ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

innocuous While the original mini-series was more charming and quirky than an actual Arthurian epic, "Merlin's Apprentice" doesn't even rise to that level. Don't misunderstand me...I have a genuine fondness for "Merlin" and own the DVD, watching it at least once a year. But "Merlin" had a tone and a theme that make it a pleasure to watch."Merlin's Apprentice" has competent cinematography, good lighting, decent editing, competent sound, and a lot of other qualities that are too often overlooked in recent films.The script and direction, however, leave a lot to be desired. The story itself really does seem to have come from an after-school special. There's a heavy-handed politically-correct attitude that is definitely intended to teach kids some lessons about life as it should be. (The character of Brian is an egregious example of this, and it is an example of outright pandering to the PC crowd.) One thing that is sadly lacking is any sense of grandeur. The magic barely rises to the level of parlor tricks, making objects fly around the room or stopping an arrow in flight.The direction of Wu leaves a lot to be desired as well. The actors are capable of much more, but Wu fails to bring it out for the camera.Overall, though, it's worth watching, especially if you enjoyed the original.

T&R W The first Merlin was quite entertaining and involved; but this apparent follow-up felt very weak, repetitive, predictable, frequently dull and more like a long, drawn-out episode of Hercules than a well-written drama. The scope of the story is much weaker and smaller -- a small group of supposed heroes, with Dark Secrets™ and so on, and takes place across a small period of time, where Merlin was supposed to span the entire life of the wizard. I guess that's what you get when the first is an adaptation of a dramatic, legendary tale, and the second is written as a cash-in on it. What is even worse is that they completely failed to properly follow up! The established facts, as portrayed in the first adaptation of the myth of Merlin, are ignored here for convenience -- some of the scenes and time-line are completely at odds with what went before. Combined with the poorly paced and written storyline, it just reeks of laziness. It shouldn't have been hard to spot these problems, so you have to assume they just decided to ignore them.If you're a fan of the first, don't watch this. And if you watch this and don't like it, don't let it put you off watching the first movie.

Joy H Being a viewer with a short attention span who bores very easily watching TV I was amazed that Merlin's Apprentice captured me so much that it caused me to sit watching avidly for the full three hour epic on the British Christmas TV schedule. I wanted to break away, but I couldn't; for me this testifies to its excellence. Negative criticism of the Director David Wu is unjustified; he's been nominated for Outstanding Direction for another of his works, and in this there was nothing to barrack him about. The production values for a TV drama were engaging. The cast were not "wasted" as David Mayer claims, though it would have been more satisfying if Miranda Richardson had more screen time. I admit I did find some of the editing cuts rather odd, and some of the flashback sequences didn't quite work, but overall it was a very enjoyable fantasy drama. I very much disagree with David Mayer's comment that the script was "flaccid and slow" - personally I thought the vocabulary used was charming and thoroughly in the time/mood of the piece. What is David Mayer's problem about using many different accents? It makes a drama so much more interesting and gives it way more flavour than a piece which only contains a bland monotone of generic American accents - personally I love to hear more than 'one voice' for distinctive characters; especially in fantasy. Drama isn't ALL about SFX - this fantasy didn't really need them, because the story, the cast, the acting, the direction were good enough to hold the attention and keep the viewer watching - and that's ALL a production aims for. How cruel and unjustified for David Mayer to say this should be dubbed for comedy and that it didn't work - this smacks of bitterness to me, as though this reviewer has an axe to grind regarding this production. The truth is that it DOES definitely WORK and it's certainly not a comedy. Merlin's Apprentice is an enchanting, exciting, and captivating tale well acted, well produced, and well directed that all ages can enjoy viewing, with many "Oh my goodness" moments in it that keep you glued to the set until the end. Watch it if you can, and find out!

ozthegreatat42330 I enjoyed this one because it goes into an area almost never touched on, what happens after Arthur and the fall of Camelot. While the humor of Merlin (especially Martin Short) was not in as great a supply, it still had the story to tell. It did seem to me that the leader of the raiders was trying to emulate Arnold Schwartzenegger in his Conan days, and taken with Merlin, it was not the best casting for Miranda Richardson to play the Lady of the lake, since she was queen Mab before. I would have liked for Sam Neill to have had more screen time, but there was an excellent story here, and you were never really sure of the outcome until the very end. It is not quite as good as "Merlin" but still, all in all, very watchable. If you really want a good Arthur miniseries then have someone film the four books of Mary Stewart's Arthur and Merlin saga.