Watch Camelot For Free

Absolutely the worst movie.

A Masterpiece!

A lot of fun.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

I'm an unabashed lover of anything about King Arthur. Even the bad movies (like the recent King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) provide something new to the myth. I'm also a lover of musicals and if the spirit and energy are there, I can excuse most badly acted movie musicals.Camelot left me feeling...meh. Richard Harris was so lifeless as Arthur he looked asleep. Vanessa Redgrave had her moments, as when she sang "What Do the Simple Folk Do?" but she seemed disinterested most of the time as well. Franco Nero gives a rousing performance as Lancelot du Lac. He was the only cast member who seemed to really be trying to earn his pay, although a good director would have reigned him in a bit as he was close to going over the top. The plot meandered and it felt like a highlight film of King Arthur rather than a streamlined story. The musical numbers were badly directed and performed. I also could not get over Arthur calling Guenevere "Ginny". I've never heard or read anywhere that he called her that. It came across a anachronistic and a bit too hippie for my taste (it was 1967 after all). I hope the original Broadway version was better.I still enjoyed the film, but as I'd heard so much about it over the years, I guess I was expecting more.

I found this big-budget movie transfer of the Lerner-Louwe musical about the court of King Arthur and the courtship of Lady Guinnivere to be a slightly uneasy mix of the dramatic and the musical. I found myself enjoying both aspects individually but in the final analysis, not together. In the end, the dramatic side of the equation seems to get bigger play, particularly the last half-hour where nary a song is heard, as the climax of the dastard / bastard Mordred's plot against Arthur unfolds using as its fulcrum the ill-fated romance of the Queen with Arthur's champion knight, Sir Lancelot.I'm a big fan of Richard Harris, the singer as well as the actor and felt he carried the film well. I like his emotive singing voice and he acts the King's mood-swings with assured-ness and charisma. He frequently comes across as the boy-king who never quite grew up as witness the irreverent way he almost never sits properly on his throne and his frequent callings out to his childhood mentor Merlin and his eventual commune with his younger self in a dream sequence at the height, or depth, of his marital difficulties. I don't quite see Vanessa Redgrave as being quite beauteous enough to attract the attention of the two great knights she bewitches plus I found her performance somewhat skittish and girlish. Franco Nero as third-wheel Lancelot didn't fit my imagined appearance of the great knight with his mop of curly hair and youthful, clean-shaven appearance but improves as the movie goes on as his beloved king's reluctant love-rival.The sub-plot of Arthur's establishment of the code of chivalry and the introduction of a legal system throughout his kingdom is used and abused by the scheming Mordred, played with conniving cunning by David Hemmings to trap his father between the proverbial rock and a hard place, the film ending inconclusively on that point although the doomed king has the satisfaction of learning, in the character of his youthful fan and protégé, young Tom, that his royal legacy will endure down the ages.Director Joshua Moore certainly allows the stories the time to develop, like many other big musicals of the time, it has a long, probably overlong running time. I did however find the awkward lip-synching to the music by the singers to be off-putting and perhaps through being unfamiliar with the score of this particular musical, wasn't really swept away by the music either. The settings (especially the recreation of the castle and the celebrated Round Table) and costumes are fine and there were some imaginative scenes (Arthur's dream sequence in particular) but as stated earlier, I found the songs tended to hold up and indeed rather let down the drama somewhat.Now considered one of the last of the old-time big-budget musicals, "Camelot" seems to be somewhat anachronistic, released as it was in the late 60's as film-goer tastes changed, "The Sound Of Music" having caught that movement's last wave but it is nevertheless worth watching at the very least for Harris's multi-layered portrayal of King Arthur, even if it won't have you humming many of the tunes after it finishes.

Like the earlier reviewer, the film gets full marks for costumes, sets and photography. The light, the textures, the colours - especially if you see a well-projected version or a restored DVD version - are absolutely ravishing in conjuring a faux-medieval fantasy land. Some moments, such as the candlelit wedding or the early scenes in the snow, will linger long in the memory.I will always remember seeing this film at a young age and being amazed at one of the later scenes when Vanessa Redgrave is so emotional that her nose drips snot. It made the moment raw, real and true - and I followed her career ever afterwards. That deeply-felt acting sometimes feels at odds with the conventions of a film musical - at least in the 1960s - but it is NOT at odds with the source material - TH White's Once and Future King. In that mighty tome the whimsical mingles with the tragic in a very teasing fashion - all the more brilliant for that.I wonder whether this film will not be revered in generations to come and its over-wrought acting (with too many disconcerting closeups) might be seen as psychologically penetrating. There is a later filmed version - a stage version starring Richard Harris which captures the "musical" side of the musical better (more even singing, for example) but nothing beats this 1967 version for DESIGN.

I watched this movie first when I was a little girl, and especially the sequences in the magic winter forest in the beginning have been with me all these years. I always think about them when I walk in a wintry forest! I think this production has captured the magic of the Arthur legend better than any other, on screen, stage or in a novel. I love the wonderful photo, the lavish exteriors, interiors, clothes and props, the beautiful people who are all exactly right for their roles, and last but not least the captivating songs and the stirring music!The love triangle is for ever intriguing, because I suppose we all live it at some time of our lives - if not in reality so in imagination. There cannot be many people, who have never had feelings for anyone else than their spouse... and been faced with the horrible understanding of the consequences, if you give in (and if it is mutual of course). Many people, who "do the right thing", still live all the rest of their lives with a longing and a regret: "what might have been"...There are a couple of things I would like to change though. First of all, the movie is much too long. If you watch it all through in one sitting, you cannot concentrate or care anymore when the ending finally comes.Also, it focuses on too many subplots of the Arthurian legend. It would have been enough with only the love triangle, and the things that naturally come with it: such as Arthur's decision to form his round table. Having Mordred, Merlin, Pellinore and King Arthur as a child in it too, makes the movie too long and, in the end, tedious. Also, I think a few of the weaker songs should be cut, first of all "Take me to the fair" and "What do simple folks do".Another thing: it is a pity that all the best songs and scenes should be at the beginning of the movie. After Lancelot's and Guinevere's confession of love to each other, after the tournament, there is nothing much to look forward to.*****Now I have watched the movie again, and I have to add something: my impressions have changed a little this time. Yes it IS a long movie, but this time I did not think that any scenes were superfluous, or should be cut. On the contrary, I found everything worked together very well. I think you need to watch this movie several times before you can really take it in and understand the greatness of it! My tip is: take a break in the middle (when the intermission is), stretch your legs a little, let in some fresh air maybe go for a walk... and then go for the second half!