Couldn’t see a thread about this, so thought I’d start one in case any UK members might like to comment (seeing as they’re the only ones who are likely to have seen this).
I must admit to this show, which is currently showing in BBC1’s early evening Saturday slot (recently reserved for the like of Doctor Who and Robin Hood), being something of a guilty pleasure of mine, which is strange as it never fails to annoy me with its complete hash of Arthurian legend.
Quite apart from fact it’s so obviously aimed at teenagers (which is so not my demographic), what annoys me is the way the creators have taken characters with established(ish) traditional backstories and decided they don’t need to worry about any of that old rubbish at all.
Some examples:
• Arthur lives with Uther as a young prince of Camelot (read Spoiled Teenage Brat of Camelot)
• all the Knights of Camelot appear to be about 12
• Guinevere as a servant
• Morgana as Uther’s ward
• Mordred as a young druid boy
• Geoffrey of Monmouth as the castle genealogist (I can’t believe how much this one annoys me)
• many other small things
Despite all this I still guiltily enjoy this show. Am I just a teatime TV masochist? I’
I’m sure they could have made an equal show whilst sticking to at least some of traditional ‘facts’ of the legend. I’m still kind of interested to see where they’re going with this re-imagining (if anywhere), but fear there’s only going to be one series. Actually I hope there’s only one series, so I don’t have to keep beating myself up over it.
Just for balance, a couple of things I do like:
• Uther (played by that bloke from the Nescafé Gold ads) as some sort of proto-fascist who’s banned magic
• Michelle Ryan as Nimue (of whom we need more)
• Richard "I don’t believe It!’ Wilson
• John Hurt as the dragon
If you watch this show, it’s bound to annoy you too, so feel free to list your annoyances…
Tony Head. I thought that his stint as Giles on BtVS had overshadowed his part in a commercial by now. Go figure.
The Arthurian legend is convoluted enough to let the showrunners basically do whatever they want. I’m enjoying it as it is, even though the appeaant 13th century setting does not fit real history in any way, what so ever. OTOH, setting it properly in the 6th century and keeping it ‘real’, as in the backdrop being from that era, would make it unwatchable.
Like it or not, Arthur is medieval, albeit very early. For most people medieval means jousting, chivalry and bards. Doing it in a proper historical setting would not make sense for the slightly drunk post football audience.
I do like how we see Merlin as a young person, knowing by hindsight whatthe legend will say. It’s actually an interesting twist.
What disturbs me are the large number of black people in Camelot (three or four). My suspension of disbelief doesn’t stretch that far for the royal court of 13th century England.
I liked the first appearance of Excalibur last week. That was good. And I also liked the Lancelot episode.
I mostly agree with your disappointment in the complete trouncing of the traditional legend, but then I realised that it opens up unpredictability in the potential storylines. They have the freedom to explore any fantasy or dramatic trope they wish, while still hovering vaguely around the familiar myth. It’s more like Robin of Sherwood did with the Robin Hood legend.
I am disappointed that Merlin has this unbelievable power just by reciting words and making his eyes glow, as I was hoping it would be about learning to wield power, rather than already being adept, but oh well.
In terms of competent drama and engaging storylines, it’s improving as it goes. I’ll keep watching.
I am currently watching episodes back to back from the beginning. I’m now up to the middle of season two.
I like the show but a few things I find disappointing.
Magic/magic practitioners are ten-a-penny. This makes Merlin seem a lot less ‘special’ as he’s just another person who can do magic. I don’t know much about Arthurian legend so what I have to go on is smidgens here and there. My favourite thing ever done with the legend is the two-part Drama that had Sam Neil as Merlin. In that - magic was something rare and mysterious that was done by few people, and only when absolutely necessary.
I also dislike the drawing-out of the revealing to Arthur that Merlin is a Magician. One of the things I liked about the Sam Neil Merlin (and other bits of the legend) was that Arthur knew about Merlin’s magic by default and Merlin was considered Arthur’s ‘pet wizard’ by detractors and his trusted advisor by Arthur himself.
And finally I dislike the Anti-magic rhetoric of the kingdom of Camelot. I always thought of Camelot itself as a bit Magic, and ruled by a King who embraced magic. The constant re-affirming of the Anti-magic rhetoric in this is annoying and is going to make the eventual point where Arthur knows about Merlin’s magic a big hurdle to get over plot-wise.
I think they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t. I can choose to be pedantic and find it annoying that there’s a percentage of black people in England in the whateverth century in this show, but I choose to look past it. It’s a show about Magic and I’m pretty sure there was no magic either in that century.
I can’t even think of anything about the show that annoys me. I love it to bits and pieces. Of course, when things do get annoying, I tune it out and focus on the pretty. Sometimes the writing is weak but Merlin and Prince Arthur are always beautiful (not to mention Morgana and Gwen).
The two-part premiere for S3 was actually really great. Probably two of the best of the entire show–not that it didn’t have its weak moments. Sometimes, I think their hands are tied by their genre (family show) but it looks like they are going to get a bit darker and more…serious…this series.
Re: Suspension of disbelieve and 13th Century England–you can’t watch the show that way. There are too many anachronisms (like when Gaius explained somebody had a cerebral hemorrhage or all the fresh beautiful tomatoes they chuck at Merlin’s head). It takes place in Fairy Tale land (or as the show itself says a land of myth and a time of magic).
I’ve been watching the first season on Netflix lately. It’s not that bad. I don’t mind the anachronisms. Once you’ve posited wizards, dragons, and fairies, you’ve already established that you’re not on Earth, so who cares if you’ve got a couple of (if you’ll excuse the pun) black knights? And the Arthurian mythos are elastic enough to absorb all sorts of tinkering, so that’s alright. I think my biggest problem is Merlin himself, whom I just don’t like. On the other hand, the relationship between Arthur and Uther is gold. I think the show would be a hell of a lot more interesting if it focused on them, and relegated Merlin to a second-tier cast member.
I also find it amusing how the show keeps trying to paint Uther as an unreasoning anti-magic bigot, but they keep undercutting that by portraying every single magic user who’s not Merlin or Gaius as a fucking sociopath.
I can’t help wishing Uther would hurry up and Die, so the story can ‘begin’ as it were.
ETA: just a reminder that I’m only as far as about episode 6 of season 2. For all I know he dies later on in season 2.
ETA: And if Uther’s death implies Arthur’s becoming king, then where does the taking from the stone of the sword fit in? (I was under the impression that the taking of the sword from the stone is how Arthur proves himself to be the rightful King)
Lobsang this is not really a spoiler, just something the creators have said about the series, but I’ll err on the side of caution
If by “real story” you mean “The story of King Arthur and Albion” you’ll have a long wait. The creators have said more than once that the show will end with Arthur crowned king.
The first two series have aired in the US (NBC and SyFy), and the first season and first two episodes of the second have aired in Canada (CTV and Space), for the record.
Why? Historical or legendary accuracy is hardly common in Arthurian stories, why would I expect either from this version?
Not really - the majority of the antagonists (both magical and non) are reacting to Uther’s (or Arthur’s) actions - Nimue (the only recurring antagonist, up to the point I’ve seen), and the Black Knight to personal betrayals, others to his policies, or just stupid choices made at some point. There are a few who are just evil, but most are covered above.
Uther has not made a single intelligent decision - policy or personal - in the entire series.
Uther’s anti-magic policy created enemies - Edwin; Mordred and the Druids; Tauren; Morgana, his own adopted daughter, for god’s sake - and stymied their ability to deal effectively with magical threats who would have been a threat anyway - Mary Collins, Valiant, Sophia, Nimue*, the Black Knight*, Cornelius Sigan - by preventing them from (knowingly) fielding their own magic users.
And, again, Nimue and the Black Knight were threats because of Uther’s actions, but that was a personal decision, not the anti-magic policy. (Well, partially, in Nim’s case.)
Then there’s the Unicorn Keeper and the assassin from the series 2, episode 2, who were threats because Arthur did something stupid.
The only enemies that wouldn’t have been easier to deal with (or avoided completely), without the anti-magical law are the two that Arthur managed to piss off.
Compare magic to firearms - would gun control that consisted of exiling everyone who can use a firearm, including those who are loyal to, and employed by, the government, and executing any who didn’t leave, or even dealt with someone who knew how, be considered a ‘smart policy decision’?
I saw this last summer on SyFy. I adore this stuff, though I didn’t pay all that much attention to the plots or dialogue. The black girl was a bit jarring, not that I didn’t like her or anything, she was an anachronism (but there was a rock n’ roll soundtrack in A Knight’s Tale, after all). I love Michelle Ryan, and “no-fink” you can say against her. In this.
Putting aside the no-magic thing (which I think is a good decision (as was mentioned earlier, every time we see a magician other than Merlin and Garius, every time we see a magician, he’s up to no good), the thing that triggered my brother’s comment was when there was some sort of disease going through the poor quarter and Uther decided to impose a quarantine. That’s clearly the right decision; if there’s an outbreak of a potentially contagious disease, you impose a quarantine so that the people with the disease can’t get out and spread it to the rest of the city, but Uther is portrayed as a little shit for doing so.
Uther didn’t just outlaw magic. He purged everybody in Camelot he even expected as having magic, regardless of whether they were guilty. Also minor spoiler for 3.1 (The Tears of Uther Pendragon)
He drowned children in the well. Not sorcerers. Just children who was suspected of having magic. At least five of them. Uther doesn’t have “sound policy decisions.” He’s mad, and he’s a tyrant. I’m sure other rulers who conducted genocides thought they had some pretty sound decisions too.
Also, Uther’s decision to impose a quarantine wasn’t some sort of stroke of brilliance. The disease was an enchantment in the water and it affected everybody in Camelot. The quarantine was a thing to do, but it wasn’t the right thing to do to actually fix the situation. Uther pulls shit like that routinely. He’s sure he has to act, but he never gives a second thought to long-term consequences.
But he didn’t know it was an enchantment in the water. He thought it was a regular disease, and his actions were logical ones based on what he knew, and when Arthur was criticizing him in the episode, Arthur didn’t know it was an enchantment in the water either.
And again, magic is evil, and magicians killed his wife.
Uther killed Ygraine. He was the one who struck a magical deal, he was the one who chose to sacrifice his wife for a heir, and he was the one who (same minor spoiler as above) killed children in her name after he killed her in order to bring a child in the world. And yes, ordering a quarantine for a regular disease would be reasonable if it were a regular disease, but it wasn’t and so like most of Uther’s decisions, it was ineffective and shortsighted. But because of Uther’s blind single-mindedness, they can’t even use magic to investigate the source and fight the villain.
Also, the enchantment was a direct result of Uther’s actions, and magic was the only way to fix it. If Uther had known that, he would have killed Merlin and then let the rest of his kingdom die because there would have been nobody left to kill the monster. In fact, if Uther would just let Merlin protect the kingdom, the body count for magical attacks would drop severely, and probably most of the attacks would stop. But that would require a reasonable, thoughtful view of the world, and Uther is incapable of that, being the mad tyrant he is. We have no indication that magic was dangerous before the Purge, except that Uther made a very poor decision and sacrificed his wife. In fact, he was friends with Nimueh and Gaius clearly used to be a sorcerer. Far more likely is that magic was never a threat to Camelot and all the people Uther murdered would have never posed a risk to his kingdom.
First, no, that’s not the case. Morgana, Mordred, Mordred’s master - none of them were hostile when they first showed up, though Uther’s actions made them so…except for Mordred’s master, who is dead. And the sorcerers being executed at the beginning of the first episode, their only crime was sorcery.
And, again, exactly 4 of the ones who are threats would still be threats (not ‘up to no good’, as one threat was testing Arthur) if it weren’t for Uther’s actions. Nimue (the antagonist of fully half the first season episodes), the Black Knight, Edwin, Morgana, Modred, and Tauren’s lot were all acting against Uther or Camelot directly because of Uther’s actions, and the Unicorn Keeper was testing Arthur in response to his killing a unicorn. (Again, this is only counting up to the first few episodes of series 2.)
And again, all of the magic users were credible threats primarily because the only magic users Camelot could field have to act in secret - not secret from their enemies, but from their allies. If Merlin could act openly, and Uther had wizards working for him, most of them would have been dealt with far more swiftly (Valiant being the only major exception - he was successful mostly because of Uther’s class arrogance, not his anti-magic arrogance), and Sigan would never have been released in the first place if he hadn’t been so utterly pig-headed about the situation.
And in the quarantine episode, I have no idea what you’re talking about - what Uther is presented as an asshole for is planning to have Gwen executed on spurious charges. (I’m pretty sure that’s also when he had Morgana imprisoned for mouthing off to him over it.)
Everything Uther does in ‘defence’ of Camelot is pretty obviously going to blow up in his face, not due to narrative necessity, but because they’re all transparently bad ideas.
But, speaking of narrative necessity, that is the reason most of the magic users we’ve seen have been hostile - the show’s an action show, it needs conflict. By the same token most of the NON-magic users we’ve seen have been hostile (save the core cast and the future Knights of the Round Table). And, since Merlin is the primary protagonist, most of the conflict will have to involve magic, either magic users, magic beasts, or situations best solved through spellcraft. Under those circumstances, the fact that most of the magical threats are out for revenge, or to topple a tyrant, rather than out of dark motives (or darker than Uther’s, anyway) makes the idea that Uther’s ideas are good not just wrong, but quite laughable.
I’ve only seen about 2/3 of the first series, so I’ve admittedly got even less of the full view of the show than you, but it seems to me that while Uther’s actions may have attracted the attentions of these magic-users, they’re all pretty transparently psychotic, regardless of what Uther’s done to them. Yes, most of them have a legitimate grievance against Uther, but the way they prosecute that grievance is so monstrous that it effectively justifies Uther’s actions. Just running down the episodes I’ve seen, we’ve got:
1.1 The witch wants vengeance for Uther executing her son (who, as far as we’ve seen, is actually blameless). Her vengeance takes the form of murdering an innocent woman to take her place, murdering a scullery maid who accidentally discovers her identity, and attempting to murder not Uther, but Arthur, who hasn’t done anything worse than be an over-priviledged jerk.
1.2 A knight uses magic to secretly kill his opponents in a tourney.
1.3 Nimue, who has a very legitimate beef with Uther, decides that the best way to get revenge is to poison everyone in Camelot.
1.4 When that doesn’t work, she tries to start a war by murdering Merlin, whom she chooses as her target entirely because he successfully prevented her from killing all of his friends (along with everyone else in Camelot) in the previous episode.
1.5 The only episode I’ve seen so far where the villain isn’t a magic user. It’s a magic beast instead - the griffon. Still not a great advertisement for how wonderful magic really is.
1.6 The son of executed sorcerers decides to get revenge on Uther by having his magic beetle burrow a hole into Morgana’s brain. Admittedly, his plot required that he be able to save Morgana’s life before doing the same thing to Uther, but still.
1.7 It’s revealed that fairies consider human sacrifice an acceptable way for someone to pay off their debts. These are creatures of pure magic, and their actions are entirely unrelated to anything Uther has done.
1.8 This is the first episode I’ve seen where you can make a good argument, based purely on what what’s shown in the episode, that Uther’s anti-magic policy is genuinely tyrannical. However, if you judge the episode based on knowledge of Arthurian mythos in general, it’s a damn shame he wasn’t successful, because the kid grows up to be the biggest villain in Britain. And, once again, he’s a magic user.
1.9 This is the first episode where the antagonist’s actions are remotely morally defensible - the black knight only kills Uther’s knights, and only those that volunteer to fight him in one-on-one combat. This is, of course, also a plot by Nimue, but note that this was her second back-up plan, after poisoning the entire city and starting a war both failed.
That’s as far as I’ve gotten in the show so far. Now, obviously there’s such a thing as a good magic user. The show’s named after one. But from what I’ve actually seen in the show, he appears to be practically unique in that role. While Uther’s actions have brought down their ire on his kingdom, from what I’ve seen, it seems like Camelot would be a hell of a lot better off in general if there was no such thing as magic. Even if they weren’t specifically pissed off at the King, I don’t think things would be much safer if these sociopaths were allowed to live openly in the kingdom.
