Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

BeSummers Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Cardinal Biggles I know the series starts with a disclaimer that it's just a bit of fictional drama, but even so......I've seen two episodes now, and it's very much of the ilk of Britannia, or a lesser version of series such as Vikings, and the Last Kingdom.History? No. Not at all. This is a 'Politically Correct' A Team meets Ivanhoe. Or perhaps Monty Python and the Holy Grail on Speed.? So yes, there are plenty of costumes around to adorn the cast of.... well, not thousands, but ceratinaly several. Watch it as a yarn, not a documentary and you will find much of it very entertaining. The fight scenes were very well done. The American drawl on the Castillian Ambassador perhaps not so much. Don't expect Game of Thrones writing. I think A Team is about the right level to describe the plot depth. The clichés fall thick and fast.So there is the stereotypical Arch-Villain/Evil plotting Advisor dude, complete with the regulation Sheriff of Nottingham beard, causing underhand deeds to be attempted on our Heroic Templar Master. This latter is always clad in full Knightly garb of full mail armour, steel Spaulders with sword and surcoat. Doing the dishes must have been a real bugger.The damsels are all the required "strong, independent, determined" type, not averse to telling the King she'll be choosing her own husband, thank you, nor to picking up a spear and kebabing a bad guy, saving Our Hero's life at a critical battle moment.The Apprentice Hero is a suitably headstrong "youth" seeking wild Revenge against the bad guys for doing in his fiancée. And yes, obviously he will become the squire and sidekick to our hero. The dateline seems very flexible, but it is very understanding and modern of our 14th Century French King that he is not in the least bit curious nor surprised that he has somehow sired a mixed race daughter. Happened all the time in Medieval marriages.... Mind you, if the Pope can be a Yorkshireman then anything is possible. I won't bore you with more details, just to say that the script is very formulaic and predictable. Your kids will love it. History buffs or those used to decent historical drama - not so much. At least there's no Blackadder in it. Put it on when you get back from the pub and want something mindless to watch while you boozily nosh on your takeaway. I'm not rushing to record the series. There is better to watch.

By-TorX-1 Given a longstanding interest in the Knights Templars, Knightfall looked to be of great promise, but alas, it is nothing but a rusty and clanking mess. Indeed, the disappointment is there from the outset as the initial siege of Acre should have been an exciting spectacle, but instead of thrilling scenes of brutal medieval warfare, all we get is about 10 Templars going out to face thousands upon thousands of Saracen attackers. Moreover, the director opts for cut-price '300' style fighting scenes, again, somewhat lessened by the fact that there are only about 10 knights who enter the fray (and who declare that Acre is lost after about five minutes of combat). Also, given that the central character, Landry, manfully growls to a Saracen messenger (in a would-be "This is Sparta!" moment) that they would all rather die in glory than surrender the city, it is then somewhat comical to see that the Templars quickly opt for the 'Monty Python and the Holy Grail' plan and shout "Run away! Run away!" when the action gets heavy. Thus, from the outset, the budget for this 'epic' is clearly on the low side, and the writing is somewhat dubious. Post Acre, the action jumps forward 15 years, yet miraculously none of the characters age one iota (is this thanks to the mystical power of the Grail? Sure, why not? It isn't as if this is history or anything). From there, we learn that the Knights Templar are pretty much the Batmen of Paris, protecting the weak and persecuted (because Landry is, you know, a swell guy), and as soon as I saw the young Jewish women leap into battle alongside the Templars like a 13th century Xena, felling villains left and right, I knew that any pretence of historical accuracy was stone cold dead even before the end of the first episode. Moreover, to add to the drama, we even get a young fellow by the name of Parsifal shouting "Nooooooo!" to the heavens on discovering his poor wife has succumbed to a William Tell routine gone wrong. In this regard, it is strange to think that a future generation will inherit this now pervasive revisionist style of history, with texts that are the product of what a current political class wish history was, and are now actively making it so with their fantasy-based visions of the past. Of course, you might argue that it is all just entertainment and that the show is clearly made to get in on the Game of Thrones market, but then why be made by the History Channel? Then again, looking at said channel's prime offerings, it cannot be long until an episode of Knightfall features our intrepid Templars teaming up with some ancient aliens to track down the elusive Grail, or turning up on Oak Island to randomly bury some cursed gold.

Tostig66 While TV drama should never been taken as historically accurate, and this is not the first drama from the history Channel, this series is bad no matter how you look at it. At least with the Vikings it took a whole series to go from something that was historically adequate to something approaching high fantasy. With this series that rule is broken in the first minute. The Templars did not have a holy grail that is a conspiracy theory created centuries later. The siege of Acre is also completely wrong but I get budgets and requirements for story dictates certain decisions. However, nothing looks right, everyone talks "plot" rather than character and ridiculously modern ideas such as the Knights caring for the Jewish population is ludicrous. Maybe this all calms down but seriously after the hysterical opening and terrible dialogue I just couldn't go on. If you did, you're a better person than I but seriously this is neither Game of Thrones nor even Vikings level of entertainment.

tiger86-2 This show is pretty much what you expect when two writers with no previous experience in the genre try their luck. One of the creators of "Knightfall", Richard Rayner, has only one writing credit to his name - a romantic comedy that came out nearly 20 years ago. Don Handfield, the other one, has a career consisting of mediocre garbage, the highlight being 'Touchback' - a movie about American football. None of them has, as far as I'm aware, any previous experience in writing historical dramas - and, sadly, it shows. The story is badly plotted and the dialogue is just awful - and it sounds way too contemporary for my taste. The acting is serviceable, although limited by the writing. The production values are great and the fight choreography is excellent, which is why I was willing to give the show a chance. Alas, although my expectations were low, it didn't live up to them. I'm not going to write a detailed review, I'll just say it like this - "Knightfall" is about as historical as BBC's "The Musketeers", but without the humor. While "The Musketeers" is just funny, "Knightfall" is trying to be serious. While "The Musketeers" is not even pretending it is historically accurate, "Knightfall" tries to look authentic - and succeeds, but the writing fails it, because, as I said, the plot is awful and the dialogue sounds as if it was written by the writers behind a romantic comedy and an American football themed fantasy. Sorry.