Sir Gawain und der grüne Ritter

Atmospheric is the first word I'd use to describe this movie. With the thick rolling fog, deep forest, dark castles and rocky seacoast; this movie delivers on locations. The filth is fantastic. When characters get dirty, they stay dirty. Their clothes look worn. When Gawain falls ill, he looks it. There are sweat stains on most of the cast. I don't know about you guys, but I appreciate touches like that.

In this version of Gawain, everything, no matter how bizarre or with a touch of silly, is deadly serious for the players. From the moment the movie starts it wraps itself in the period and surreal imagery and grimly marches on to a very well done conclusion.

Though it gets a lot of bad reviews, I genuinely like this movie. In fact, I like it much more than the remake "Sword of the Valiant"-- whose characters come off as not taking their environment, or each other, seriously.

I was about six when I saw this so forgive the vagueness. It's kind of Monty Python's Holy Grail in look with a Michael "couldn't-direct-traffic-on-the-Orkney-Islands" Winner directorial style. It was so deeply bizarre that it has stuck in the memory ever since. Thinking I perhaps didn't understand it because I was a kid I asked a couple of film boffins I know, they said, "no, mate, it was a genuinely odd film." (I seem to recollect lots of misty forests, dream-like fights and a man who lived in a vat of oil in order that his genitals erode away). Anyway, I think more youngsters should be made to watch this film so that they can grow up confused and slightly warped.

In 1973 Stephen Weeks directed the first of 2 versions of the SIR GAWAIN & THE GREEN KNIGHT saga. He would remake it 11 years later in 1984 as SWORD OF THE VALIANT. As far as I'm concerned, this first version is the best one by far. It's also the film that Monty Python took the look of their HOLY GRAIL movie from and provided its inspiration. GAWAIN & THE GREEN KNIGHT was made inexpensively but used actual locations in Wales and Cornwall to achieve its authentic look.

The story is part of Arthurian legend and first appeared in the 14th century. It concerns a squire, Gawain, who takes up the challenge of a mysterious Green Knight after none of King Arthur's knights will. The challenge involves beheading the Green Knight (at his request) after which the knight then gets to return the favor. Gawain beheads him only to have the knight put his head back on his shoulders. He tells Gawain he will wait a year to redeem his promise but Gawain must seek him out.

In addition to being a romantic tale of knightly deeds and chivalry, GAWAIN is also an allegorical coming-of-age story. We follow Gawain on his journey as he has many adventures and encounters a mysterious woman named Linet. By the time he finally encounters the Green Knight, he has changed from the callow youth who set out into a worldly wise adult who has come to realize that knighthood and chivalry aren't what he thought they were.

Murray Head does a fine job as Gawain. He engages us from start to finish as he overcomes many obstacles and discovers love and what it means to lose it. Veteran character actor Nigel Green (in his last film role) portrays the Green Knight as an imposing figure with just a touch of wry humor. Brit TV actress Ciarin Madden is the wisp like Linet who looks the epitome of the early 1970s heroine. The other significant parts are taken by well known English character actors Robert Hardy, Murray Melvin, and Ronald Lacey. The film is narrated by Ian Richardson.

Director Stephen Weeks said in a 2014 interview that he preferred the later version, SWORD OF THE VALIANT. He's entitled to his opinion but after watching the two movies, I can't understand why he feels that way. Although bigger budgeted, SWORD seems cheaper in every way with a script that borders on parody and a terrible 1980s synthesizer score. GAWAIN, unlike SWORD, was never released on home video in any form and was almost impossible to see until recently when it showed up on YouTube. You can catch it there and it should be seen as a precursor to EXCALIBUR (1981) and MONTY PYTHON & THE HOLY GRAIL...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.

A bored and listless viewer sat through a boring and listless movie today. As others before me have said, I waited in vain for the Monty Python troupe to come charging out of the bushes and breathe a little life into the proceedings. GAWAIN AND THE GREEN KNIGHT is, I suppose, an honest attempt to portray the legendary exploits of a Knight of the Round Table, however it fails to generate any excitement or even any interest in the characters. Badly acted and unconvincing combat scenes, dreary scenery and a vastly overblown musical score become tedious rather quickly. Overall, this is a real yawner by any standard one cares to apply.

This film has to be one of the most underrated films ever. And in some ways I think this could be due to it being a British film made with a reasonably low budget...in other words a prejudice against it.

I admit it does have it's flaws such as some of the fight scenes (but not all) being a little silly, a few deviations from the plot of the poem, and the occasional line of cheesy dialogue (though on this count we there is not that much of this at all).

This film had a small budget however the filmmakers accomplish a great deal despite this. The set designs I have to say are rather good. As for the costumes, they do indeed look like 'Monty Python And The Holy Grail' costumes in some cases. There are two reasons for this that are over looked...these are the facts that Monty Python spoofed this film (aswell as others) with their film...The other fact is that the costumes are based on Medieval Costumes and so it's obvious that some will look similar.

I have seen a lot of people on this site say how bad the effects are, and I have to respectfully say that their comments are baloney on this matter. The effects are no worse than most other films of that time and genre.

Also it should be noted that this is a British film and most of the cast were fairly well known in the UK at the time, so they are only a 'No Name' cast to people abroad (not in the UK) in the USA...etc...People forget that films are always predominately made for their own countries and not generally foreign markets...and this film is the same.

Over all this is quite a good film...I will give it full marks just because everyone else are giving this film such ridiculous marks on these reviews.