Worst movie ever.


I don't know if it is because of the "(TV)", but this movie was the most irritating, stupid, bad movie I have ever seen.
You who like it, what do you compare with? "Glamour"? If so, it's understandable, they have the same quality.

Everything is bad, actors and their lines, "special effects", characters, plot. Everything.

Damn, this movie makes me ill.

Anyway, I understand some people like this movie... so maybe you can tell me why? What is good about this piece of ****

/Baszag

reply

i liked the casting, directing & editing, acting(sam neil was great here), make up, Decent CGI effects and the story was original... 8/10

reply

May I ask what you compare this movie with? Movies from the bottom 100? If so, sure, it may be 8/10. But compared with good movies, like LOTR, it's 1/10.

reply

I agree that it's not a great movie, in fact it is pretty bad, but certainly not the worst movie ever. That award (in my book of bad movies) goes to the Babes in Toyland with Drew Barrymore and Keanu Reeves. Wow that was a horrible movie, but anyway, back to the topic- I personally like the story of it and how it's from Merlin's POV. And of course I liked Martin Short, but that goes without saying.

Oh and please, never, EVER compare a movie like this to LotR, even in an example. LotR is just in a league of its own. ;-)

reply

Barnaby4lyfe.

reply

Wow, i loved the Laurel and Hardy one big-time, and i can't wait to get my hands on that! Unless it's the one with the toy machine that goes whoop and clunk and barnaby had a curvy sword, in which case, i already have. On acid! Aughhhhhhh

reply

but didnt you liked about this movie exactly...i stated my arguments..how about yours?

reply

Baszag, in my opinion u just don't like these kind of Movies, I'd put Merlin and LOTRs in the same Genre and u say the're both bad.

So us give an example of movies like this that u do like

Finnigan...ARGH!!!!

reply

Well obviously, it was made in 1998
and who compared it to LOTR, its nothing like LOTR, if it is to be compared to anything, it should be compared to other Arthurian movies, and of all of them this on is unique in telling Merlin's story, much like how King Arthur was unique in portraying Arthur and his knights in a more realistic spectrum.

You wasted life why wont you waste the afterlife?-modest Mouse

reply

LOTR was absolute rubbish (in my oppinion) totally boring! Merlin was so much better!

reply

[deleted]

Stayed true to what lore? It was nothing like any Arthurian legend I've ever read. And the Lord of the Rings is one of the most accurate-to-source adaptations of any movie. Ever. Most of the changes in LotR where for the sake of taking something in narration and making it into dialog. Merlin was just silly, and the lousy acting, writing, directing, special effects, and costumes are just icing on the really bad cake.

reply

Baszag you a little weird. Compare it with good movies like Lord of the rings.....? Okay, to bad I liked this more than I liked lord of the rings.

reply

Baszag, you say "Everything is bad, actors and their lines, "special effects", characters, plot. Everything."

May i ask why stupid people like you enter there forums only to curse movies with no arguments at all?? Let me tell you now that you don't no A THING about bad movies. Merlin is an example of fantasy films. Damn man.. get some glasses or somethin' i have seen literaly HUNDREDS of movies that don't match Merlin not by a long shot, like Dungeons and Dragon or First Knight... but even those aren't the worst movies ever. For a 1998 movie, the visual effects are great, Sam Neil is a formidable actor and so is Mirranda Richardson and even young Merlin, whose part in this films is his first part. Ultimately, i only ask you NOT to judge a movie like this as the worst ever because that is simply absurd!!

reply

It is very easy to say
"this movie is terrible and thats the way it is"
But all people have different tastes.

I like this movie. In fact I love it. Part of this rests on the fact I saw it when I was very young and it enchanted me. It had a beautiful set and beautiful costumes. Love and magic and enchantment. The lady of the lake, her necklace of fish. Arthur and his tragic story. Merlin - acted so wonderfully by Sam Neil.

These days It sits amongst the movies I love that arnt movies I love.
Like groundhog day. I know that Groundhog Day is not the sophisticated and well, amazing movie that say LotR or The Royal Tenebuams is, but it is enjoyable. Its funny, its appealing in its simplicity.

The same goes for Merlin. Its quirky magic, its simple message, its gorgeous actors and set and imagry. It might not be the movie that sits on the blockbuster movie list and wins academy award after academy award. But it is entertaining. It has a happy ending and it has Sam Neil.

reply

Yeah this was some crazy crap, but it was entertaining. The special effects weren't that great, but hey, the Merlin point of view thing was awesome. I thought it was a decent film.

reply

This is the best T.V. movie I've ever seen. Sam Neill's acting, the ensemble cast, the magic, the whole crushing drama of a character who witnesses the fallabillity of England's Kings, and realizes that it's not going to get any better. The battle scens, some of the effects such as the blood in the snow, and all around the acting , music, and directing was great.

And many people would say that Groundhog Day was a very deep movie

I haven't killed a man since 1984

reply

its obvious that ppl either love this movie or hate it
i personally love it and have watched waaaay too many times, but then again ive always been fascinated by this time period, and King Arthur etc. so maybe thats why i love this film!!

reply

In Baszag's defense, he said LOTR was a good movie. However, you really can't compare Merlin, a made-for-tv-movie, to the grandest fantasy epic of all time. I give Merlin a 9 for what it is, good tv entertainment (certainly still better than some box office flicks).


www.festizio.net
award-winning

reply

By the way, very well acted and well written. Plays out very well.


www.festizio.net
award-winning

reply

Why? I thought this movie was really magical!

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

I have to almost agree with Baszag. This is a terrible movie. But the worst ever, hey, it's not even the worst Sam Neill movie. Anyone remember "The Piano". It's not the worst Miranda Richardson movie (though not from lack of effort on her part), remember "The Hours". Even the guy playing Mordred has been in a worse movie, "The English Patient".
I just suffered through it's rerun on SciFi last night. It has not improved with time. I found the special effects to be irritating. Budjet problems, I don't know, it seems to me that we had better special effects in Hercules and Zena.
But my real complaint is the messing around with the Arthur legends. Did the screenwriters have no knowledge at all of the Arthur stories? It would have been better if they had just renamed everyone and treated it as a 'new' story. I had the same complaint about "First Knight". That would have been such a better movie if the characters had been named King George, Queen Pearl, and Sir Surfer Dude from California, or anything other that Arthur,etc.

reply

That's my complaint about the movie too. I like the story and movie pretty much, but it just annoys me that they messed around with the Arthur legends. I always hate it when screenwriters change stories and legends too much. That's usually why movies are never as good as the story or book.

reply

i love this movie! i have no idea what you're talking about. i first saw it when it came out on tv, and ive had the dvd ever since it came out. the casting is just amazing..and i love all of the different camera angles and special effects. and the costumes are amazing also!

i must say, miranda richardson is so amazing in this movie! im a big fan of hers, and this is definitely one of her best performances. and man is she hot!

reply

Make Miranda Richardson the reason that I absolutly love this movie!!!

"Your pride condemns you..."

reply