First Knight is an example of the interesting casting Hollywood throws up occasionally – and American Sir Lancelot in the form of Richard Gere, and a Scottish King Arthur, Sean Connery. I’m really not sure how faithful the rest of the storyline is to the Camelot mythology, but to me that doesn’t matter a great deal because the filmmakers have taken an interesting slant on the ancient tale.

Lancelot is a lone ranger, living by the sword and unafraid to die. The reason for this isn’t explained until late in the story but it does make him a dangerous enemy and uncertain ally at the best of times. Arthur, meanwhile, has finally decided to wed – to the beautiful Guinevere of Lyoness (played by Julia Ormond). She of course is the third part of the love triangle which involves the two men above. However there are greater concerns in the land that need to be deal with – the Evil (really, it’s a capital E) Prince Malagant (who even sounds nasty!). Malagant was the First Knight of King Arthur but turned to the Dark Side (oops, sorry wrong movie), abandoning the noble laws of Camelot and instead opting for “the strong rule the weak” – with him being the strong, of course. Over the years he has managed to gain a whole army of followers, and he may now feel strong enough to challenge Camelot…

Although we have the whole good versus bad deal going on throughout the film, it’s main thrust is the relationship between the three main characters, and particularly Lancelot’s self discovery. Gere plays the seemingly carefree but often tortured Lancelot well, Connery is relatively believable as King Arthur, and Julia Ormond displays a quiet strength as the object of both their desires. Her character is a little confused though – in the early scenes she seemed much more of an active character but then turned into a typical damsel in distress. Ben Cross as Prince Malagant really did make you believe he would happily chop bits of you off, make a stew with them and then force you to eat it – one seriously nasty piece of work.

If some scenes, most notably in the town fare in Camelot, the film reminded me quite a bit of Knight’s Tale, but overall it wasn’t as cheesy. For similar reasons though it wasn;t as much fun. One of the reasons that I enjoyed Knight’s Tale was the fact that it didn’t take itself seriously, so while it was silly, I didn’t mind. First Knight however has delusions of grandeur and obviously believes itself to be a true epic. There are several profound statements in the dialogue, but far fewer than the script seems to think there is. Some of the scenes really get bogged down by uninteresting dialogue, and the film falters quite badly when Guinevere first enters Camelot.

The fight scenes and battle sequences are quite well done on the whole, but they go on a bit too long and due to some very hammy acting by the extras end up looking rather foolish. (They can drop dead at merely the sight of Lancelot’s sword – or foot, sometimes!) The film ends up being rather too long for its own good. The special effects are relatively good though decidely shaky in a couple of scenes - fortunately not enough to blow away your whole suspension of belief.

However, despite the above criticisms, I did rather enjoy First Knight. It’s main problem is simply that it aspires to be something it’s not. The interesting character study of Lancelot is interesting enough to hold it together during its shakier scenes. Recommended to those who like medieval adventures and fans of Richard Gere – if you’re neither, you probably won’t enjoy this much.


Other Information

Year of release: 1995
Rating: PG (US rating – PG-13) - some parts were a bit gory
Runtime: 134 minutes – it would have done better to simply be an enjoyable medieval action-adventure romp and less grandiose
Directed by: Jerry Zucker (who seemed to have managed to get most of his family in the film somewhere if you look at the credits!)


Links

Richard Gere - Chicago, Shall We Dance

Sean Connery - League of Extraordinary Gentleman



Recommended: Yes