- Acting of Lead Performers
- Acting of Supporting Cast
- Music Score
- Title Sequence
- Historical Importance
- Would You Recommend?
0 Member Ratings
NO REVIEWS AVAILABLE
The title has not been reviewed. Be the first to write a review by clicking here to start.
in my eyes.
I always want this to be more than what it is.
THE FILM ..CAMELOT
PLEASE SHOW THIS WONDERFUL AGAIN SOON ..I AM AFRAID I WAS STILL SLEEPING on May 13 2017 time 630 am. also again bad time for me May 24 , 2017 at 2.24AM SLEEPING AGAIN ALONG WITH EVERY ELSE IN Ontario Canada .WE Love your films , I follow your reviews very closely, TCM IS OUR FAVOURITE ..THANK YOU...
Campy and Overlong...
- Russ G.
Saw this at a college movie night just half a dozen years after it was released; I guess you could rent a 35 mm film pretty cheap then. The audience was mostly New York kids who thought themselves too sophisticated for this smaltz or perhaps regarded a film version of a Broadway show an abomination. But, at three hours it's too long for film. The Arthurian legend is just that - a legend and the picture of medieval life is far from what the suffering peasants endured. Not to be taken seriously.
- Michael Whitty
"Camelot" is magical and mystical. It was on the stage in 1960 with Julie Andrews and Richard Burton and on film in 1967 with Richard Harris and Vanessa Redgrave. The legend of king Arthur and the knights of the Round Table with songs by Lerner and Lowe of "My Fair Lady" fame such as "Camelot", "If Ever I Would Leave You", "How to Handle a Woman", and "The Lusty Month of May". king Arthur was lucky to find and marry Guenevere then later came along the knight Lancelot who later had an affair with Guenevere. Then there was Mordred, the illegitimate son of Arthur and the villain to this story, who wants to tear down the Round Table and kill the queen for her adulterous side. Will Lance save Guenevere and what about Arthur? For any musical the songs have to be good since musicals thrive on their music and they are good here and "Camelot", which won 3 Academy Awards, is mostly a winner though 3 hours may have been too much to tell this.
Much better than people give it credit for
Better on Broadway
Give me Burton, Andrews and Goulet anyday. Harris and Redgrave pale in comparison. This IS a musical after all.
I simply profoundly love, and loved this moviefrom the time I first laid eyes at age 12 in a dark theater,the world of knights, the soulful expressions, real life loveand chemestry between Vanessa (Queen Guenivere), andFranco Nero (Lancelot) was breathtaking, stunning visuals,photograpy, delightful lyrics/music, flowing images I willnot forget, as Writer, Minister, Romantic soul,free spirited, I love the transitions, scenes, mysticaland ancient story, classic--a product of my generation,ha, well to some degree, this movie seemed toenvelop the era, and lost age, from the early,to later 60's, and sweep like a tidal wave--even now in my cynical Grandma years, the passion of this film, the senseof joy, and abandon, energy, and devotion the actors relayed,in putting hearts together to create this master piece leavesme enthralled still, and feeling as thoughI am joining the King, ill-fated lovers-life imitatesfiction, or is it the other way, maybe both, in awar of real emotions, mixed loyalties,making impossible choices, brutal, raw,delicate longings, and, dramatic contrastcontests, and war of wills, of good/bad, justifications forselfishness, devestation of guilt, unrequited,and fullfilled forbidden desires,chinks in the armour, ideals, high standards brokenthe fight and quest for purity, nobility on all fronts--what is true freedom, principal, honorit is easy to root the lovers on, to hope for escape,for a Kings wrath to be satisfied none-the less,for the Law to be upheld, yet compassion/forgivenessis the Highest Power, as the message and performancesof these fine skillful actors also conveyin real life, there are consequences for breaking hearts,in the end we all get broken... This film so stirred the running waters of my imaginationdeeper reflection, and study of the humancondition; there are crystol Biblical parallells,compelling joy and anticipated of birth, re-birth,and death of a beautiful dream..resurrection of True Love..
Love the movie!
I love this film and everything about it! Vanessa Redgrave is simply beautiful and has the perfect facial nuances needed for the love-torn Guinevere. I do not believe Julie Andrews would have been nearly as good as Redgrave here, as Andrews does not project the vulnerability that Redgrave does. Franco Nero and those blue eyes devastates as Lancelot, the noblest knight who fights against but gives in to his love of Guinevere. And what can you possibly say about Richard Harris? His Arthur is so idealistic, so vulnerable, so heartbroken when he discovers Guinevere is in love with his favorite knight that you own heart breaks for him. Harris was 37 when he made this film and it was the perfect age for playing King Arthur. Harris was in his prime and made for this role! Mention should be made of David Hemmings in the role of Modred. He is so ambitious, cunning and evil that you loathe him instantly. THAT is a good actor!
Pretty to look at but pretty boring
- Oliver Cutshaw
Big budget mess of the late 1960's. The film came as the cycle of great broadway plays to films was coming to an end. While it is better than Hello Dolly it is well short of Funny Girl. Sets are beautiful, Vanessa Rengrave never looked lovelier but she seems too damn sexy for the part. Richard Harris is surprisingly good. The rest of cast is okay, many varied and not compatible acting styles. The action seems to be set in a confusing combination of shakespearean age England, Dark Age Wales, and sunny San Francisco. The cast includes an odd ball mix of glum action picture hams, british character actors, and hippie dippy 60's era party goers.But you have to blame director Logan for the biggest problem, the film does that most unforgivable error it reveals not conceals all the weaknesses of the Broadway play.Let's be honest this play has some interesting dialogue, several wonderful songs, and a bit of humor. But the Richard Burton, Julie Andrews, Robert Goulet magic is what made it a classic on Broadway. At 2 hours and more you can see of the weaknesses and lack of vision that flawed the original Broadway play. When thrown up on the big screen, the film just seems like a second rate soap opera masquerading as Epic Romance.Worth a viewing by Arthurian legend fans, and lovers of Lerner and Lowe songs, but after one viewing keep the channel selector nearby.
I have always, always, loved this movie. It's my favorite Richard Harris movie and Vanessa Redgrave movie. The music is spectacular. I can't wait to receive it!
Story and Music are Beautiful, Actors Mediocre
What a shame that the Broadway cast was not used in this film. This is a musical, so it would have been nice if the cast could sing.Camera work is beautiful, but overall:Wasted opportunity.
Joshua Logan's Camelot
- David Atkins
I titled my review Joshua Logan's Camelot because the esteemed Director was given carte blanche my Warner Bros in the person of Jack L. Warner with the proviso that Logan film this classic story on the backlot of Warner Bros. Burbank Studio! For my book, the correct casting should have been Richard Burton, Julie Andrews, and Robert Goulet who all starred on Broadway in the hit Broadway version. By the time this film was made Richard Burton and Julie Andrews had ascended to the heights of Hollywood. I cannot recall why Burton was not cast,but Logan gave a back handed slap to Julie Andrews because he wanted a 'very feminine, and sexy Guinivere'.Vanessa Redgrave was cast in the female lead, with sturdy Richard Harris and Italian Franco Nero cast in the male leads. When Logan is good he is very good if not great: Bus Stop with Marilyn Monroe and Picnic with Kim Novak gave those two great stars roles of a lifetime. However Logan missed his mark in some other films such as Ensign Pulver, and Tall Story both at WB and South Pacific at 20th. The film version of Camelot has the wonderful Broadway score and the set and art design by the true masters at WB is stunning. One would never guess we are seeing a film shot on sound stages and the Burbank back lot. In Logan book the Director noted that Jack Warner abruptly gave a drop dead date for filming and towards the end Logan and cast and crew did all they could but time ran out and the film stopped.
Vanessa Redgrave and Franco Nero
This the better version of "Camelot" thanks to Vanessa Redgrave, Franco Nero and Richard Harris' superb acting. Redgrave and Nero were very drawn to each other during the filming of this 1967 version. In 2006, decades after they had their son, director Carlo Gabriel Nero, Redgrave and Nero finally were married and still are. Throughout their lives, Nero has acted as the primary father-figure to Redgrave's children. Natasha Richardson had Nero give her away as her dad when she married actor Liam Neeson. Seems Nero is the real like Lancelot to Redgrave's Guenevere. Talk about a long term romance. Knowing all this makes the film all the more intimately intriguing.
This has to be one of my favorite musicals of all time! Richard Harris is my ideal KIng Arthur, while Guenevere isn't Julie Andrews, Venessa Redgave does a fine job! This movie has everthing to satisfy my taste for a magical land called ... Camelot! "Don't let it be forgot, that there was once a spot, for one brief shining moment that was know as Camelot!"