Merlin et le livre des sorts

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.

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 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.

"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.

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.