of effort has been put into sets, mainly in pouring shedloads of mud on the ground. It's not the great adventure you'd expect, but as it delivers it's peaceful message towards the end at least I wanted to believe it.
Released on video in Finland in the early eighties.
King Arthur fights saxons, picts and whatnot in this watchable little flick. Lots of effort has been put into sets, mainly in pouring shedloads of mud on the ground. It's not the great adventure you'd expect, but as it delivers it's peaceful message towards the end at least I wanted to believe it.
Released on video in Finland in the early eighties.
Probably the most realistic Arthur movie yet made. Minimal budget and gorgeously fun
andrewsmithbugs9 November 2018
As has been said in other reviews this is a feature film that has been put together by cleverly editing the popular children's television series that was screened in the UK in the early seventies. It was immensely popular and is fondly remembered by many people of that generation. Like so many UK TV series of that period it was shot on a minimal budget and at times tends to be somewhat creaky and the dialogue at times clunky - but the stories were written by many of the top television screenwriters of the period and many of the 30 minutes shows are little gems.
The low budget also meant that the set designers were apt to be creative and thus what we have are wooden sets and oodles of mud - in other words brutal realism. And - the key cast members Tobias, Gothard and Watson - plus a wonderful bombastic Brian Blessed - fill the screen with gusto and give larger than life performances that make you fondly chuckle and root for them.
One reviewer has pointed out that he feels that it is historically inaccurate. He is wrong. If there was an Arthur/Artoise - he was a Celtic warlord - who may have become a king during the early period of the dark ages, when Rome withdrew from Britain. Thus historically - it is the most accurate version of the legends yet made. As an aside the original television series - 23 episodes - has now been released as a box set.
No King Arthur here.
winner5527 July 2006
Since this film has begun to appear on cheap DVD compilations, I feel it my duty to warn the potential viewer of the following: 1. This film was clearly made as a pilot for a television show which I don't believe ever made it to the home entertainment center.
2. This film has nothing to do with the King Arthur of legend.
3. This film has nothing to do with any possible historical King Arthur.
4. This film has nothing to do with either the Dark Ages, or the Middle Ages.
5. The dialog is just one long recital of every "swashbuckler" cliché in film history.
6. The actors are very unprofessional and very hammy.
7. The story is absurd and absurdly directed. No wonder the actors didn't perform well - given such weak material, who could? 8. The sets were cheaply tossed together, the camera work is shoddy, the editing poor, the costumes a laughable conglomeration of fashions from different time periods, and the action sequences unbelievable and confusingly filmed.
Follow the example of TV execs who here made one of their better decisions: reject this film.
2. This film has nothing to do with the King Arthur of legend.
3. This film has nothing to do with any possible historical King Arthur.
4. This film has nothing to do with either the Dark Ages, or the Middle Ages.
5. The dialog is just one long recital of every "swashbuckler" cliché in film history.
6. The actors are very unprofessional and very hammy.
7. The story is absurd and absurdly directed. No wonder the actors didn't perform well - given such weak material, who could? 8. The sets were cheaply tossed together, the camera work is shoddy, the editing poor, the costumes a laughable conglomeration of fashions from different time periods, and the action sequences unbelievable and confusingly filmed.
Follow the example of TV execs who here made one of their better decisions: reject this film.
Excellent treatment of the "real" Dark Ages Arthur
porchfilms27 June 2003
No flashing steel-armored knights and dazzling pageantry, this is a telling of the Arthur tale as he probably was - a British warlord struggling to maintain order and civilization after the withdrawal of the Roman legions in the fifth century. Arthur is mentored by Ambrosius Aurelianus, the "last of the Romans" in war and diplomacy, and together they fight against the barbarians pressing down on the remnants of Roman Britain.
Documentary-style beginning of a telling of a young King Arthur...
dwpollar6 March 2022
1st watched 3/5/2022 - 4 out of 10 (Dir - ???):
Documentary-style beginning of a telling of a young King Arthur who tries to bring together warring lands into one peaceful union of southern part of what we now call England. He uses unusual means including the tactful retreat(run-away per Monty Python fame), and other shrewd methods that are not the most noble. This movie is actually a compilation of BBC television programs pasted together into a movie, and it comes across that way sometimes with each episode intertwined by dialogue. Arthur begins the movie as a chieftain with a few loyal friends. The other lands are feuding with them initially, and he brings them together to fight one enemy. His methods are at many times deceitful, which kind of turned me against him. Examples include one episode where he messes up a marriage to get more land, and another one where he promises treasure where there isn't any to get help to rescue his friends. This may work for a sitcom, but not a historical movie. This one is to bypassed if you don't want to learn terrible ways to be a leader.
It's A Compilation Of The 70's TV Show From The UK
retrogames23 March 2007
Although a few people have pointed out this was a 70's TV show in the UK, this is not a spin off movie. It's actually an abridged version of the show, cleverly edited into a movie. The fact that nobody has noticed that (even the people who remember the show) just proves the editor has done a very good job.
As others have pointed out, if you remember watching this on TV then this is an excellent piece of nostalgia. Even if you never seen it first time its still an enjoyable watch, but just remember it was shot on a 70's TV show budget (a UK one at that) so its not a major production. Although in my opinion it just adds to its gritty charm.
As others have pointed out, if you remember watching this on TV then this is an excellent piece of nostalgia. Even if you never seen it first time its still an enjoyable watch, but just remember it was shot on a 70's TV show budget (a UK one at that) so its not a major production. Although in my opinion it just adds to its gritty charm.
Nice little film.
JJChandler21 January 2007
I saw this years ago (the early 80's) on The Movie Channel and was hooked on it. Decades later, they've put it out on DVD and I've found it to be almost as good as I remembered thinking it was back then.
The only drawback that some might find with this movie is that it was never really a movie and doesn't play like one. Like with some of Gerry Anderson's shows, this was a "movie" that was pulled together for international release by using stand alone episodes from the TV series Arthur of the Britons and covers a fair stretch of that show's run. This means that the movie, if looked at as a whole, seems to bounce around a bit because it is made up of several story arcs that begin and end in under 30 minutes before jumping into the next one. It also suffers from the same budget issues that many shows coming out of England from the early 70's faced.
Beyond that, it's actually very well done. The stories stand up well and they pulled some good episodes from the series to make this. The wedding story alone, and Brian Blessed's fantastic work in it, are worth the price of the DVD.
You can find the DVD all over the web for low prices. Grab it, it's worth it.
The only drawback that some might find with this movie is that it was never really a movie and doesn't play like one. Like with some of Gerry Anderson's shows, this was a "movie" that was pulled together for international release by using stand alone episodes from the TV series Arthur of the Britons and covers a fair stretch of that show's run. This means that the movie, if looked at as a whole, seems to bounce around a bit because it is made up of several story arcs that begin and end in under 30 minutes before jumping into the next one. It also suffers from the same budget issues that many shows coming out of England from the early 70's faced.
Beyond that, it's actually very well done. The stories stand up well and they pulled some good episodes from the series to make this. The wedding story alone, and Brian Blessed's fantastic work in it, are worth the price of the DVD.
You can find the DVD all over the web for low prices. Grab it, it's worth it.
Great fun if you saw the TV series and feel nostalgic
brucetomalin16 February 2007
This film is intrinsic to many people of my age who remember the television series from their childhood. Sure the acting is not great, the story is nothing to do with the King Arthur legends, sure the costumes are vaguely 70's hippie inspired. But its great fun. In my opinion the Arthur legends are at best interesting at worst lies. No one will ever prove King Arthur existed. However if you do think he existed than in reality he was probably like this film depicts. A Celt warlord in ancient times. The cast list includes many young actors who went on to be famous so perhaps they where learning their craft.
My advise get this film its great fun. It's not meant to be serious. Plus its a film spin off of a 70's television series in the UK.
My advise get this film its great fun. It's not meant to be serious. Plus its a film spin off of a 70's television series in the UK.
Nice Little Film
Rainey-Dawn6 September 2017
As a child of the 70s, I've never seen this series on American TV (reruns that is, I was born in '72) - and I would have watched it!! My understanding this is a BBC TV series from '72-'73. I am happy to see the edited/abridged version put into a film - it's pretty good.
This is a gritty take on the tale, more realistic than the high polished, well rehearsed fight scenes that most films of this nature have. Realistically speaking, real mean would not have been like "superheroes" as they usually try to make them out as in films today. This film cuts past all that fancy, flashy stuff and gives more realism to the action. Film makers today need to realize that "heroes" are not suppose to be comic book "superheroes" - two different things all together.
Nice little film that I'm enjoying watching as I type this review.
9/10
This is a gritty take on the tale, more realistic than the high polished, well rehearsed fight scenes that most films of this nature have. Realistically speaking, real mean would not have been like "superheroes" as they usually try to make them out as in films today. This film cuts past all that fancy, flashy stuff and gives more realism to the action. Film makers today need to realize that "heroes" are not suppose to be comic book "superheroes" - two different things all together.
Nice little film that I'm enjoying watching as I type this review.
9/10
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
