Memorable, crazy movie

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

This is an intriguing look at the King Arthur legend and all its spin-offs. I believe the movie was based on a book of the same name, which purported to tell the story from the women's point of view. This view appears to include more magic and goddess culture than the standard version, and is quite an interesting interpretation, lending a "behind the scenes" feeling to the various plot twists. Angelica Huston is marvelous as the powerful Lady of the Lake, supported by an excellent cast (although I confess at times I found it a bit difficult to recall the players without a program). Lovely sets, costumes, hairstyles are icing on the cake.

I was very excited when I learned that my favorite book, "The Mists of Avalon," was being made into a mini-series. Unfortunately, the title and characters were the only things this mini-series has in common with the book. Now I realize that this was a long book and that some parts of the storyline would have had to be sacrificed but there were major events and even a few main characters that were simply not there. The basic spirit of the story was gone and the storyline mangled almost beyond recognition. The book's author, Marion Zimmer Bradley, must surely be spinning in her grave. I believe she would be greatly disappointed with this adaptation of her truly wonderful and innovative tale of the women who were the real strength and power of Camelot. Do yourself a favor. Skip this mini-series and read the book.

As the stories of Arthurian legend (maybe myth?) have evolved through re-tellings and expansions over the centuries, this retelling also goes in directions from Marion Zimmer Bradley's book, which openly created a different presentation and interpretation of the stories of Camelot. Morgan Le Fay, demonised in the Tennyson presentation where she had been a somewhat neutral character in previous renditions. Viviane had been the villain of most renditions meanwhile. I cannot profess to have read every telling over the years of the Arthurian tales, but being a student of multiple religious faiths including "English paganism" (not simply that of the Druids, but also the little people) I can see much of the potential of the book.Unfortunately, the faith issue was not the topic of the movie, nor was the ability of Arthur, first through force against the Saxons, and then through conversion to Christianity of those same Saxons, to unite England. Instead we have the Saxons still attacking at the end in the movie. Instead, we have characters as sculpted in the book presented in a low budget production with leaps in the story meant for people that haven't read the book to get a sense of the voices. Acting does accomplish some leaps over problems in the story, but read the book, read the early texts, maybe then read the Tennyson rendition.Could a big screen rendition handle this better? I doubt it would have enough time for the stories along the way, which contrary to the view of the director explain much of the book. A mini-series, as this originally was, with another two hours (this is already 183 minutes) could have better developed key aspects, such as Lancelot's marriage, and the important plotting Morgaine undertakes in Wales, as well as Gwenhwyfar's abduction and Igraine's death. Even the death of Viviane and Raven's prophecies were mishandled, losing key understandings of the different faiths. Maybe somebody with the time, budget, and in need of a sweeps blockbuster will try again, but then again, maybe the tale works only when transferred from the words on the page to the images of the mind.Maybe the best that can be done with cinema is either the musical Camelot, or Monty Python and the Holy Grail - the Arthurian tales are too broad to cover in one presentation. That said, the migratory sparrows are dropping more coconuts around here, I need to go pick them up.

I enjoyed this movie, but the book is even better. However, it does make you look at the Camelot stories in a different light. Morgaine was always made out to be an evil manipulative woman out to destroy King Arthur. This story gives a totally different perspective. You get to see how she was manipulated into having relations with Arthur without her knowledge. She had Mordred taken from her and raised by her sister to be a man who only wanted to destroy Arthur and Morgaine in order to take the throne and have power. In the end, Morgaine was the only person who truly cared about Arthur and made sure to take him home to Avalon at his death.