Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Slime-3 I like the majority of Eric Rohmer's individual and thoughtful low- budget movies (The only one I have yet to watch being SIGN OF LEO)but PERCEVAL lacks any of the usual charm and engagingly endless chatter. It leaves me utterly cold I'm afraid. It's....well actually it's pretty awful to be frank! Some of the acting, despite the constraints of the stylised elements (intrusive madrigals, forced rhyming and so forth) is good but it's a 2+ hours journey through a cardboard landscape to absolutely nowhere. One sees the credits roll and cannot help asking "is that it?" Rohmer's strength was always to create engaging contemporary love triangles in which much amorous youthful angst was discussed at length in rambling but rather mesmerising dialogue , usually by at least one very attractive young actress. Sometimes the stories ended abruptly or just fizzled out to nothing but in all cases there was an element of reality in that. Rohmer's costume pieces are all far less successful than the contemporary fables. PERCEVAL is the nadir. Everyone is allowed a dud. This is the great Rohmer's.Thats a far better record than most directors.

Mitch-4 I've been on a long Rohmer kick this year, and while I greatly enjoy almost all his work I have to admit there are ways they're all rather alike. With two tremendous exceptions: "The Marquise de O." and "Perceval".I'm glad I read the earlier-placed IMDb comments, it's very helpful to think of this, as someone suggests, as what Chretien would have produced had he had access to filmmaking rather than narrative poetry. 20th Century narrative manners had not yet developed, and what would be quirky (or downright incompetent) structuring in a late 20th Century film are entirely normal in this 12th Century film.

Wolfram-4 The first time I saw this film, I thought it was terrible; Plan 9 from Outer Space Terrible, but the more I thought about it, the more the film grew on me. Soon, I came to realize Rohmer's vision about this film...Perceval le Gallois is the film adaptation of the medieval epic poem "Perceval" by Chretien de Troyes, and it is the story of Grail seeking Arthurian knight Perceval(Parsifal to Wagner, and Parzival to Wolfram von Eschenbach, who is my favorite) I came to realize that Rohmer was making the film as though medieval Chretien had had access to a camera. The use of the decidedly un-realistic sets is designed to give the viewer an impression of medieval entertainment and style, and the fantastic, magical tone of the work. The use of the minstrels is a great way to let the viewer in on how a medieval audience would have experienced this story, without sets or actors, just the story teller and his accompaniment. This film is pure genius, and is a must see, even though it is extremely difficult to locate.

patate-2 First there was that medieval novel in verses. Then, there was this offbeat idea of making a film out of it. Cardboard trees and a castle impossible to mistake for the real thing. A lot of talking meant only for lovers of French language. You either love or hate it. If you a)ever read poetry, b)watched other Rohmer films and c)understand some French, you may love it, otherwise, avoid it at all cost. Video prints are nearly impossible to find. Years from now, long after Shakespeare in love is trashed and forgotten, this flick will still be enjoyed by many.