Excalibur (1981) movie review - Sneak Previews with Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- This is the original review of Excalibur by Siskel & Ebert on "Sneak Previews" in 1981. All of the segments pertaining to the movie have been included.
It’s the best movie ever made about King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table.
Monty Python-hold my dead parrot
The best ever? Oh come on!
Sadly, true. Most efforts are like illustrations for a book, as this one is in many places.
@@steelionx9255 What other King Arthur movie compares in terms of action, actor performances and above all, connections with the Arthurian Lore
@@steelionx9255Name a better film about King Arthur?
The hell? Excalibur is a classic.
Right?
Sometimes they're just incredibly wrong. This is one of their worst cases. I believe they also gave thumbs down to 1980's Flash Gordon, which was awesome. But still, this is even worse.
Was my all time favorite movie for a long time!
@@samfrazier5599 Ebert always had a blind spot with British films. He hated "Withnail & I" too.
I watched it once but didn't like it much. I watched it many years ago though. Maybe I'd like it more now.
Every once in awhile the boys went off the rails and crashed and burned spectacularly, and here we have one of their doozies. This film was a classic from the day it opened, and I was privileged to have reviewed it for a newspaper at the time, awed by pretty much everything about it. Entrancing world-building, dream-like, immersive style and mood, smart British humor and eccentricity, and an almost poignant sense of foretold doom and tragedy, etc.; it captures the spirit of the myth and the legend better than any other film.
I have to agree. I’m shocked. Although they make interesting points about some of the cast,, this film was a work of art. It was captivating and visually spectacular. I really can’t see how they can give it a thumbs down. There are so many unforgettable scenes. I love near the end, when Arthur assembles his knights for one final battle and charges through the countryside as life returns to the land. O’Fortuna plays in the background as he passes through the lush greenery with cherry blossom petals floating through the air. The scene is so visually and emotionally striking.
Ebert and Siskel weren't alone. Vincent Canby wrote in THE NEW YORK TIMES, "EXCALIBUR is humorless, which is not the same thing as being serious."
Coincidentally, the movie was released about the same time as the COLUMBIA took off for the first Space Shuttle flight. Many people have compared the Kennedy administration to Camelot, and it occurred to me that the 1960s space program was a bit like the search for the Holy Grail. (I thought of this 22 years later when the COLUMBIA blew up, at a time when I happened to be reading THE ONCE AND FUTURE KING.)
Excalibur is one of my favorite films. While running the movie department of a local cultural center, I screened Excalibur and the audience, composed predominantly of college students, loved it.
A quarter of a century after its' release, Excalibur seems to have held up better than most other films of the same era.
Couldn’t agree more...
One of the best British films ever made & the best King Arthur adaptation created. And a cinematic experience as immersive of it's time & world as Blade Runner.
When Excalibur came out, I went to the theater four times to watch this classic. I'm wondering if either of these guys saw it once.
If anyone's a movie critic, it's their intent to see it, so therefore, they saw it once, they reviewed it once on their show, and yet, once they reviewed it for us, they still gave that movie an unfortunate "NO".
Ebert probably couldn't lift his face from the popcorn bucket.
The film is flawed mess. But it's so magnificent that We overlook it's idiosyncrasies. Or perhaps it's nostalgia and part of my childhood as I was 16 when I saw it with friends. The film for me has sentimental value. They're Wrong about Other characters Not developing as it does focus on Adultery, Betrail and Forgiveness between the Other 3 main characters.
My brother ran the cinema where Excalibar was playing. Every Wednesday night was dollar night and I went to go see Excalibur every Wednesday night all summer long. Never got tired of it.
The scene where Arthur gets knighted by his enemy is one of the best acted scenes and delivery that I’ve ever seen. That alone is worth 2 thumbs up.
I especially love that the knight who knighted him died refusing to betray Arthur. A very good character ark.
Nigel Terry was very good as Arthur. Compelling and tragic.
His transformation from squire boy to King is something to be duly noted. Especially his final scene with Mordred.
Excalibur is a classic and defined some of the best fantasy movies of the 1980s.
Brilliant film from John Boorman who also directed Deliverance. How do I know? Every scene is memorable. Liam Neeson, Gabriel Byrne and Patrick Stewart are introduced to the world.
He also directed Zardoz. 😉
@@thursoberwick1948 But we forgave him for it.
@@thursoberwick1948 I was honestly expecting these two american mainstream critics to pick on Boorman for making Zardoz and Exorcist II previously. Thankfully that wasn't the case....
They are sadly mistaken....This is a classic
Understatement
This is a masterpiece
Gawd, Helen Mirren as Morgana is so freaking hot.
Interesting trivia: Arthur's mother (who is raped by Uther in disguise as her husband, thanks to Merlin's magic) is played by the director's daughter.
@@JustWasted3HoursHere Yes, I knew that. It always struck me a creepy fact.
@@speedmastermarkiii Yeah, he mentions it in the director's commentary on the DVD, but didn't seem odd to him at the time. (I don't know about you, but directing my topless daughter in basically a rape scene would be bizarre to say the least. But, I guess he is the consummate professional.)
@@JustWasted3HoursHere Morgana's son was played by Charlie Boorman (his son).
@@an3ony Interesting! I did not know that. Such a great movie. The music is outstanding.
Sad for people who don’t get this masterpiece. Another classic fail by S & E.
Nicol Williamson - that voice, what a titan of an actor.
Not so much of a Titan if I first heard of him minutes ago.
He steals the film!
@@steelionx9255You mustn't know very much about classic films.
The guys totally missed the mark on this film! This is a classic, and one of my all time favorites.
The moment when Arthur hands over his sword to be knighted in the water was extraordinary and Merlin's puzzled "I didn't see that" is perfect. After that the movie dragged a bit for me but I still love it.
Yes, it is almost as if he does it against his will.
"I never saw this!"- Nicol Williamson
Same here. The movie peaked at that scene in the river. On the whole I still like the movie, though.
Siskel and Ebert never knew how empty were their souls, because they were never filled.
Their review is the only thing I don’t want from them. Excalibur was not made to live a movie’s life but to be the stuff of future memory.
I think as they gave their reviews for many other films, until their deaths in 1999 and 2013, they did receive some filling and honorable mentions, such as naming a film center after Siskel in Chicago, and Ebert later receiving a star on the HWOF.
My biggest disagreement with Siskel & Ebert. The movie is one of the most well represented versions of the legend of the sword of Arthur and the holy grail. I loved it, and it still on my favorite films list. My favorite part is Percival and his story.He shows bravery, honor, humility, esteem, etc. more than any other. When all Hope seems lost, he doesn’t abandon his quest, and is able to find that which was lost.
These guys must have phoned it in on their critique.
Yep. The way Boorman tracked in Wagner's "Parsifal" into Paul Geoffrey's journey was extraordinary. Cinematography I will always take with me.
@@gpwerner yes…the soundtrack! It’s incredible.
A big miss on this review. What's not to understand? A classic, beautiful film.
Wrong Roger. Wrong Gene. Excalibur is a great film. It's true that you need a couple of viewings to understand how Merlin and Morgana are affecting the events depicted, but it all threads together very nicely if you pay attention. For example, near the end of the film it's not immediately apparent why Merlin returns to confront Morgana (who had imprisoned him in the world of dreams). Was Merlin merely after revenge? Only partially. More so he was there to trick her into calling the dragon's mist so that Arthur and his severely overmatched knights would have a chance in their final battle with Mordred. The only thing Siskel and Ebert got right was the terrific interplay between Merlin and Morgana, and the fine acting of Nicol Williamson and Helen Mirren. But the rest of the cast, while a bit amateurish, are also great. Nigel Terry does a great job transforming from boy king to King Arthur. Nicolas Clay was the perfect realization of Sir Lancelot. Gabriel Byrne, Patrick Stewart, and Liam Neeson have genuine gravitas and passion. Paul Geoffrey, who plays the somewhat unsung Sir Perceval, has a perfect blend of boyish enthusiasm, courage, and vulnerability, eventually culminating in heroism exceeding even Lancelot's. I never felt I was watching modern day actors posing in knight's armor. The battle scenes of clanging armor and splattering blood seemed realistic and were extremely well done. This is a superb movie. There is no film realization of King Arthur that comes close to Excalibur, which is an awesome film irrespective of that. John Boorman, you did the world a great service. Well done old boy.
Nicely elaborated.
Wow, great review.
@David Topchiev Another Boorman oddity is LEO THE LAST, where Marcello Mastroianni plays a royal pretender living in a house in the London slums. The first half is a fairy tale, the second half is a political tract. (It ends with Mastroianni burning down his own house!)
They set the bar too high....entertaining enough.
Despite their reviews still set at a “NO”, from that long ago, your review still deserves a “YES”.
What the hell is wrong with these people? Nicol Williamson’s performance alone makes the movie worthwhile and I’m not saying that’s all there is to love.
I love this movie. I know the dubbing is off, but the atmosphere and acting more than makes up for that. Nevertheless, I love watching these two review movies, rather I agree with them or not.
If there was a top 10 list called "Ten Times Siskel and Ebert Got It Wrong", this would be at number one.
Looking back at these two really tells me I did not need them to tell me what is a good or bad film. They dropped the ball huge on this one
Film critic might be the most useless of jobs.
@@smithryansmith If that really was the case, huge names like Roger Ebert, Leonard Maltin, Richard Roeper, and Gene Siskel, wouldn't even become well known, in the world of movie reviews.
@@chrisfinch8637 would have been a better world then
@@smithryansmith A world without those big named movie critics, would definetly be something different. But, those legendary critics, like Ebert and Siskel, really go down in history, as one of the iconic duos of the last century, no matter how good, bad, controversial their past reviews were.
@@chrisfinch8637 And when they crap on an excellent film like this, it shows how competely useless they were. Audiences are better off deciding for themselves. Again, theirs was a pointless existence of creating nothing, just critisizing.
If Siskel & Elbert were more familiar with the source material, they might’ve better understood and appreciated this film.
Don't totally agree with Siskel and Ebert. First of all, they didn't even mention the epic music of Wagner, and Nigel Terry as Arthur was wonderful.
stealing great pre-existing music for your movie is lame.
@@nikosvault It can't be stealing if it's public domain.
@@nikosvault wtf does that even mean? such a broad statement, almost all great filmmakers have used pre-existing music for their films: Scorsese, Kubrick, Coppola, Tarantino etc.
Aren't you forgetting the music of Carl Orff ?
To quote the Grim Reaper from ‘The Meaning of Life,’ “well, you’re dead now, so shut up.”
Interesting. Grim (literally), but interesting. It's too bad they already gave their unique takes on the movie, from THAT long ago, though. They are forever missed.
This is perhaps the only review I would absolutely, categorically disagree with both Siskel and Ebert on. Even to wonder, "Were we watching the same movie?" John Boorman put a decade's worth of care and work into this, and it all shows up on the screen. If anybody can make a better King Arthur movie, prove it to me.
I'm amused by the fans decrying S&E for not liking this movie. You do know that it's totally fine for people to disagree about art, right? Two people can watch the same film, in the same theatre even, and walk out with completely different experiences and views. Liking the movie doesn't make you "right," any more than disliking it makes the other person "wrong."
The movie looked great, but didn't connect with them, and (here's a life lesson) that's perfectly okay.
i think I saw this on its opening weekend. More than once, i'm sure. LOVED it! Wish my VCR hadn't gone extinct a few years ago. I still have a couple of boxes of VHS tapes, and 'Excalibur' is among them.
I loved it as well. I have only one complaint with this movie: On the director's commentary, John Boorman is hard to listen to, with LOTS of "ums" and "uhs" and long pauses, like he's doing his taxes while doing the commentary. But the movie itself is, in my opinion, the greatest King Arthur legend movie of all time. The music, from the beginning, is extraordinary as well. I believe this was Liam Neeson's first movie (and one of Patrick Stewart's first as well - still with no hair...)
By the way, I picked up a used VCR at Goodwill a couple of years ago for $7 and it works perfectly (though no TV to connect it to nowadays!). Or, Excalibur can be found on Blu-Ray or DVD for just a few dollars. www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000Q66JXA/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=excalibur+dvd&qid=1573690825&sr=8-1
These guys obviously had no poetry in their souls. And failed as reviewers for this movie. Its a classic. S&E....you missed it. RIP
Wow. They fucked up this one. They lived at a golden time and didn't even know it. Too bad they didn't live to see the crap that passes for movies now.....
So funny, considering that so many now consider it to be the best King Arthur movie, including myself. Love it
I completely disagree with them. I do agree that Merlin is brilliant. This film thrilled me from the opening scene. My absolute favorite of the King Arthur legend.
Unless Siskel, but especially Ebert, were reviewing hard dramas or Oscar-type pictures or huge popcorn movies where the goal of the film was obviously for pure fun and entertainment, they typically missed badly on their takes. They were atrocious on comedies and anything that was somewhat niche like many Sci fi and fantasy films, They couldn't understand the audience they were made for. They were to be taken seriously, yet we're not traditional high drama genres and featured subject matter which they didnt understand. They didn't get what made Excalibur so good. They didn't get that it was the best depiction of Arthurian legend ever put on film. They didn't get that no one had every seen anything like it before. They didn't get that it was LOTR before LOTR could be put on the big screen in live action. They also totally missed the score and the mystical quality of it all. They tried too hard to break down every line of every actor instead of looking at the whole of the parts. It's one of the worst misses they ever had. The film ensures 40 yrs later for a reason that they totally couldnt see.
@Rhys Henville I guess not. I'd hope you don't have to have Celtic heritage to appreciate the film, because its themes were pretty universal I thought...good versus evil and such.
I didn't really know anything of the Arthur legend yet this film blew me away and still holds up 2 or 3 sittings later.
My all time favorite film
Good choice it's great I Love it too
Another Hellen miren movie I highly recommend is no the long good friday
Is not no
@@michaelorick2197 Is that a deliberate double negative? If not, what is their favorite film? This is obviously a subjective post.
I thought the characters were well delineated. It's a fantasy movie, these two are complaining why it's not realistic, lol.
Ebert also hated Highlander and Gladiator. He had terrible taste.
I guess they were expecting Shakespeare.
Two "no" votes for EXCALIBUR? Gimme a freaking break, guys. I think this must be one of those where Roger had a pizza delivered to the theater and half-watched the movie for ten minutes before going home and typing up a bad review.
Love this movie. Epic music and story.
Roger Boorman did and excellent job in telling the story of the boy who would be king. The fact the helen and nico had a bad relationship between each other they still make a great pair on screen.
I'm certain that tension actually (ironically?) brought out the best in them.
John Boorman?
I disagreed with them on this one.
This is seriously one of the greatest movies ever filmed.. 👍👍👍👍
Beautiful film and let’s not forget the great score!
The decision to move Trevor Jones' music into underscore and center the big pieces around Wagner and Orff paid off incredibly memorably.
Then in the future, Roger Ebert royally misses the boat on Gladiator that he practically gets into a fight with a woman critic that is as memorable as the many disagreements Siskel and Ebert had.
I agreed with him on Gladiator.
I absolutely agreed with him on Gladiator. Today I think it is just on the side of being good but very overrated.
This film was great for late night pot heads like myself. The film really told the entire story of King Arthur and Camelot not excluding any of the characters, not even Jesus. A great epic for late night teenaged pot heads to lay back and trip out on and into. HBO used to be good place for easy heads to rest.
@Jim Notor LOL!!!!!!!
Excalibur was great when it came out. I thought they liked it too. I guess I was wrong. I seen almost every show on wttw when I was a kid. It was great 👍
This movie is such a classic, one of my favorites of all time.
Curiously, EXCALIBUR is basically a Merlin vs. Morgana story. (Helen Mirren's at her hottest here!) Arthur comes off as a secondary character, less a great man than a man wrestling with great forces.
My favorite line comes after Merlin tries to catch a fish in a brook with his bare hands but just ends up soaked. He tells Arthur, "Remember, there's always something cleverer than you!"
As vivid as much of the movie is--kudos to cinematographer Alex Thomson--the story does get vague in the second half when the knights head out to find the grail. (What IS the Holy Grail?)
Arthur says as much all through the film. "What does it mean to be King?", and many other lines that prove he's just a good man caught up in an avalanche, doing the best he can. He's never in control, he's Destinies Fool, but he's really no fool. He's brave, and honorable, and he does all the right things. He even opens his arms to Morgana AND Mordred. And in the end evil is vanquished, utterly. But the King has no Heir. Thus ends the story of King Arthur, always.
They are absolutely wrong here. This movie is a classic and as 9 year old I knew it then. Best version of King Arthur until Clive Owen in 2004.
They are absolutely wrong here. This movie is a classic and as 9 year old I knew it then. Best version of King Arthur -until Clive Owen in 2004- .
Fixed.
This movie is a masterpiece. These guys seemed to be sleeping half of the movie. This is the best depiction of this saga I've ever seen. It is dark, magical, mysterious, and haunting. It is an ADULT version of the legend, and it is done so well. Seen this movie at least ten times. Can see it ten more times. This reminds me of why I hate "professional" critics. Their lack of intelligence is what is on display here, not the movie itself.
Sometimes I think they are trying to appear more intelligent than they really are.
My sister really used to love this movie.
By far, the best arthurian legend movie ever made.
Imdb 7.4
Need a mulligan, guys?
Should be an 8 rating at least.
My favourite film of all time!
Helen Mirren looking damn good
I figured any nerd would love this movie, but Siskel and Ebert are on another level.
Wow these two ever miss the mark
I agree with them about everything they said about the movie but I still love it anyway. Especially Merlin.
I'm not sure exactly what they were expecting Boorman to do. When approaching Arthurian legend, a preference generally has to be decided between mythical scope and individual character. The preference in this film is clearly for the mythical, the mysterious, the otherworldly. That's why the magical characters Morgana and Merlin are so successful. However, to then want the rest of the players to act like something out of a kitchen-sink drama is a really disjointed expectation that surely would have sunk the film, had it been realized. The characters are as delineated as they need and ought to be. Paying some attention to the musical selections from Wagner and Orff should have given them a real thematic clue; but neither of them seems to know much about music and they rarely bring it up as an important or even overtly indicating aspect of a film's creative choices. Add to that one of the finest ensemble casts working seamlessly together and a completely unforgettable, unified cinematographic and directorial vision and .. what more do these guys want?!
What a stupid review. Movie is timeless. I get 1000 goosebumps in this movie, and they are focusing most insignificant part in the whole movie - chemistry between Morgana and Merlin. Haha.
I loved this movie though.
Tobey Starburst Touche. And Helen Mirren was so hot in it.
Helen Mirren was hot, I also like the green light that was always around and Wagner.
This is not only the best film on king Arthur but 1 of the best movies ever on middle ages. How did these intelligent men not understand that??
I agree with them completely and yet I've watched it several times. Helen Mirren alone is worth watching.
Although I enjoy this movie a lot, its for the same reasons that they mention and I have to agree with their points. I have a fondness for the period and subject, but the movie has problems.
I love this film! As well as Boorman's other film Zardoz.
What about the emerald Forest? It’s really underrated
Boorman also did Deliverance and Hope & Glory which are both decent films.
I loved Excalibur, but I have to disagree with you about Zardoz.
@@johnfitzpatrick3094 It's an acquired taste. ☺️
I like Boorman's work. Excalibur and Zardoz are both overly mystical, overstuffed with subplots, murky plotlines, outdoors nudist scenes, and yet I still really like his work. Zardoz especially plays like a kind of The Day After Meets Lord of The Rings.
The only problem I had with the film is that I never bought into Arthur's love for Guinevere. There were just no sparks...beyond that...I loved the film.
I think that was part of the point. The first "royal marriage," so to speak. Done to unite the land, not because their love was electric or even passionate.
I love the boys even when i disagreed. Great analysis....
I understand their issues but even so, the performances worked for me and I still very much enjoy this movie. Actually I think it's the only King Arthur movie adaption I like. =P
I'm absolutely shocked! I haven't seen this film but I heard only good things about it. However, my mood went down a bit when Gene mentioned the director also did Deliverance which I thought was meh.
This movie is a paradox: It is a bad movie, yet watchable and people enjoy it which makes it a good movie. But it's still bad, but I like it, therefore it's good.
I have loved this movie but, a lot of the acting is completely awful. I would think of this as more of a cult classic that's loved as nostalgia and it really is defined as one of the best fantasy movies. It's still pretty bad as a whole though with flashes of brilliance. Doesn't make me love it any less though.
I still watch now and then. That movie kicks ass.
This new learning interests me, Sir Bedevere. Explain to me again how sheep’s bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.
Excalibur is an excellent movie. Siskel and Ebert were buffoons. 😊
It was a great movie a definite thumbs up 👍
Ebert gave Camelot, which is the musical version of King Arthur, 4 stars!
Oh dear...
proof they were movie critics and not movie fans, Excalibur is a classic
Excalibur was a wonderful film, and they said thumbs down???
i love fantasy movies, but this one is a mess. the dubbing is dreadful, its slow and way too shiny. helen mirren is a goddess as always tho
Usually, I respect what Siskel and Ebert have to say, even when they rip on movies that I like, but they really dropped the ball here. At least they appreciate the production design and Nicol Williamson’s performance as Merlin.
0:45 Wait, isn't this Sir Guy of Gisbourne from "Robin of Sherwood"? 😁
One of my favourite films.
BTW they were out of step with the majority of critics at the time. They just didn't personally get that kind of mythic, psychologically symbolic approach to film making. Which is all cool of course.
I don't agree with every point they made here, but I think they did hit on the main problem of Excalibur: you simply cannot encompass the entirety of Arthurian legend in a two hour movie; it really needs the Game of Thrones treatment to do it justice.
You don't know whether to laugh or cry as the power of the film clips underscores the foolishness of both S&E to give thumbs down to this masterwork.
Then as I was scrolling through the comments for signs of sanity, I caught a thumbnail of a suggested video: S&E's review of Popeye (1980). Final quote by Ebert from that review:
"Two enthusiastic yes votes for that one"
_validated_
Popeye? What a steaming pile.
Watched it again last night. Prob 10 tines now. Still holds up 40 years on. Masterpiece. They never even mentioned the score, which is perfect.
I actually loved this movie when I saw it when i was a kid.
Excellent movie
These two were in drugs. Excalibur is a brilliant masterpiece. This is why I don’t listen to movie critics.
Morty pythons and the holy grail is my favorite
Harlan Ellison thought this movie was bunk; so did these two. But, however, HE viewed *The Dark Crystal* with much delight, unlike Gene and Roger.
Harlan Ellison was highly talented. He was also a bit of a ...
@@thursoberwick1948 Egomaniac? Harlan Ellison thought every other story ripped off his work. If he was still alive, he'd probably threaten to sue me just for writing this.
@@gpwerner I wasn't thinking of that word! I think he was talented but I wouldn't put him at the very top. He probably was plagiarised, many are.
I was 15 at the time and I saw it 4 times. I just love the film so much! So much reminded me of Star Wars too.
This is why I never pay any attention to movie critics. Excalibur is one of the greatest movies of all time, and the best King Arthur movie ever. My personal favorite of all time.
If either man had a chance (sadly, they have both passed), I wonder if upon viewing this again, they would change their minds. I get the impression that Ebert allowed himself to evolve, but Siskel never changed his mind about anything. Ebert could give qualified regard for a film, praising its high points, but Siskel seemed to only endorse a film if he liked EVERY aspect of it.
Regardless of the few misgivings they had for the movie, they were far too harsh to give it 'thumbs down".
Excalibur kicks ass.
40 years later and this epic is still the greatest, those two clowns are long dead and long forgotten.....
and yet here you are.
@@nikosvault and you make two......
I LOVED everyone they voted NO.
But yeah I love Excalibur.
I remember when it came out. Was OK. Definitely an attraction to the D&D geeks at the time. A good friend of mine must have seen it 10 times.
I was never into the mythology of Camelot and Excalibur til I saw this movie . When I was a kid I was into James Bond and kid comics like Richie Rich and action movies and shows . I saw this movie and it blew me away , especially with the music . I STILL disagree with the both of Gene and Roger . This is one of the best movies I've ever seen .
Wow, they were way off on this one.
Well, they didn't like Jaws at first, either.