Good movie but grossly overrated

Better Late Then Never

A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

This initially promising entry in the sword and sorcery stakes boasts a well-known cast of British personalities and a fun opening sequence involving Sean Connery's Green Knight. Unfortunately this is the best part of the film and what follows is below average stuff; a poorly-edited mish-mash of episodic adventures lacking in both clarification and continuity. Now, I know the dreaded Golam-Globus partnership produced this mess but this is below the standards of even their usual Chuck Norris movies. One of the many problems with SWORD OF THE VALIANT is that it doesn't know what kind of film it wants to be. One minute it's a Saturday morning matinée type adventure in the style of THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, complete with athletic stunts and lots of sword fighting, and the next it's a silly comedy with some truly appalling scripted lines which fail to be funny. Then a romance comes along and drags the pacing down and the overlong running time makes it feel like a three hour long bloated epic of a movie.In the end it's the editing which kills this film off and drags the entertainment value down. Some individual scenes in themselves actually aren't bad and are quite entertaining, especially the action bits. Director Stephen Weeks (one-time horror director with I, MONSTER) handles the camera well and creates a visually interesting film. As for the special effects, well, apart from the cheap disappearing unicorn/invisible ring shots, they're low budget but fun. I especially liked Sean Connery's decapitation at the beginning of the film complete with ultra-cheesy model head used. The weird red toad effect was...interesting as well.Miles O'Keefe takes the action hero leading role of Sir Gawain. Sadly, his ridiculously-bewigged performance isn't one of his better parts and his fighting skills seem to consist of him swinging a sword around randomly trying to not hit the other actors or furniture. Although he's wooden, the camera takes ample opportunity to show off his muscular torso and he strips off more times than Sybil Danning would in one of her films. As for the supporting cast, well it's nice to see all the familiar faces but nobody really puts in a good performance here. Actors are usually over the top or understated, to one extreme, which is never too hot. Sean Connery probably comes off the best as the hilarious Green Knight, decked out in a leafy suit of armour, a ludicrous wig (which looks like a mop) and green-painted skin. He hams it up a treat and adds to the film during his brief appearances.Lots of stalwart British talent on view. Trevor Howard plays it up as a grumpy wizened king whilst Douglas Wilmer is very effective as the evil Black Knight. Ronald Lacey (who incidentally is reprising his role from a previous 1973 version of the tale, again directed by Weeks) is the snivelling evil bad guy again and seems to be pretty much accustomed to the typecast part. It's great to see Wilfrid Brambell in one of his last roles before he died as the grumpy porter, and horror legend Peter Cushing makes a welcome appearance as a court aide but is sadly underused. Cyrielle Claire is plain ineffectual as the romantic interest. Despite the many flaws this film contains, those interested in medieval legends and the movies will want to check it out because some of it isn't bad. It's just a shame that some disaster happened post-production and turned it into such a tiresome ordeal.

...And he will thankfully in literature but not this cinematic garbage. The Medieval poem "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" is a wonderfully layered poem about old and new, good and evil, pure and tainted. This movie basically rips all the subtext from that work and throws it away so it can add nonsense like the Green Knight turning a sorceress into a red frog. Some mythological land where a woman wants Gawain for his body. Then there is the sub-story about some renegade marauders fighting for an evil baron who take in men just from anywhere to fight in their army. None of this makes much sense. The whole Arthur storyline was excised as well. Forget Gawain being a paragon of virtue and chastity. Here we get pretty boy-look-a-lot-like-a-lady Miles O'Keefe - who as another reviewer noted - creeps me out too! Sean Connery looks ridiculous as the Green Knight spouting out drivel. The whole end of the poem as well as the mid-section are totally changed. In the poem the Green Knight has three whacks at Gawain for Gawain had unwittingly stayed at his castle and received three kisses from the lord, Sir Bertilak's wife. He praises Gawain for his purity and righteousness. Here we get some lame ending about the seasons. We also get a fat monk who steals, a Sancho Panza-like Humphreys, and a host of characters not ever imagined in the poem. Director Stephen Weeks did this as his last film. That says sooo much right there. The acting is dreadful with O'Keefe looking like Fabio at every turn. Poor Sean Connery. I felt bad for Ronald Lacey(always good at playing bad guys like the Nazi leader in Raiders of the Lost Ark)and Trevor Howard just as the King - though for what reason I am unable to fathom was not called King Arthur like he was in the poem. Was it copyrighted by an anonymous poet from the 14th century? The gal who plays the love interest is beautiful but always covered. Alas! Woe is me! Then there is Peter Cushing - an actor for whom I have an incredibly soft spot for in my heart of hearts. This was either his second or third to last film. He is in his early 70s and as always good. Shame this had to be one of his last projects. He did do the film as a favor no doubt for Weeks as he directed Cushing in I , Monster - Weeks's best film to be sure. And the final insult to injury is the over-the-top, totally misplaced musical score. It resonates loudly throughout without any other effect than an incredible annoyance. The film is also cheap-looking in that 80s cheap movie way. Despite what might have been a very good cast, this film - in a word - reeks!

Now...can we take any movie seriously, whose awful soundtrack is a boring copy of the HE-MAN cartoons soundtrack? I feel sorry because this movie is NOT one's typical B production...they shot scenes in lavish locations in England, Wales and France, and were thus beyond typical B stuff... However, this is yet another Golan-Globus-Cannon actioner that turns out awful. Barren the barely decent Connery & Cushing, lead actors seem out of a high school rehearsal; O'Keefe stars as not-so-clever low-steroid musclehead. The storyline is interesting, but what you watch on the screen isn't after all... It's supposedly a deeply philosophical quest for the self and what you watch is a Richard Pryor thing. When the second red knight uses the sword, you clearly see it's fake and not a real sword. I won't watch it again.

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