First Knight

A handsome, entertaining twist on the King Arthur legend. Read full review

First Knight has all the elements of a crowd-pleaser. Read full review

Whenever Zucker stops piling on battle scenes as if he were directing Braveheart, his film casts a romantic spell. Read full review

First Knight is sublime summer entertainment, from the passion and beauty and grace of its stars to the thrust of its drama to the awe of its spectacle. [07 Jul 1995]

As with many Hollywood epics, the movie glosses over inconvenient details and takes more than a few creative liberties. Yet First Knight dazzles. The spectacle of Connery charging into battle or Camelot glimmering in the distance makes it a most satisfying romp. [07 Jul 1995, p.5G]

There is a sweet, simple tale at the center of this overstuffed epic. And sometimes, its romanticism manages to shine through all the picture-book pomp. [07 Jul 1995, p.17]

Inspired by the grand Technicolor epics of Hollywood yesteryears, First Knight, despite its flaws, is engaging fun. [07 Jul 1995, p.03]

Knight is a medieval festival for the eye and ear, with rich blue hues and stirring fanfares. [07 Jul 1995, p.1D]

Literate, sober-minded and almost rigorously chaste, First Knight sweeps the viewer up in the doings of these impressive, larger-than-life characters and offers a credible portrait of regal personages whose priorities are well sorted. Read full review

It's a nicely chained movie melody of high adventure, of both the heart and the battlefield, set, of course, in the golden city of Camelot. [27 Jul 1995]

Zucker gives the Camelot legend a makeover and rediscovers its humanizing fire. He has made a true adult fairy tale, only with a heart of glass. Read full review

First Knight, despite its unfortunate title, is not a stupid film, just a mostly flat and talky one. It's gorgeously crafted and filled with goodwill, but it's more admirable than genuinely compelling or moving, much less ablaze with conviction. It's got the trappings, but not the inner fire. [07 Jul 1995, p.27]

First Knight manages to fill the screen with enough swashbuckling to keep things interesting for a while. [07 Jul 1995, p.29]

A generally entertaining schmaltzy melodrama, as long as you are not overly reverent about traditional versions of the Arthurian legend and can get over William Nicholson's sometimes clumsy dialogue. [07 Jul 1995, p.3E]

The three leads make a decent fist of it, but they're somewhat let down by a script that fails to sparkle and a less-than-perfect balance of action and emotion. Read full review

Aside from Gere, First Knight acquits itself honorably enough. Read full review

This expensive, star-heavy retake on the Arthurian legend works well enough as Hollywood Gothic hokum: Connery is his usual reliable self as the renowned first among equals; Ormond is quite excellent as a thoroughly modern maiden torn between love and duty; and Gere's fearless Lancelot may be about as medieval as a roller disco but still has charm and athleticism (less Lancelot du Lac than Lancelot du Lacquer). Read full review

The movie is entertaining enough in its own way, and Sean Connery makes a splendid King Arthur, but compared with the earlier films this one seems thin and unconvincing. Read full review

Sean Connery is perfect for the King Arthur role. Too bad he isn't given more to do than stand around looking regal. Read full review

The great Cornish king becomes merely a corny one as the tale devolves into a compromise between the principles of Camelot and of Hollywood. Read full review

Excali-BORE, Gere as Lancelot lost-a-lot; inaccurate. Read full review

First Knight lurches between swashbuckling spectacular and Idyll soap opera. There's swordplay to the hilt, but the story itself never quite gets in Gere. Read full review

First Knight isn't sparkling enough to be a legend, isn't grubby enough for realistic drama or bad enough to completely dismiss. Call it a near-myth. [07 Jul 1995, p.6]

Despite desperate efforts to sell this umpteenth recycling of the Camelot legend as a Sean Connery vehicle, it's Richard Gere's film and he's not much of a Lancelot. Read full review

A somewhat double-edged Arthurian romance. There's a sharp side, with Sean Connery the noblest of kings, Julia Ormond an impressive Guinevere, and some genuinely epic imagery; on the blunt side, the tragedy is Camelot-via-Tinseltown: Richard Gere's Lancelot is far from convincing and the armour is just too shiny. [31 Dec 2005, p.49]

The romance is unexpectedly chaste, and the violence muted. [07 Jul 1995, p.23]

It's not that First Knight is a terrible, embarrassing piece of junk; it's just a film of stunning averageness and not really good or bad enough to make any kind of a lasting impression which, depending on your point of view, may be even worse than a total failure. Read full review

The movie satisfies a basic need to see pageantry, pomp and pennants flying over the Cornish countryside. But if you're expecting a story that sticks to the Arthurian legend, this is Scam-a-lot. [07 Jul 1995, p.1F]

The Arthurian legend has received a wide variety of treatments over the years, but this safe, sanitized American version drains the juice smack out of a notorious romantic triangle. [07 Jul 1995]

Maybe the Arthurian legend is unfilmable. There has never been a successful cinematic adaptation. There still isn't. Bad films are forgivable. First Knight is not. [07 Jul 1995, p.H3]