Average Rating: 5.2/10
Reviews Counted: 43
Fresh: 20 | Rotten: 23
No consensus yet.
Average Rating: 5.6/10
Critic Reviews: 15
Fresh: 8 | Rotten: 7
No consensus yet.
liked it
Average Rating: 3/5
User Ratings: 150,270
The tale of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table is always ripe for retelling. In this rendition, the sexy Richard Gere is Sir Lancelot, threatening to supersede the aging King Arthur (Sean Connery) by winning the love of his young wife Guinivere (Julia Ormond). This update of the age-old legend succeeds on the strength of Gere's happy-go-lucky sex appeal, Ormond's gorgeous period costuming, and Connery's unbeatable wry nobility. The script focuses on the triangle of the three
Jul 7, 1995 Wide
Oct 7, 1997
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
All Critics (47) | Top Critics (17) | Fresh (22) | Rotten (24) | DVD (8)
Whenever Zucker stops piling on battle scenes as if he were directing Braveheart, his film casts a romantic spell.
Aside from casting Richard Gere as Lancelot, First Knight marches out as an agreeably intelligent, mature and well-mounted telling of the legendary King Arthur story.
The problem for him[Gere], and the film, comes when the non-physical acting begins.
The movie is entertaining enough in its own way, and Sean Connery makes a splendid King Arthur, but compared with the earlier films[Rob Roy and Braveheart] this one seems thin and unconvincing.
Bad acting, dumb dialogue, and confusing cinematography abound, creating one of the most shoddy Camelot stories to date.
...lots of action and chivalrous pomp, but no magic.
Extras include a commentary by director Jerry Zucker and producer Hunt Lowry, along with a second commentary that focuses on the Arthurian legend behind the film's story.
While director Jerry Zucker seems to have been intent on dragging the film to the mushy middle, it's still more entertaining than most comparable Middle Ages-set movies.
Goes for a pass as a shallow but occasionally rousing swordfighting flick with a handful of thoughtful scenes...has something those other pictures don't have: Sean Connery as King Arthur.
This one is pure Hollywood.
Director Zucker is unsuccessful in trying to put a fresh angle on the familiar story, and he is not much helped by his romantic leads, Richard Gere and Julia Ormond.
The out-of-place [Richard] Gere doesn't do justice to the fine performance of [Julia] Ormond.
Starts off mediocerly, but once Sean Connery enters the stage as the fabled King Arthur, the quality level is instantly raised. Richard Gere looks a bit misplaced as the fearless Sir Lancelot, and wouldn't have been my first pick for the role, but he still takes it on to the best of his abilities. As for Julia Ormond,
April 17, 2007Super Reviewer
Another terrible rendition of King Arthur. Turning the story into nothing more than a romantic threesome is just pure slander. To change the story to fit a movie is one thing, but this should've just left Arthur's name all together. The acting is terrible, quite possibly Sean Connery's worst performance and the usual
May 23, 2010Super Reviewer
| 35% | The Hangover Part II |
| 25% | Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Par... |
| 81% | Kung Fu Panda 2 |
| 44% | Cowboys & Aliens |
| 83% | Rise of the Planet of the Apes |
| 25% | Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Par... |
| 88% | Lady and the Tramp |
| 69% | A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas |
| 21% | Fireflies in the Garden |
| 45% | The Rebound |
Journey 2 Not Worth the Trip
What are his 10 best movies ever?
See the all-new action-packed trailer!
Five new Marvelous pictures