Ginevra e il cavaliere di re Artù

After playing "Constantin IL Grande" ,a sword and sandal made in Italy ,it was only natural that Cornel Wilde wanted his own costume drama ; then again ,with wife Jean Wallace ,his usual leading lady , he opted for another version of "knights of the round table ",hardly ten years after Richard Thorpe's and a few years before Joshua Logan's musical "Camelot" .

LIke most of the versions (including more recent versions such as Boorman's) , the story essential deals with the legendary triangle .Guinevere is beautiful ,but perhaps too "Iseut" ,too "Germanic " ,too nordic and I have a tendency to prefer Ava Gardner.

There's an unusual humor in the first part : the foam of the soap -which had been known since antiquity (the Gallic used it) - which scares Lancelot's companion is a good idea ;and during the bath they share in a small lake (in full clothes!) , soap may be the magic potion which causes eternal love between the knight and the soon-to-be-queen.

As it has already been pointed out ,the villains provide the movie with its low point :they are insignificant and cannot hold a candle to Stanley Baker and Anne Crawford in Thorpe's movie ;Brian Aherne is a noble king ,but he remains passive and listless .

And that's probably what Wilde wanted : to enhance the beauty of his co-star/wife (who ,unlike Gardner,can wield a sword) and his feats ;his film is pleasant and compares favorably with the other versions .

Little did the critics -who considered Wilde a lightweight as far as directing is concerned- know that his following effort "the naked prey ",would be a genuine masterpiece which would influence countless other movies ,especially Gibson's "Apocalypto" .

Cornel Wilde should be awarded an "E" for effort in The Sword of Lancelot, a gabby, murkily photographed, and surprisingly bloody King Arthurer from 1962. Wilde as Lancelot sports a dandy little French accent that reminded me of the guy in the tower in Monty Python's The Holy Grail while he fights for the king, until he gets all gushy over the lovely Jean Wallace as Guinevere.

There is quite a bit of long-looking and love-talking and smooching between the real-life couple (and a tightly shot post-coital embrace with the two drippy and funky; boy, what did the folks at the Production Code think of that?), but after a good while, you're starting to grumble at the screen to GET ON WITH IT, whatever it might be.

The battles swing from the hokey to the excitingly bloody. You don't see many guys get their heads split down the middle in American movies in 1962, and Wilde does stage a couple of well-thought-out sequences, so there is some benefit to sitting through the kiss-kiss to get to the clang-clang.

The whole Arthurian legend is such an appealing story that even though Wilde has two strikes against him--a budget equivalent to pocket change (the film quality is so bad, I honestly checked my glasses to see if they needed cleaning) and the fact that most everyone involved looks a good generation too old for the story--he still brings some real love and passion to the screen.

Which is why The Sword of Lancelot should be taken at face value, and even though Jean Wallace is pushing forty in the picture (too mature for a maiden), all I can say is, "What a face!"

Richard Thorpe was, for MGM, the great specialist of medieval actioners, in the fifties, I mean. IVANHOE, KNIGHTS OF THE ROUND TABLE, QUENTIN DURWARD, and in the sixties Franklyn Schaffner gave us the awesome WARLORD, a milestone in medieval film history. This one, directed by Cornel Wilde, is purely awesome too, with a terrific production design and, as with many other Cornel Wilde's films as a director, some bloody, brutal short scenes. It is not cheesy at all, the acting is perfect and I am ashamed that this movie had never been released in France when it was released in Belgium, for instance; that's why it has a French title.... It has been aired only a couple of times since on cable movie channels, French TCM like channels. This is a true gem, gripping, riveting, with no length at all and outstanding battle scenes. Yes, Richard Thorpe would not have done better.

A good action film that is reasonably faithful to the Arthurian legends as interpreted (and sometimes actually written) by Thomas Malory in the 15th century. The addition of the "Viking Invasion" dates only to the movie itself, but provides for some good action sequences. And action is the hallmark of this movie. The battle scenes are very well done and the arms and armor (except for the Vikings' horned helmets) are reasonably authentic for the late 11th century. The individual sword fights seem like hard and deadly work----no dancing and prancing or choreographed acrobatics as in most films of this genre. Just clanging metal and men straining in their armor, with gory and graphically depicted consequences.

The film is indeed part soap opera, as is the Lancelot/Guinevere part of the Arthurian Cycle, but these interludes are done in a matter of fact, rather stark manner. This and the copious action scenes make for a fast moving, absorbing pace with little down time. Lancelot's French accent seems a bit contrived, and the dialogue is somewhat clipped and less theatrical than in most epics, but this only adds to its realistic qualities.

An excellent film by a man (Cornel Wilde, who also stars as Lancelot) very underrated as both an actor and filmmaker.

Dvd version I watched entitled "Sword of Lancelot"-US title 1st watched 3/25/2022 - (Dir-Cornel Wilde): Valient attempt at creating an epic story of the relationship between Lancelot and Guinevere fell short mainly along the lines of believability, and the inability of the actors to pull in their audience. Cornel Wilde acted, co-produced and directed this effort, and obviously put a lot of passion into it. Jean Wallace as Guinevere never really does well enough to help us understand her perspective as the Queen of King Arthur and lover of Lancelot. Wilde as Lancelot does a better job, and Brian Pherne as King Arthur fairs okay. The story starts as they battle for Guinevere to be won over as Queen under Arthur, than quickly she falls for Lancelot as well. The battles that ensue were actually pretty well done despite not being clear on the reason for them, but the story keeps coming back to the lovers and their plight. The movie was longer than it could have been due to the battle scenes, which came across as un-important. I was glad I watched this movie, but in the end I can't recommend it unless you are a fan of this genre.