Excalibur

Movie Information

In Brief: I remember seeing John Boorman’s Excalibur when it first came out in 1981. I remember being completely blown away by its visual splendor and Boorman’s fascinating attempt to present the Arthurian legend in terms of Wagner opera (which pervades the soundtrack). I also remember the scorn with which the film was received by a number of reviewers — and being more than a little shocked by presumably adult critics bitching about the fact that the movie didn’t have a real dragon in it. (In Boorman’s take on the story, the “dragon” is the spirit of the earth itself.) Time has tended to side with Boorman’s incredibly ambitious film — a take on the story that preserved its essence, but enlarged on it, made it more universal and shifted the focus to the emergence of Christianity over paganism (“The one God comes to drive out the many,” Nicole Williamson’s Merlin notes at one point). It remains a remarkable and visually stunning film.
Score:

Genre: Arthurian Legends a la Wagner
Director: John Boorman (Zardoz)
Starring: Nigel Terry, Nicol Williamson, Helen Mirren, Nicholas Clay, Cherie Lunghi, Paul Geoffrey
Rated: R

excal3

 

John Boorman’s Excalibur (1981) was one of those “happy accident” movies for me when I first saw it in 1981. I had no real interest in seeing it at the time, but I had ill-advisedly signed up for a college course in musical appreciation—a notion that came to an abrupt end when I realized I was going to be appreciating Haydn’s “Surprise” Symphony. But rather than explain that I was dropping the class to persons who would not be pleased, I went out dutifully every Tuesday night for several weeks—to the movies. And since Boorman’s take on the story of King Arthur and his cohorts was done in pure Wagnerian scale—with a lot of Wagner on the soundtrack—it also served to enhance my musical appreciation. And glad I am that I went, since this turned out to be one of my favorite films of the year, and far and away my favorite of this type of film. (And, yes, I include Peter Jackson’sLord of the Rings films in that assessment.) Oh, it may have a few problems—not the least of which is that it sometimes gets perilously close to self-parody—but it’s one of the most stunning-looking films ever made, and in tackling the material head-on, it achieves a boldness of purpose that imbues the overall film with something at once truly mythic and surprisingly moving. After years of absurdly stoic, bizarrely clean and dramatically inert movies about knights bold and damsels fair, Boorman finally gives us one that feels grounded in sweaty, suffering humanity, a less bombastic take on magic and a true sense of being born of the British Isles. I’ll take some imperfections for that.

 

excal2

 

Seeing the film again in a newly remasterred Blu-ray version reminded me of what an incredible visual experience the film is. (It’s the season to bitch about Oscar slights. Look no further than not giving Alex Thomson the award for cinematography on this.) When the film was being made, there was a certain amount of bafflement in some quarters over Boorman’s insistence on placing green gels over many of the lights for the forest scenes, but when you see the film’s glowing greens it makes perfect sense, especially within the context of the film.The film presents the Earth and the things that grow out of it as virtually characters in their own rights—certainly as living things. In fact, the film’s concept of “the dragon” (one that annoyed some) was that the Earth is the dragon, not some gigantic separate beast. Merlin (Nicol Williamson) himself expresses that the film is taking place in a world not far removed from when “bird and beast and flower were one with man.” In fact, the film takes place—again as said by Merlin—when such a magical time is giving way to the time of man.

 

excal

 

Boorman’s decision to present the film in terms of Wagner’s operas affords it a unity it might not otherwise have—and anyway, there are certainly connections between the Arthurian legends and the ones in Wagner. Certainly treating Lancelot (Nicolas Clay) and Guenevere (Cherie Lunghi) as Tristan and Isolde is reasonable enough, since that story predated the Arthurian tales and influenced them. In a way, it’s all part of Boorman’s apparent to desire to create a work that is at once sweeping and mythical, yet earthy and real in a way that previous films had never been. Whether Messrs. Malory and Wagner would agree with the approach is another matter. Then again, you could always show them Richard Thorpe’s Knights of the Round Table (1954). That would almost certainly shut them up.

 

ecal4

 

The whole thing was a risky proposition—and it didn’t pan out for everybody. There are still those who are cheesed over an allegorical dragon rather than the fire-breathing special effects sort. When the much lesser Dragonslayer opened a few months later, some critics compared Excalibur unfavorably to it because “it at least has dragons.” Oh well, what can you do with the literal-minded? Much more risky, however, was the very fact that Excalibur took itself seriously and wasn’t a simple adventure, which was very much at odds with the tenor of the early ‘80s and its generally Lucas-Spielberg vibe. Booorman and company are offering something quite different.

The Asheville Film Society will screen Excalibur Tuesday, April 14, at 8 p.m. in Theater Six at The Carolina Asheville and will be hosted by Xpress movie critics Ken Hanke and Justin Souther.

SHARE
About Ken Hanke
Head film critic for Mountain Xpress from December 2000 until his death in June 2016. Author of books "Ken Russell's Films," "Charlie Chan at the Movies," "A Critical Guide to Horror Film Series," "Tim Burton: An Unauthorized Biography of the Filmmaker."

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

2 thoughts on “Excalibur

  1. DrSerizawa

    I saw this when it was released at the Grauman’s Chinese Theater in glorious 70mm. I tried in on TV later but it just didn’t do it. The film begs to be seen in as large a format as possible, Possibly the most stunning cinematography in the history of movies.

    • Ken Hanke

      And undoubtedly the largest use of green gels in the history of cinematography.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.