Perfectly adorable

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

(Possible Spoilers) As a fan of the eye-filling costume spectacle, I don't expect deep thoughts and careful characterization. I can even tolerate minor anachronisms. However, the story and the actions of the characters still need to make some sense, and that is where "The Black Knight" begins to fall apart.Several enormous castles are shown in this story, which implies a violent society requiring serious defenses. However, the castle of the hero's amour is invaded by Viking cavalry—horned helmets and all!—who ride in without significant resistance. There do not even appear to be any sentries watching for trouble; everyone is chowing down at the dinner table.The Vikings trash the place, and upon their retreat, the hero pursues their leader a few fields distant…to Camelot. In fact, all of the locations seem to be a horse-gallop away from each other, which is convenient, and easy on the horses.Returning to the ruined castle (thehero does a lot of to-ing and fro-ing along the same wooded trail. The horses must know the way.) the hero finds his former lord in a demented state, with only his daughter, the hero's would-be amour caring for him. The place is a smoldering pile of smoking debris; does the hero take the surviving pair to Camelot where they at least will have shelter and something to eat? NO!!! He leaves them there amid the ruins! What a guy! There are other lapses like this.There are some deeply strange scenes, most notably Stonehenge full of dancing pagans bringing Margaret Murray's theories to life. The hero—who in the course of a week or so learns all the fighting arts of a knight—disguised as The Black Knight, rescues his amour from pagan sacrifice. I must have dozed off, because she was wearing a wig as a would-be sacrifice, and I have no recollection why she was wearing the wig.King Arthur is miserably stupid in this movie, and there is no Guinevere. The Bad Guy is Sir Palomides, a Saracen knight who DID appear in some of the Arthur stories, but he wasn't in league with renegade Cornishmen or crazed Stonehenge pagans. Peter Cushing is fun to watch in this role.I love secret passages, and this movie has one roomy enough for the hero to run through! Following the passage, he eavesdrops on conspirators. Perhaps he is hard of hearing, because he doesn't just listen; he opens up a secret panel allowing nearly a full-length view of him with the Evildoers five feet away! The movie goes on and on and on—can someone tell me what a bunch of armed horsemen are going to do to attack a castle? And why the castle archers expose themselves to enemy fire? The painting of Camelot is a fantasy medieval castle on steroids. It is enormous, but we never see much of the interior. I would hate to have to pay the heating/air conditioning bills.The helmets of Arthur's knights are strange…possibly inspired by the helmets of the Teutonic Knights in "Alexander Nevsky." Just like Zorro, our hero sheds his Simple Blacksmith Clothes for the (unique) short-sleeved armor et alia of The Black Knight—more aptly The Big Black Bird Knight. He stashes his horse somewhere out of sight, too. Unlike Zorro, he does not have a plausible hidey hole for his changing room and horsekeeping headquarters. He just appears and rides for the next castle.Except for the crowns, which look like the paper crowns Burger King gives away, none of this looks cheap, but the writing and acting sink any chance this movie had. The Faux Old Timey English grates on the brain. Alan Ladd doesn't help.It is all exhausting, watching all the going back and forth between various castles and other hangouts. I think I would have found this one annoying when I was ten years old.

1954's "The Black Knight" marked the coming out for Peter Cushing's screen career, his top villain Sir Palamides outshining Alan Ladd's miscast hero John, serving King Mark of Cornwall (Patrick Troughton) as they perform their pagan misdeeds disguised as Vikings in trying to overthrow King Arthur (Anthony Bushell) and Christianity. In just his second feature, Harry Andrews appears all too briefly as the Earl of Yeonil, but Andre Morell shines as Sir Ontzlake, who teaches John the skills he needs to win, but to wait until they can confirm the treachery of the sly Palamides (actors Bryan Forbes and Dennis O'Keefe are credited with 'additional dialogue'). Wearing earrings, hair carefully curled, bearing a faintly Arabian accent that makes each line a cherished treasure, the bearded Cushing is a menacing, awesome sight, his blue eyes accentuated by his dark skin, certainly a match for his idol Basil Rathbone in either "The Adventures of Robin Hood" or "The Mark of Zorro." For an actor who loved Westerns and derring do, this would remain a cherished role that Christopher Lee would get to play far more often. This was only the first of six times that Cushing would be paired with Andre Morell, most memorably as Holmes and Watson in 1958's "The Hound of the Baskervilles." Like Cushing a future Dr. Who, Patrick Troughton was so prolific on television that he rarely strayed from horror on screen, working again opposite his evil cohort in both "The Gorgon" and "Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell." Though best remembered as an actor (appearing with Boris Karloff in both "Five Star Final" and "The Ghoul"), Anthony Bushell later directed Christopher Lee in 1960's "The Terror of the Tongs" (previously appearing with Lee in 1957's "Bitter Victory").

The legend of King Arthur has him first appearing in the year 412, Others have him magically working around the year 1204 A.D. Whenever; the additional time, the legend of Merlin had yet to become clear for the two. Indeed, such is the period problem for both men and that further allows script writers to use one or the other in movies, such as this one called " The Black Knight. " Regardless, the story of a King Arthur serves to place the story around the 12th century and that means whatever you've learned about King Arthur is probably confusing enough, so the less said the better. Here in with all it's inaccuracies is the tale of a young man, who works as a Blacksmith, though throughout the movie he is seen doing very little in that trade. However, Alan Ladd plays John a lowly smith making swords and in love with Linet (Patricia Medina) a Nobel man's daughter when he learns of treachery in the royal court. The heavy is interestingly enough the late great Peter Cushing, who's ambition is to kill the king, usurp the throne and take over England. The thought behind the film is exciting enough, but don't expect Ladd to be as swashbuckling as Errol Flynn or Tyrone Power. He is alright, but lacks masterly resolve and despite his ornate helmet, does little to improve his stature. The movie is theater quality and one could be entertained readily enough, But don't expect too much, so enjoy the movie, after all, that what counts. ****.

This is one of those films which is so bad it is actually enjoyable.The film is presumably set in the 9th or 10th century.However we see Saracens,what on earth are they doing in England?The armour worn by the knights and the structure of the castles is clearly 15th and 16th century and the dresses worn by the women are from the medieval period.You don't see a lot of Alan Ladd as he always seems to have his helmet visor drawn over his face to enable the stunt man to take over for the more strenuous scenes.He is in many ways a sad shadow of his forties self on a very steep decline.Peter Cushing as a swarthy Scaracen easily steals the acting honours