"Guinevere"
Moving away from the introductory episodes of Starz new series Camelot may further disappoint some who were looking for a series that rivaled Spartacus in terms of sex and violence, as Episode 3 entitled Guinevere focuses more on improving the story than displaying blood, guts and flesh.
Guinevere focuses obviously on the character of Guinevere and the awkward situation which revealed itself in Episode 2 (The Sword and the Crown), where Arthur discovers she is to be married to one of his trusted men, Leontes. When Guinevere's village is pillaged she and her family travel to Camelot to seek refuge, it appears the marriage between herself and Leontes will have to be put on hold, that is until Merlin suggests they have the ceremony at Camelot. Merlin is aware of Arthur's love for Guinevere but wants nothing to stand in his way of the challenges that soon await him, the quicker Guinevere is married the better, for everyone. Arthur tries to persuade her to not go through with the marriage, which leads to a brief "fling" on the beach, but even though it's clear Guinevere has a real love for Arthur he still ends up becoming the odd man out.
Meanwhile Morgan is continuing her sinister plans to become ultimate ruler of Britain, but those plans still seem to be rather clouded, and she appears to be suffering some of the effects of her practice of dark magic. She invites Arthur to her castle that they might get to know one another, and Merlin tags along out of protection for the King. Everything seems to be rather normal until Morgan drugs Merlin and chains him a bed post, not in a kinky way but more in an attempt to prove her worthiness as a sorceress and tempt Merlin to use his powers to free himself. Obviously her invitation had some ulterior motives, those are ever so slightly revealed at the episodes conclusion.
In terms of acting and the overall quality of the story (not the episode as a whole), Guinevere is easily the most balanced of the first three episodes thus far, which can be a good and bad thing. Balanced in the terms that no one performance stands out as great or horrible, and with the absence of any action the story is given an undivided attention and a fuller amount of detail. But it's certain that this episode is only going to fuel the fire of those who claim the series is dull and uneventful, those who would like to see all discernible boundaries removed as in Starz Spartacus. Personally, I like the restraint the writers are taking in this series, I've never found overwhelming amounts of violence a nudity anything but a unnecessary replacement for a story that's incredibly lacking. Granted this episode is not brilliant but it shows some improvement in the categories that make a good series, overall character performances and more attention to detail.
With that said there are still some areas of the episode which slightly annoyed me due to it's predictability to the norm. First of all Arthur's quick acceptance of his step sister's invitation, especially after Episode 2 The Sword and the Crown ended with her essentially telling him she wasn't going to give up until she had what she wanted. Then this episode she invites him to dinner as an "ally" and Arthur doesn't stop to think it's a trap? Obviously Merlin is weary, which is why he joins him but even he gets sloppy and allows himself to be drugged.
The other predictable moment is Guinevere going through with the wedding even though it's obvious she doesn't love Leontes and is quite smitten with Arthur. I understand this is all simply a diversion to extend the plot and revisit this at a later time but it's too cookie cutter for my tastes and it would have been nice to have seen a new spin thrown into the mix. Why couldn't Guinevere not marry Leontes due to her love for Arthur? Arthur is the King for crying out loud, if Leontes was the King and Arthur a servant her resistance would have made a little more sense, but Guinevere marrying Leontes solely because it's the man her mother liked doesn't fly for me in this situation, because it' all simply done to be able to milk the situation more throughout the series.
7/10
OK, episode three... I'm one of those who will say that so far 'Camelot' has been pretty dull and uneventful, but it's that which bothers me. It's the lack of truly interesting characters, characters for whom I care about.
ReplyDeleteYou've mentioned 'Spartacus'; all the excessive amounts of sex and violence aside, each character in that show was well-written. If not that, then at least the actor who played it managed to pull the character out of mediocrity. Starting with the brilliant John Hannah as Batiatus who stole the show, every one had something to invoke either hate or love from the viewer. Sometimes both. Either way, they all had screen presence.
I find that in 'Camelot' very lacking, now that they've killed of James Purefoy's King Lot. Only Morgan and Merlin come close to having some charisma on screen, while others are completely 'meh'. I feel like this show is, even though we're three episodes in, still going nowhere. Things do happen, but they're presented in such a way that it feels to me like nothing's actually happening. Also, truth to be told, this show could use some action - like a friendly rivalry duel between Leontes and Gawain, in this episode specifically.
And lastly, Arthur annoy me as hell. I know he's supposed to be the 'boy grows up and matures' type of characters, but they've gone too far one the 'boy' thing, to the point I can barely stand that wimpy blondie anymore. And from the comments on various message boards, I'm not alone in the opinion. In this episode, we've seen what kind of woman Guinevere is - a bombshell. Now, how can I in the right mind believe that a woman like THAT could fall instantly in love with a... ahem.. "man" like Arthur? OK, Leontes may not be the one she wants to spend the rest of her life with... but Arthur is?! Yeah, sure...
I'll tell you this, they should've gotten Charlie Hunnam (Jax Teller from 'Sons of Anarchy') to play Arthur, or someone like him. As it is, Jamie Campbell Bower may be just the reason for me to give up on 'Camelot' halfway through, because I seriously don't know how much longer I can stand him.
@Ventilation Shaft - I really can't argue with much of anything you've stated, except I personally don't find the show that dull, if it bored me I'd stop watching it. The characters do lack anything that makes you care about them and I do understand your frustration with the actor playing Arthur, it is a little hard to grasp that Guinevere would be interested in a seemingly weak character whose more a boy than a man. But strangely enough aside from that he hasn't annoyed me as much as I thought he would.
ReplyDeleteI do agree the series needs to ramp the action up a little, not just for the sake of action but if it validly fits into the story. I'm not too familiar with Spartacus, as I've mentioned before, I watched the first episode and was personally bored with that along with hating the CGI backdrops and campy overly used CGI blood. Camelot's a little more my cup of tea and can understand why others might not enjoy it much. So far not even I can rave about it, I simply enjoy it for a few of the actors and the fact it's something a little different than whats on basic cable.
I'm downloading first three episodes this week, and then I'm also venturing into the world of CAMELOT, it will be quite interesting for me since I'm currently finishing the third season of BBC's MERLIN :) So I'm basically not leaving Camelot :)
ReplyDelete@Dezmond - Let me know what you think, interested in your opinon, and whether or not this is one we agree on.
ReplyDeletewell, I've seen first three episodes so far, and I'm utterly disappointed. This may very well be the first historical show ever that I didn't like :(
ReplyDeleteBeside being dull, uneventful and boring as you said above, it is also quite unfocused in the sense that I don't really see the direction they are moving in. I wasn't even amazed by the sets, although the costumes are more or less nice.
The acting is either horrible (young Jamie who plays Arthur is probably the worst lead actor in a TV series I've ever seen if we don't count Anna Paquin in TRUE BLOOD. Not only that he has no talent but he is also physically unfitting of the role) or misplaced (although I generally like Fiennes as an actor his Merlin is confusing, unfocused, overly weird, unlikeable, and I'd even call his acting in this show a bit egocentric and egoistic, he pretty much ruined Merlin for me). Eva Green seems like the only one who knows what she is doing, although even she has her signature expressionless face and one-dimensional acting in this role as well, but at least she brings a certain charisma.
I'm not even sure whether to continue watching the show or not.
The only thing I truly loved was the music and the opening sequence.
@Dezmond - When the words "Eva Green seems like the only one who knows what she is doing" come from you then I know your not joking around ;P You've pretty much echoed my feelings for the series, although unlike yourself I in general really like Eva Green which is essentially the only reason I've been sticking this out and for me she's made the series an average diversion. The other characters do become bearable as you keep watching, but Merlin is always extremely bizarre (almost like a mental patient as I've come to refer to him later on). Also agree about the music and the opening sequence, if the series could be as good as that then we'd have something to talk about.
ReplyDeleteyes, the music is way too good for this show!
ReplyDeleteIt crossed my mind that the show would've been better if it was based and focused on Morgana, not on that wimpy brat Arthur.
I'm not sure the other characters will become bearable to me, since they're becoming more and more irritating :) Merlin especially. And I'm not sure why didn't the actor who plays Leontes get the role of Arthur, he has charisma and looks unlike that blond little brat who plays him, or better to say tries to play him. Even the young guy who plays his brother is more charismatic and talented.
And there's absolutely no chemistry between the characters in the show, not to mention that it has no warmth, magic nor atmosphere, just lots of empty and pointless darkness. Audience just gets nothing to love.
And I'm saying all of this as a person who liked and loved and watched absolutely all, and I repeat ALL, historical shows that were ever shown on TV.
@Dezmond - yea a Morgan show would have been the better route to go. I wouldn't really lump Camelot into "historical" genre though. The whole Arthurian legend is really more of a tale not really history, so maybe that's why your not feeling it. But all your complaints are valid. I'll be surprised if the show returns for another season (not sure how it's doing ratings wise) but if for some reason it does come back they better not kill off Morgan.
ReplyDeleteI like and watch both history and fantasy and the mix of those two. You do remember that I loved both BBC's MERLIN which also a fantasy and LEGEND OF THE SEEKER.
ReplyDeleteThe second season has already been ordered, we shall watch CAMELOT, GAME OF THRONES and BORGIAS next year too even though just THRONES was good.
@Dezmond - I haven't got into Game Of Thrones, saw the first episode which was pretty good, just haven't had the desire to catch up. Maybe I will soon with the lack of shows out now.
ReplyDelete