Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

alkimbel-420-345459 I find it hard to believe this movie was made in 2008. It has horrible acting, and even worse special effects. The graphics were terrible. It was a decent story-line if you want to go along with the myth behind the Arthur story rather than the historical record we see in the 2004 movie King Arthur. Granted, there is the typical myth behind Arthur with Merlin "the wizard" and the Lady of the Lake, but I think that the actual historical Arthur is a better story than the myth, because it actually happened, rather than making up a bunch of things to embellish it. Anyway, the story was OK, but the scenes especially with the dragons were ridiculous. I could photoshop a dragon that looks more realistic than those did. And why wasn't there any blood on their swords when they killed people? The costumes need a lot of work as well.

wommow-73-653539 This movie was disappointing in every aspect.Everything is just "low budget".The story is too simple.The special effects are outdated (to be polite).The "big battle" consists of ten people. (Ask Monty Python how to make a cheap good looking battle scene)There seems to be no blood in this great Britain. (Is blood really that expensive ?)Everything is clean all the time. (Is dirt really that expensive ?)Excalibur is a copy of the sword of Gandalf. (You could get a copy of Excalibur for 300$)Most events you don't see. You only see the actors watching it. (Maybe better than more cheap special effects)

sara-673 I couldn't keep from commenting, although I rarely do. After reading some of the nasty comments on this film, I couldn't keep myself from commenting. The nasty commenter's obviously didn't watch the same film that I did. The film I saw, although lower budget, is a very well shot, well thought out story of the young Merlin. It has nicely developed characters, is very well cast, and most of the acting was very good. I was impressed at the local welsh talent in this film. The story moves along well, and you really get caught up in the story, and the characters. I would say this is definitely a director to watch in the future. Also, the girl who played Lady Vivianne... also a real solid talent. I was surprised to learn this was her first feature film. Of course, Jurgen Prochnow turned in a very solid performance as well, which is to be expected.But anyone who calls this film laughable, or poorly done, either doesn't know good film-making, or simply is trying to put the filmmakers down, for some personal reason. The film has a lot of heart, and I truly hope to see a sequel to this film, as the ending hints to? (I hope?)

pineleigh I had the misfortune of buying this DVD from Play.com thinking it would be half decent to watch. What a mistake that was, as other reviewers have said this is quite bad, actors who can't act etc. etc., but worst of all there is no COLOUR to the film, no green grass, no flesh tones, nothing actually, I know it is supposed to be the Dark ages but the director Mark Atkins is also a cinematographer but he well and truly "cocked" this film up big time. What Jurgen Prochnow was doing appearing in this film is anybodies guess, the story isn't that bad with better direction and a bigger budget from money saved by hiring totally unknown actors except Jurgen who knows. A POOR EFFORT, not a very good advert for the British film industry.