Perry Kate Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Diagonaldi Very well executed

Sexylocher Masterful Movie

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

moonspinner55 Sir Thomas Malory's traditional tales of King Arthur and Lancelot are made even more commercially palatable with this costumed version from the British arm of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. The narrative has become so basic (and dull), presumably for mass consumption, that all we have left to respond to is the ornate production. Robert Taylor's Lancelot devotes himself to being Guinevere's champion (not that her husband--Mel Ferrer's vacuous King Arthur--would notice!), but Taylor seems to have wandered in from another picture; his diction is thudding and his hangdog face never brightens, not even in the presence of a ravishing Ava Gardner as Guinevere (who doesn't so much flirt with Lancelot as she does beam and glow with silent affection). The overlong film is a sumptuous spread, and there's plenty of action, but the episodes fail to come together as a whole and the sound recording (Oscar nominated!) is barely adequate. Consequently, the legendary characters rarely come to life. ** from ****

Catharina_Sweden A quite theatrical rendering of the Camelot story, that grips over too much in just a normal-length feature film: The love triangle Arthur-Guinevere-Lancelot of course, Mordred's upheaval, Merlin, Elaine and Galahad, the Holy Grail and even God's own voice (that sounded suspiciously American, to that! :-D ) One can also say a lot about other actors' pronounced American accents, and the masking is not very convincing at times (King Arthur and his beard is the worst).There are also some discrepancies here from the original story, or maybe one should say - the most common story. For instance, in this movie Lancelot and Elaine were married, but in the common story they were not. They had Galahad together, but this was because Elaine tricked Lancelot to sleep with her - when he thought she was Guinevere. Also, Merlin was murdered in the movie, while in reality this was not possible - he was living "backwards", and had at the time of the love triangle become too young to be a court magician and counsellor anymore.There is some fine dialogue, though, and something of Camelot is there in the spirit and adventure. If you like beautiful ladies in wonderful (stage) medieval dresses, handsome knights in shining armour, hearty sword fights, courtly behaviour, wonderful landscapes with mysterious old castles, etc. etc., everything in bright colouring - you will like this movie!

Claidheamdanns A great quote from this movie is inscribed on a ring that King Arthur gives Sir Lancelot on Christmas Eve. As Arthur passes the ring to Lancelot, Lancelot reads this inscription:"Friend shall I be; Call me not other. This is a pledging, 'Twixt brother and brother."Though perhaps not the best movie, by modern standards (graphically speaking), it was still well done, has beautifully colorful costuming, and presents an Arthur, devoid of magic, as the true Arthur would have been. The only thing approaching magical in this film is the obligatory "sword in the stone."

ragosaal This approach to King Arthur's legend is pure adventure and color. It has good battle scenes, interesting sword duels, a good cast, acceptable settings and wide open outdoor shootings, elaborated costumes and armors (if you don't look for historical accuracy, since those full metal armors appeared about five centuries later), intrigue, romance and the classical final duel hero-villain; but some flaws too.I think the picture is too long; in fact its start and ending have rhythm and are entertaining but it sort of bumps in the middle part and becomes kind of slow (a 10/15 minutes cut would have probably made it better). Lancelot's horse "Berick" is too smart even for a legend and somehow he saves the day at the end which is not very believable.The cast is alright. Robert Taylor (Sir Lancelot) renders an acceptable performance as the loyal knight pretty much as he had done recently in "Ivanhoe" (1952). Mel Ferrer, if not brilliant, gives some dignity to his role as king Arthur. Ava Gardner shows her undeniable beauty as Queen Gwinevere who falls in love with the wrong man. Stanley Baker (Sir Mordred) plays a credible and treacherous villain. Felix Aylmer is there too as Merlin.You could even say that "Knights of the Round Table" has aged rather well, but perhaps it has because later and even recent films on the same subject didn't come out well such us "First Knight" and "King Arthur" among others.