Sword of the Valiant: The Legend of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
Sword of the Valiant: The Legend of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
PG | 17 August 1984 (USA)
Sword of the Valiant: The Legend of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight Trailers

Gawain was a squire in King Arthur's court when the Green Knight burst in and offered to play a game with a brave knight. Gawain journeys across the land, learning about life, saving damsels, and solving the Green Knight's riddle.

Reviews
HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.
Invaderbank The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.
Billie Morin This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows
Aneesa Wardle The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
capone666 Sword of the Valiant: The Legend of Sir Gawain and the Green KnightThe worst thing about the Round Table was it never had enough chairs for everyone.Fortunately, a squire – like the one in this fantasy – makes an excellent bench.When the mythical Green Knight (Sean Connery) storms King Arthur's court and challengers the Knights of the Round Table to a contest of courage, only a lowly page, Gawain (Miles O'Keeffe), is brave enough to accept the duel.But when young Gawain fails to behead the Green Knight, he is given exactly one year to solve a riddle or the knight will return to decapitate him.Despite its valiant efforts to bring the Arthurian era poem to vivid life, this 1984 British effort is plagued with poor production values, uproarious wigs, and feeble performances. Those factors – and more - contribute to the film's obscurity.Luckily, in the Middle Ages you would probably be dead of the black plague in a year's time.Yellow Lightvidiotreviews.blogspot.ca
Aaron1375 Yes, Sean Connery did not want to be Bond forever and for the most part you can say he has done a rather good job of doing roles other than Bond. Then there are the head scratchers like that turn as a villain in the very dull "Avengers" movie. Or like here, where he decided to say the heck with serious acting let me be in one of those horrible films with one of those guys who can not act a lick in this case Miles O'Keefe, also seen in the dreadful "Cave Dwellers", which was also a sequel to another one that I have heard is bad itself Ator. Granted the movie "Zardoz" was strange too, and it made no sense as well, but it had a certain style and actually seemed to work even though there are still parts of it I have no clue as to what they were about. This one is just bad with an ending that makes one go what the heck just happened there. Did they not remember to write a good ending so they had to end it in the most vague possible manner. Not really much to say about this movie, only that Sean Connery is the only reason I gave this movie a two because he is a favorite actor of mine. However, he does not really add anything to this one, but it just makes the movie surreal just because an actor of his caliber is in it.
deac-1 I honestly believe this may be the worst thing, not film, thing ever viewed through the eyes of a person. I thought i was crying but actually my eyes were just bleeding. Please by a copy just to later burn it, Whatever you do don't watch it...Not even as a joke. You may think "it might be funny to watch this train wreck? Dodgeball or any other half decent films are rented out. Why don't we get this out just for a cheap laugh? Look it can't be that bad Sean Connery's in it!" First of all yes he is, but he's green. Second, don't do it it's not fun. It's...It's just not right.Please
jlc74 This truly has to be the worst film ever, a bunch of five year olds would surely be able to write a better script, construct more realistic sets and props and act to a higher degree than the actors in this movie seem to have demonstrated and still be more understanding to historical accuracy!And can someone please explain the wigs? Surely not adding to historical accuracy (for any century!) or even 1984! Added to this the poor soundtrack which seems to suggest that the director, at gunpoint, forced some lonely spinster from the organ of a church in Dunny-On-The-Wolds, Surrey to sit down and construct (with a timescale of half an hour) the film score on a budget of £5 and a pickled egg!I can only describe it as one horrific car crash, so awful, you just stare in disbelief, knowing that you should look away and hoping that no one else will catch you looking! Poor Sean Connery, did he desperately need to pay the mortgage for another month?! Dire!