About a month ago on a dull evening in a hotel room, I watched the first episode of stars brand new series, Camelot, yet another retelling of the King Arthur legend. The episode I saw was the first half of the 2 hour pilot that was shown after the season finale of one of my favorite shows on television: Spartacus: Gods of the Arena. No doubt I was a bit underwhelmed by what I saw after being treated to what was In my humble opinion of the finest episodes of television ever filmed. Still, the show had a great cast, a good blend of humor, action, and mature themes to keep me interested, and left me wanting more.
Its been a month now and I have finally seen the second half of the pilot, but another show has come along and divided my attention: The Game of Thrones. Based on George R.R. Martins dark fantasy novel A Song of Ice and Fire, this production has been long awaited by its fan base and trumpeted as being one of televisions biggest productions yet. So did either of these aspiring fantasy epics live up to the hype? And which one is the best of the two? Let me break it down for you.
Camelot
This is not the first adaption of the Arthurian Legend, nor is it the first to attempt a dark and gritty direction for the age old tale. When thinking back on the various versions we have seen, the results of the efforts are often mixed ( Excalibur, the Clive Owen starring King Arthur, The BBC show Merlin) or downright bad (First Knight comes to mind), with the only truly good films being the irreverent comedy Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and the classic whimsically animated The Sword In The Stone. Arthur deserves better. SO does this new revision deliver the goods? Well yes and no. Many of the reviews and ratings showed a very positive response to the shows pilot, so the majority opinion is yes. Mine is a bit more complicated.
I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy what I saw. It did have its moments, and Joseph Fiennes Merlin is magnetic and a joy to watch. However, at times I grew bored, and in general I am a bit apathetic about the conflicts within. This is only the first two hours of the show I am talking about, so my opinion may be a bit premature, but that won't stop me from elaborating on my uninformed thoughts.
The Good
The show gets off to a great start with the murder of King Uther Pendragon at the hands of his own daughter, the Sorceress to be, Morgan(played with wonderful malice by Bond girl, Eva Green). This sets the pace for the rest of the pilot. I was never bored while I watched this show, something is always happening, and young Arthur(Jamie Cambell Bower) finds himself quickly transformed from farm boy to King. The first half of the pilot plays out like a fish out of water scenario, where Arthur has to learn the hard way that being a king is in no way a romantic existence. He experiences loss and pain very early on, and the show does a decent job conveying the characters struggle to adjust to the new circumstances. Eva Green's Morgan is perfectly cast as Morgan, who after killing her own father, seduces the ruler of a neighboring kingdom, King Lot(ably performed by James Purefoy) into an alliance to kill the young king and to take the kingdom for herself. Green may prove to be one of the shows strongest assets, as her characters motivations is very dark and mysterious, and I am sure there is a disturbing back story in the works for her. In fact both villains are more interesting than Arthur himself, and I very much enjoyed their scenes together.
Undoubtedly the shows strongest element is the wizard Merlin, played charismatically by Joseph Fiennes. Fiennes is not one of my favorite actors as I didnt care for him in Shakespeare In Love, and found him boring as hell in the failed Flash Forward television show. As Merlin, Feinnes truly shines as a scene stealing character along the lines of Jack Sparrow in the Pirates of the Caribbean films. He brings a certain charm and humor to the proceedings with a hint of crazy, while remaining the wise and steadfast center of the cast. Later adaptions(as I'm sure there will be many) should take note of the way Camelot depicts Merlin, if nothing else.
The Bad
While the brisk pacing of the show may work to its advantage at the beginning, it comes with its own set of flaws as the pilot progresses. Arthur's rise to authority seems to come far too quickly, and he never seems to earn the inspirational speech he gives about three quarters of the way through the episode. I wanted to see the boy grow up a bit before gaining the respect of those around him, but the pilot seems only interested in getting things set far too early on. The way Arthur defeats Morgan and then lets her leave at the end is a bit stilted and unrealistic, and I hope she doesn't end up pulling a Team Rocket every episode, coming up with a new scheme only to have it fail, without any grave consequences. As I mentioned earlier I am a big fan of Morgan and hope the writers give her the respect she deserves. The real problem here is the lack of emotional resonance. i felt very detached from what went on, and never felt I could relate to any of the characters. There is an attempt to make Arthur relatable and sympathetic, but he just came across as a spoiled boy who is thrust into a situation he can't handle, and since Merlin has it all planned out the boy really doesn't have to. When Arthur loses loved ones, I didn't really care, nor did I buy into his sadness as he and others seemed to move on almost immediately. The action in the show was decent, but nowhere near the standard set by Starz' own Spartacus series.
The Game of Thrones
Unlike Camelot, this series pilot was only an hour long, which I think anyone who has seen it would agree is about an hour too short. Where as Camelot's pilot was very eventful and fast paced, Thrones takes its time developing characters and themes that I am sure will come into play later on. But does this focus on character and plot as opposed to action work in its favor?
The Good
Game of Thrones is all about atmosphere, and boy do they nail it here. The opening minutes of the pilot are almost flawless, permeating a sense of dread that doesn't let up for the episode's entire runtime. The production values from the get go are bold and impressive in scope and execution, a step above anything we've seen on television in this genre. The astounding level of authenticity is something I've only seen matched in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. The acting is also incredible, with the standouts being Sean Bean and Peter Dinklage. Bean has long acted in these swords and sorcery epics, and in this film he plays the interesting and complex Lord Ned Stark. Stark is one of the rulers of the land of Westeros, but first and foremost he is a family man who is raising his 6 sons to be men, while trying to balance this out with his political position and friendship to the King. There is a refreshing subtly to this show that I found lacking in Camelot. And while many of its characters are larger than life, motivations of these individuals are largely unclear. Even the young children seem to have dark stories yet to be told, and it is uncommon for television writers to take children this seriously. There are some very dark themes in this show, incest being the standout, that may make some uncomfortable, but does add to the mature tone of the story and world. Peter Dinklage's Tyrion Lannister definitely suffers from a lack of screen time, but is as watchable as ever when he gets the opportunity. Most television shows are character driven, as they need to be, but Thrones approach really hit the spot for me, giving me characters I'm sure I will find myself enjoying more and more as the series progresses. I'd also like to mention the incredibly cool opening titles sequence. Epic indeed.
The Bad
There is only one action scene in the entire episode, and that ends before the opening credits even role. I'm not sure whether this is a flaw, but it should be noted that this episode definitely leaves you a bit wanting. There are a few moments where the aforementioned subtly is cast aside, and these moments bothered me a little. The scenes involving the White haired Targaryen siblings were probably the weakest bits of the episode, but still fascinating none the less. I guess the biggest issue is simply that it ended to soon, and two hours would have been a much more acceptable running time for such expansive storytelling. Having never read the books I was a bit lost from time to time, but never once was I bored or too confused to have a basic understanding of what was going on.
Winner?
Although Camelot has the seeds of potential(read: Merlin and Morgan) it never really went where I wanted it to go, and I could care less for Arthur, which is a major flaw, though not irredeemable. Game of Thrones however instead of going where I wanted it to go, took me places I didn't expect, and with a much shorter runtime made me care more about its characters than Camelot did. The sheer epic scope of Thrones is totally entrancing, and the production itself is far more impressive. The overwhelming winner is The Game of Thrones, though Camelot should not be taken lightly, as it could really deliver on the potential as did stars first season of Spartacus, and who saw that coming? Ironically the tag line for the Game of thrones is "winter is coming" right as the winter months are coming to a close. well bring on the winter! I can't wait to see more.
What did you think of these shows? And which do you think is the best?
Its been a month now and I have finally seen the second half of the pilot, but another show has come along and divided my attention: The Game of Thrones. Based on George R.R. Martins dark fantasy novel A Song of Ice and Fire, this production has been long awaited by its fan base and trumpeted as being one of televisions biggest productions yet. So did either of these aspiring fantasy epics live up to the hype? And which one is the best of the two? Let me break it down for you.
Camelot
This is not the first adaption of the Arthurian Legend, nor is it the first to attempt a dark and gritty direction for the age old tale. When thinking back on the various versions we have seen, the results of the efforts are often mixed ( Excalibur, the Clive Owen starring King Arthur, The BBC show Merlin) or downright bad (First Knight comes to mind), with the only truly good films being the irreverent comedy Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and the classic whimsically animated The Sword In The Stone. Arthur deserves better. SO does this new revision deliver the goods? Well yes and no. Many of the reviews and ratings showed a very positive response to the shows pilot, so the majority opinion is yes. Mine is a bit more complicated.
I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy what I saw. It did have its moments, and Joseph Fiennes Merlin is magnetic and a joy to watch. However, at times I grew bored, and in general I am a bit apathetic about the conflicts within. This is only the first two hours of the show I am talking about, so my opinion may be a bit premature, but that won't stop me from elaborating on my uninformed thoughts.
The Good
The show gets off to a great start with the murder of King Uther Pendragon at the hands of his own daughter, the Sorceress to be, Morgan(played with wonderful malice by Bond girl, Eva Green). This sets the pace for the rest of the pilot. I was never bored while I watched this show, something is always happening, and young Arthur(Jamie Cambell Bower) finds himself quickly transformed from farm boy to King. The first half of the pilot plays out like a fish out of water scenario, where Arthur has to learn the hard way that being a king is in no way a romantic existence. He experiences loss and pain very early on, and the show does a decent job conveying the characters struggle to adjust to the new circumstances. Eva Green's Morgan is perfectly cast as Morgan, who after killing her own father, seduces the ruler of a neighboring kingdom, King Lot(ably performed by James Purefoy) into an alliance to kill the young king and to take the kingdom for herself. Green may prove to be one of the shows strongest assets, as her characters motivations is very dark and mysterious, and I am sure there is a disturbing back story in the works for her. In fact both villains are more interesting than Arthur himself, and I very much enjoyed their scenes together.
Undoubtedly the shows strongest element is the wizard Merlin, played charismatically by Joseph Fiennes. Fiennes is not one of my favorite actors as I didnt care for him in Shakespeare In Love, and found him boring as hell in the failed Flash Forward television show. As Merlin, Feinnes truly shines as a scene stealing character along the lines of Jack Sparrow in the Pirates of the Caribbean films. He brings a certain charm and humor to the proceedings with a hint of crazy, while remaining the wise and steadfast center of the cast. Later adaptions(as I'm sure there will be many) should take note of the way Camelot depicts Merlin, if nothing else.
The Bad
While the brisk pacing of the show may work to its advantage at the beginning, it comes with its own set of flaws as the pilot progresses. Arthur's rise to authority seems to come far too quickly, and he never seems to earn the inspirational speech he gives about three quarters of the way through the episode. I wanted to see the boy grow up a bit before gaining the respect of those around him, but the pilot seems only interested in getting things set far too early on. The way Arthur defeats Morgan and then lets her leave at the end is a bit stilted and unrealistic, and I hope she doesn't end up pulling a Team Rocket every episode, coming up with a new scheme only to have it fail, without any grave consequences. As I mentioned earlier I am a big fan of Morgan and hope the writers give her the respect she deserves. The real problem here is the lack of emotional resonance. i felt very detached from what went on, and never felt I could relate to any of the characters. There is an attempt to make Arthur relatable and sympathetic, but he just came across as a spoiled boy who is thrust into a situation he can't handle, and since Merlin has it all planned out the boy really doesn't have to. When Arthur loses loved ones, I didn't really care, nor did I buy into his sadness as he and others seemed to move on almost immediately. The action in the show was decent, but nowhere near the standard set by Starz' own Spartacus series.
The Game of Thrones
Unlike Camelot, this series pilot was only an hour long, which I think anyone who has seen it would agree is about an hour too short. Where as Camelot's pilot was very eventful and fast paced, Thrones takes its time developing characters and themes that I am sure will come into play later on. But does this focus on character and plot as opposed to action work in its favor?
The Good
Game of Thrones is all about atmosphere, and boy do they nail it here. The opening minutes of the pilot are almost flawless, permeating a sense of dread that doesn't let up for the episode's entire runtime. The production values from the get go are bold and impressive in scope and execution, a step above anything we've seen on television in this genre. The astounding level of authenticity is something I've only seen matched in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. The acting is also incredible, with the standouts being Sean Bean and Peter Dinklage. Bean has long acted in these swords and sorcery epics, and in this film he plays the interesting and complex Lord Ned Stark. Stark is one of the rulers of the land of Westeros, but first and foremost he is a family man who is raising his 6 sons to be men, while trying to balance this out with his political position and friendship to the King. There is a refreshing subtly to this show that I found lacking in Camelot. And while many of its characters are larger than life, motivations of these individuals are largely unclear. Even the young children seem to have dark stories yet to be told, and it is uncommon for television writers to take children this seriously. There are some very dark themes in this show, incest being the standout, that may make some uncomfortable, but does add to the mature tone of the story and world. Peter Dinklage's Tyrion Lannister definitely suffers from a lack of screen time, but is as watchable as ever when he gets the opportunity. Most television shows are character driven, as they need to be, but Thrones approach really hit the spot for me, giving me characters I'm sure I will find myself enjoying more and more as the series progresses. I'd also like to mention the incredibly cool opening titles sequence. Epic indeed.
The Bad
There is only one action scene in the entire episode, and that ends before the opening credits even role. I'm not sure whether this is a flaw, but it should be noted that this episode definitely leaves you a bit wanting. There are a few moments where the aforementioned subtly is cast aside, and these moments bothered me a little. The scenes involving the White haired Targaryen siblings were probably the weakest bits of the episode, but still fascinating none the less. I guess the biggest issue is simply that it ended to soon, and two hours would have been a much more acceptable running time for such expansive storytelling. Having never read the books I was a bit lost from time to time, but never once was I bored or too confused to have a basic understanding of what was going on.
Winner?
Although Camelot has the seeds of potential(read: Merlin and Morgan) it never really went where I wanted it to go, and I could care less for Arthur, which is a major flaw, though not irredeemable. Game of Thrones however instead of going where I wanted it to go, took me places I didn't expect, and with a much shorter runtime made me care more about its characters than Camelot did. The sheer epic scope of Thrones is totally entrancing, and the production itself is far more impressive. The overwhelming winner is The Game of Thrones, though Camelot should not be taken lightly, as it could really deliver on the potential as did stars first season of Spartacus, and who saw that coming? Ironically the tag line for the Game of thrones is "winter is coming" right as the winter months are coming to a close. well bring on the winter! I can't wait to see more.
What did you think of these shows? And which do you think is the best?
