Arthur et Merlin

I saw this rated at 8/10 here earlier and thought wow, low budget movie with a genre that I like, with actors I've never heard of.

I had to see it.

Storyline is OK, as it should be as it is based on an ancient story (Atleast I think it is) Actors are bad, sometimes in a comical way, sometimes just in a bad way.

Merlin as a boy in the beginning gives you a cringe on bad acting, but after that its watchable if you like the genre.

There is no "special effects" other than a fog that rises to cover any need for it.

The two main characters have their moments, thats pretty much all there is in this movie.

I found this take on the King Arthur Legend very entertaining. The use of colour and the cinematography was the most enjoyable aspect of this film. The story was good enough to get me through the full film despite it's length being close to a Lord of the Rings film. It is clear to see the effort and passion that has gone into this film and it has paid of in the end result.

Although this film may not compete with Peter Jackson's fantasy series, it's budget is a fraction of Hollywood features and it is still very enjoyable.

It works very well as a family film as I watched with my kids and they thoroughly enjoyed it.

Considering the reviews so far are either 'zeroes or heroes', I thought I'd offer a middle-of-the-road approach.

This movie is by no means horrible. It reminds me of a better than average pilot for a TV series (albeit one made in the 80's), or could even pass as 'part-one' of a mini-series.

The leads are unknown, but solid without being brilliant. David Sterne who plays King Vortigern is a better than average TV actor, and he was very believable. Charlotte Brimble who plays Olwen (the lead female) does a very creditable job, and she didn't have to get her kit off to do that job either!

Special Effects were very, very, simple and wouldn't have over-stretched the budget, eg the occasional fog machine got switched on, but that worked in the movie's favour, as it meant that nothing was done 'badly'. ie there was no need to cringe at poorly constructed monsters.

The Story was also very, very, simple, but that meant that it wasn't as rushed as B-Grade movies can often feel, as they try to pack a script worthy of War and Peace into 90 minutes. The last 12 minutes were 'so-so', as endings go, but once again, 'not horrible'.

In summary, you wouldn't pay to go see it at the movies, but you wouldn't regret watching it, if it turned up on Netflix either.

It's not worth much more than an honest 5, but it's definitely not a 1!

Honestly, I have seen far worse adaptations of the Arthur/Merlin legends. The acting is pretty amateur but it's a passable story. I actually quite enjoyed the score. Kudos to whoever was responsible for locations.

This started off promising but as expected, with a low budget, this sort of movie degrades into B movie territory. There is a distinct lack of CGI and special effects especially at the end of the movie where so much more could have been done. The script tries to stick to a twist in the famous legend, but does not build up the protagonists' relationship up enough to make the obligatory battle against darkness believable. In one instance Merlin is dead against joining Arthur, and then all of a sudden gets random inspiration to join... "deus ex machina" galore. There are too many similar contradictions in the plot to make this truly enjoyable for me. One wish for low budget films - at least pay for a good writer, even if the acting is dodgy.