Opiniones de usuarios

"Merlin and the Book of Beasts" was actually a surprise of a Sci-Fi Channel movie. It took me by surprise, but then again, I didn't really have high expectations to it, given the previous works aired on this channel.

The story told in the movie is very easy to follow, and it sure had some interesting adventure and fantasy elements to it. However, I must say, there were moments in the movie where the plot was on thin ice. But overall, the story worked adequately enough for the movie.

What amazed me in "Merlin and the Book of Beasts" was the sets and the details they put into the sets, from the village to the castle of Camelot. And the costumes and outfit worn by the people in the movie was actually also good. Nothing flashy and shiny, so it had that medieval-feel to it. Thumbs up! I read some reviews where the effects were slandered. I, however, found the effects in the movie to be alright. Sure, they weren't award-winning, but for a Sci-Fi Channel movie, then they were really good, because they are not known for their amazing CGI effects. The movie wasn't loaded with CGI effects, but when they did use some they were actually alright.

One thing did puzzle me, why did they chose to put elements from the Greek mythology into the British mythology? That was sort of a weird mix. Now, I am not saying that the medusae were crappy or anything, just that they seemed a bit out of place in medieval Britain.

As for the cast, well I think that Patrick Sabongui (playing Tristan) was the most memorable of all. He did a good job. Laura Harris (playing Avlynn) also put on a good performance. And now on to the bad part of the cast, James Callis (playing Merlin), wow, why him? He was speaking with such a strange voice, and there were times I didn't even understand what he said because of the low voice and the way he fumbled through the words. And sometimes he would speak with a Scottish accent, then other times he sounded Jamaican. What was up with that? Hand on heart, then this was the worst interpretation of Merlin I have had the pleasure of seeing. Callis' appearance and outfit was good though, but the rest was not.

Given the benefit of the doubt, then Sci-Fi Channel made a good TV movie here, and if you like adventure / fantasy (or play Dungeons & Dragons like I do), then you might want to sit down and watch this movie. Forget all about Sci-Fi Channel's reputation and be willing to look past James Callis' performance, then you are in for an adequate adventure movie.

SCI-FI Channel continues to go down hill. They take good actors and make stuff I can't make it all the way through without changing the channel. They kill decent shows like "Dresden Files" and deluge you with reality shows like "Ghost Hunters". Maybe they should change their name to Reality-FI :). Don't waste your time with this movie. The movie is slow paced with poor special effects. The story line is mediocre at best. None of the characters full develop. The move is a real bore with no substance or any real entertainment value. SCI-FI really need to rethink there approach to entertaining sci-fi fans. They have fallen off the mark and don't seem to be able to get on track.

The Arthur legend has led to some great movies and stories. This retelling of the story doesn't work. Not good mythology or good narrative. The script could have been pared down considerably. If Arthur is Celtic make the girl a red-head, not a Swedish blond. If Merlin is Welsh, he would have come from Noth Wales, not Swansea. What an accent. Merlin would have been more believable if he had used his beautiful spoken English. What are the Greek Gorgons doing in England, they belong in Greece. How did the sword get away from the Lady of the Lake? Try T.H. White's Once and Future King or try Geoffrey of Monmouth for better versions of this story. There is enough material in the Arthur legend without the Greek improvements. The Disney cartoon based on White was a much better story than this version.

i'm a sucker these costume rehashes of Merlin and the knights of the Round Table. not much in the way of character development in this film - i guess you're required to know the general story well enough to understand who/what the characters reference.

Merlin, who i guess is supposed to be one of the leads, plays the character like a homeless person who's inhaled too many dangerous chemicals and is permanently deranged. 'daisy,' from Dead Like Me, tries to provide a moral center for the film, without success.

the rest of the cast stays in the background. even the 'bad guy' has minimal screen time and doesn't make much of an impact.

made it too the end only by using the 'fast forward' function of our DVR.

Despite this is a TV movie, I thought, it should have some quality, as James Callis, who was great as Gaius Balthar in Battlestar Galactica re-imagined, plays here the said Merlin.

It's the story of an old magician/warrior who turned his back on the world, but has to fight a last time against a young, but well-known enemy, together with the daughter and sons of his former comrades of the Artus-saga.

So far so bad, because it turns out that the plot, which has some potential for an entertaining fantasy movie (remember 'The Raven' with Vincent Price), is executed in a very cheap and unpleasant way, the directing has no feeling for unintentionally ridiculous moments, which are happening astonishing often.

James Callis as Merlin is completely out of place, he overacts far too much, maybe he tried to save the movie, but he hasn't yet the caliber to save a lost production, regardless how wide he opens his eyes, how heavy with meanings he dons his hood.

The rest of the crew is trying hard, but also fails against ridiculous dialogs, pathetic scenes and a script apparently from a children's book author or even his/her teen progeny - no pun intended.

From a children's view the movie may be entertaining, but I don't think it was intended for this audience, which should not be older than, say, 10 to 12 years. And if it did, I wouldn't welcome to see my children watching a movie made that sloppy...

So, I finished watching this movie today, and the only thing that was even half decent about it was the soundtrack. The acting was sub-par, the script was abhorrent, and the characters were more shallow than a kiddie pool. The effects were terrible, and all around I feel like I should be paid for even watching this movie. I was originally interested in this movie because the actor who plays Merlin was the actor for Baltar in Battlestar Galactica. I remembered how good of an actor he was in that television show, but sadly he was terrible in this movie, especially the accent he adopted for the role. All in all, don't waste your time.

I had to take the time to write a review of this movie, in the hope that it might save someone else who may be sucked into watching it. My clear advice here is to stay away from it - it's a dismal waste of time. I am someone who loves fantasy, who loves swords and sorcery, who loves Merlin and King Arthur, who should have loved this movie or at least found it enjoyable. I have no issues with low budget production or crude effects. I have imagination enough that stuff like that does not bother me at all. What I do have a problem with is bad writing and wooden, laughably bad acting. That is what killed this movie. The concept was fine, but the execution was terrible. I really felt like I was watching some terrible cosplay event among amateur roleplayers. Not recommended. Unless that's your thing.

I tried to watch this movie because I love the Merlin legends but it's just doesn't ever catch fire much less show a faint spark. With all the good series, mostly Sci Fi, that have come from the studios and locals in British Columbia I had hoped for more but this movie was only mildly more entertaining than watching paint dry.

The acting is wooden and there are no facial expressions or ease in the exchanges between actors and James Callis seems to have taken his character hints from Joe Cocker or maybe it's the directors fault but all the same surely some sort of expression other than a wide eyed stone faced monotone delivery would have been possible ?!

Please, Space Channel, stop showing it frequently (or totally would be better) and find something better even it is a repeat of something that will engage viewers and inspire more than a '?$%* why did I waste my time' response !

It's a pity that someone didn't have a match so set light to the reels....it would have at least been pretty to watch the flames of destruction.

I think the people who are ranting against this film are missing the point. Yes .. clearly this was a very low budget film. It was a film comprised of about 10 actors ... with two scenes with some extras. The special effects were basically theatrical quality (as in a stage production). However, I would argue that a film with those things running against it ... the acting was far better than the overall production ... as was the script. Was it a "masterpiece" I think that is clearly not the case ... but was it the worst film of all time? Not at all. It was a delightful little film that was entertaining. If you are someone who likes fantasy, sword and wizardry stuff, a geek who likes Lord of the Rings or Dungeons and Dragons ... you might enjoy this film. If you are not either of those things ... you probably want to take a pass. Don't expect a big budget epic adventure ... if you go in with modest expectations you might enjoy the film. If your looking for super high quality, big budget Hollywood entertainment ... take a pass on this one. For what it was ... the film was good ...

First of all, this is NOT a re-telling of the Arthurian legend. Set in a later time, when the knights' children are grown, this is a fantasy piece that merrily mixes a lot of different sources, with little regard to historical or mythological accuracy. Nor does it matter; it's jolly good fun.

Unfortunately, it suffers from bad sound; James Callis remains largely mumbling and unintelligible throughout. A pity, since we know from "Battlestar Galactica" that he has an excellent voice and good delivery. I can only conclude that the grumbling and mumbling were his choice, and the poor recording makes it even worse. Apart from that, it's one of the best of Sci-Fi's "made for TV" movies. Special effects are several cuts above average, which is a breath of fresh air in such pieces.

I can say that I saw all absolutely all the movies on the genre, Merlin is one of my beloved characters and this guy James Callis -who is not that bad in Battlestar- is the worst Merlin that I ever saw, I mean it. His accent is so horrible, not enough old, not enough wise, terrible.

The blood in the movie looks like grasp berry juice.

There are some scenes so slow and useless like the one in the fountain.

What the heck is doing Medusa in UK?

Excalibur is not any sword is "The Sword" and it looks like any sword.

What the heck happened in the eagles scene?

The rest of the movie is like a big chapter of Xena or Hercules, not that bad.

I seriously disagree with the other review. I honestly suspected this movie was going to be bad before I got into it, so I wasn't expecting much to begin with. That being said, They talked too damn much and did too damn little. There were very few action scenes and those that were were pretty lame and didn't seem well thought-out. It was a classic sci-fi channel movie, completely lacking in real plot development or ability to draw in the audience.

I enjoy sci-fi movies a lot, but only if they aren't garbage. I have watched a lot of garbage, and a lot of fairly good sci-fi movies, including Lord of the Rings and Star Wars of course. I have also watched and loved the Star Trek TV show and movies. I honestly have to say that I would prefer to watch In The Name Of The King, and that movie was terrible. The problem with this movie is that it was boring and did not engage the audience in the least. There was too much talking, especially with big fantasy words that were unnecessary aplenty. It almost seemed as if it was trying too hard. I would rather watch a Dungeons and Dragons movie, because at least they do enough to keep me involved.

I was expecting little from Merlin and the Book of Beasts in the first place, but you always do get that hope that it is at least watchable. Apart from some lovely locations, and a rousing and sometimes sparkling soundtrack, Merlin and the Book of Beasts is a disaster on all levels. The acting feels very stilted, nobody looks properly comfortable and a fair number overact. James Callis especially is so bad that you actually wonder why he was cast in the first place. The characters are underwritten and never likable too, while the effects are amateurish and the camera work is often haphazard. The sword and sorcery elements are clumsily choreographed and the story is constantly dull and the Greek mythology elements with the Gorgons are ridiculously out of place in a film about the Arthurian legend, further proof that the Sci-Fi channel don't do their research properly before producing their films. In conclusion, not worth bothering with. 2/10 Bethany Cox

This is definitely not the best "Merlin" movie ever made. Low budget it certainly is, but the movie is not terrible! James Callis is an English actor trying to replicate a Welsh accent and not very successfully. (I am Welsh so I am reasonably well qualified IMHO) Merlin would have probably been a Celtic Druid, and as the Celtic tribes occupied most of Britain and Europe until the Romans conquest, it is highly likely that most of the mythology which the Romans absorbed from the Greeks would have been incorporated into Celtic religion. They certainly absorbed several Roman gods into their daily religious practices. This would explain references to Medusa etc. I hope this explains some of the apparent plot anomalies. Getting back to the movie, I gave it 5 stars because it is watchable. It is what it is..... The sort of movie to watch if you don't want a complicated plot. I can understand US viewers having problems with the welsh accent!

Made for TV 'Merlin' clone is a drab fantasy-drama with too much melodrama and not enough fantasy. Bust out the dry ice to create some ambience, fill some sets with era-appropriate props, and let CGI take care of the rest seems to be the casual approach here with predictably poor results.

The acting is over-wrought and at times comical as the gruff Merlin throatily delivers his words of wisdom (he looks possessed most of the time, like he's consumed some bad forest mushrooms), whilst the plot so laboured and interminably tedious, it's a struggle to persevere for almost 100 minutes.

Battles with beasts are clumsily staged and lacking suspense (the encounter with the Medusa witches had potential but was marred by the ridiculous CGI), and then the soap opera-styled melodrama is pointless padding to fill in the time when nothing happens (which is most of the time).

As Merlin defiantly announces to his bunch as they approach the castle 'it's not Camelot, it's an abomination!' and that could equally be the byline for this medieval misfire.

Compared to the likes of High Plains Invaders and Beyond Loch Ness, this is high art. As I write this I am sitting through this for the second time. Watching the Snooker on streaming video so the Mrs found this on Syfy HD. As aficionados of the whole Arthurian mythos and having just had a trip to Broceliande in Brittany, we were happy to watch this again. As a detour from the conventional myth it is o.k. James Callis' performance is pretty good, and whilst it does not carry the whole movie it is worth the effort of watching. Some of the acting is a little wooden but compared to say Kim Cattrall in, well everything she has ever done, Laura Harris gives an adequate turn. As for the comments on the threads and previous reviews regarding her hair, the poor props, sets etc. bear in mind that this was produced for the cost of the catering budget on Battlestar. Accept that this was made for a genre TV station on a shoestring budget and limited release, and willingly suspend your disbelief, you might actually enjoy it.

This movie is just plain weird. Merlin's voice is so off it's all you can notice most of the film. In parts he's like Christian Bale's batman, with a weird raspy whisper but not good and other times, it's just weird. Some type of accent with a forced rasp, I don't know how to explain it.

The villain is dumb. Evil comic book laugh, I'm doing this because I hate everything kind of attitude.

This is one of the worst movies I own. It's not really worth watching but if you're bored it's also not going to cause you any harm.

I would say that any of the 10/10 reviews are either fake or are only there to try and counter the bad reviews when they really thought it was 5/10 or something. It's just not a good movie

The Villain and James Callis' voice in the movie are why I don't like it.

Some people complain about x person being in x place and maybe that's off but I really don't care about that. The script is bad, the voice is bad, the movie is bad.

It seems that more modern fantasy movies just can't get out of their own way. This isn't the worst movie I have watched, but it wasn't really any good either. Overall the storyline can be followed. The script is mediocre. The acting is mostly reasonable, except for the characterization of Merlin's voice. The action sequences are mostly sub par. Special effects are extremely low budget. There is surprisingly character development over the course of the movie. Unfortunately that doesn't counteract the numerous negative components of the movie. It is watchable (barely so) but I definitely would not go out of my way to watch it.

This is SO bad it's not even "kitch". The thing that seals the deal is the atrocious acting. who's worse Mordred, the knights or Merlin in this joke? I think Merlin wins for the worse acting ever!!! The others follow close behind. Who ever cast this film should render their salary back to the crew, because they did the best job I'm sure. Costume and Production design is pretty good. Oh!! The horses were great!! Really Sad. I mean the actor who plays Merlin has played in some pretty good shows and probably did well, I guess his terrible acting in THIS inferior piece of work could be blamed on the Director and Producers. I must add that I rarely write such bad reviews of film/TV because I feel everything is a work of labor & few people can pull off anything, but this is ridiculous, everything about this production is pathetic, not campy, but truly lame. I want to know WHO were the people making this?

"Merlin and the Book of Beasts" is not the best of fantasy adventure movies available, as it had a rather mundane and slow paced storyline which really wasn't particularly interesting.

The special effects were semi-adequate, which was a shame because a fantasy movie needs to have proper special effects to really carry the movie. The atmosphere of the movie felt half-hearted, and you never really immersed yourself into the world.

The characters were adequate, but I can't grasp why they hired James Callis to play Merlin in this movie, as he wore a constant scowl and a lot of his dialogue was mumbled so you couldn't properly hear what he was saying. And the way that he was talking in general, made it seem like Merlin was suffering from constant constipation. It felt like it was a cartoon version of the Merlin character.

There might be a bit of enjoyment to be found in "Merlin and the Book of Beasts" if you, like m,e are a big fan of the fantasy genre, but don't get your hopes up.