First Knight - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

First Knight Reviews

Page 1 of 149
Super Reviewer
March 23, 2012
Not a serious historical piece (and what do we really know of Pendragon anyway?) but a children's fable extolling virtue, the Zuckers take a chance with this glittering fairy tale. Connery is the Arthur the story wants, or is it that we want Connery to be Arthur, its hard to tell. Gere supplies the dashing derring-do as Lancelot, and Ormond fills the difficult position of being torn between two lovers fetchingly.
Super Reviewer
½ April 17, 2007
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, she's quite lovely as Princess Guinevere, altough I would have very much liked to see her put a little more energy into her performance. What speaks for the film in positive terms, however, is the atmosphere and action, along with a highly enchanting music score by the brilliant Jerry Goldsmith. It's so good, in fact, that I've made it a part of my inspirational music library. If there is one thing I could change though, it would be the costumes. They look a little plain and cheap for what is essentially a period piece. Maybe they ran out of money when it came to clothing the actors? Apart from said maladies though, it remains a captivating tale of love, chivalry and sweeping adventure. Easily one of the better renditions of the Arthurian legend.
Super Reviewer
May 23, 2010
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 Richard Gere treatment.
Super Reviewer
September 16, 2009
I saw this one in the theatre and can't quite remember the whole film, but I do remember enjoying it.
Super Reviewer
½ September 11, 2009
"First Knight" is a version of the Camelot legend. I'm not familiar at all with the legend of Camelot, but I do know one thing, I really like "First Knight." Sean Connery plays the part as King Arthur, Julia Ormond is the Queen, and Richard Gere plays as Sir Lancelot.
Lancelot is a wanderer who doesn't have a home or any place to stay, but he is satisfied living alone with just his superior sword-fighting skills. That is, until he meets the soon to be Queen and falls in love with her. Will Lancelot be successful in making the Queen change her mind about who she wants to be with, or will her top priority still be King Arthur?

Don't get me wrong, "First Knight" is not only a love story. There is a lot of exciting fighting, mostly with swords, it's easy to tell the movie is an epic with the huge castles and the many knights on horses, and throughout the whole movie, everybody, especially the three main stars (Ormond, Connery, and Gere), all do a great job of acting to make the movie captivating and believable.

The bottom line is, "First Knight" is an exciting epic about the story of Camelot, and all the while with all the fighting and other conflicts, there's an underlying love story to make it even more interesting.

Even if you're not that crazy about epic films, give "First Knight" a chance. If you are a big fan of great epic movies, I recommend purchasing "First Knight" as soon as possible! NOTE: That was my Amazon review from the year 2001. To this day, this is still one of my absolute favorite epic films, and my favorite Sean Connery flick.
Super Reviewer
September 10, 2007
Its ok but i didnt finish it all but its ok but not as good as the old braveheart
Super Reviewer
April 28, 2007
It is always fun to watch another version about Camelot. This one suffers the indignity of having Richard Gere looking like he is from the 20th century playing Lancelot. Sean Connery does a tremendous job playing King Arthur.

The ending is just too hokey - one minute Aurthur is sentencing Lancelot to death and the next minute bequeathing his kingdom to him.
Super Reviewer
April 20, 2008
Pretty good movie. No disrespect to Richard Gere or Sean Connery, because there both wonderful actors but there not convincing as these legendary men. The story carries on awhile to but nothing ever progresses, and its only a few well done fight scenes and the end of this movie that makes it pretty good.
It's worth watching, if your interested in this period. If not, then you probably dont want to see it because there are a lot better films of this period and of these men out there that can give you a loving of this legend and time.
Super Reviewer
March 1, 2008
I don't know why critics hated this movie, Sean Connery as King Arthur, amazing, forget Richard Gere it's Sean Connery.
Super Reviewer
February 6, 2007
Apart from the anachronistic performance by Richard Gere as a kung-fu fighting Lancelot, this is a memorable retelling of the King Arthur legend, with its emphasis on a historical, romantic approach as opposed to fantasy. Director Jerry Zucker keeps it big and impressive, developing his characters in a believable fashion.
Super Reviewer
January 1, 2008
Another great cast and period costume movie about Guinevere who is torn between Arthur and Lancelot.
Super Reviewer
September 24, 2007
Super Reviewer
½ September 16, 2007
For a Gere movie, not too bad, but I wouldn't see it again.
Super Reviewer
½ September 3, 2007
cheesy...I think you'll enjoy this if you're 12. A horrible retelling of Aurthurian legend.
Super Reviewer
June 19, 2007
A pretty good swordplay film with a strong cast....but this type of film has been done better, many times since.
Super Reviewer
December 31, 2006
Uniformly dreadful retelling of the Arthurian legend full of wooden performances, laughably anachronistic production design and illogical plotting. One for Seans nest egg, I suspect.
Super Reviewer
½ December 28, 2006
I liked it but it was meant for the ladies.
Super Reviewer
½ October 26, 2007
Great movie. Nicely paced action and brilliant performance by Sean Connery. The story seem short but it lift up to the legend of King Arthur.
Super Reviewer
½ December 10, 2007
Quite uninspiring film for a tale that has fascinated so many...
Super Reviewer
November 12, 2007
For what it's worth, I found First Knight to be a good movie if you take it for what it is instead of trying and forcing your own interpretation of the Arthurian legend upon it. A few minutes in the movie, I understood what the filmmakers were trying to create, a film in the spirit of classic adventure and swashbuckling movies of the 30-50ies, think Errol Flynn in medieval England. No serious contemplation about British History (or pseudo-history), no gritty and brooding tale of the dark ages but shiny knight in Armour and evil (evil !) villains. At one point, Richard Gere and Julia Ormond are riding on a horse through the pouring rain, finding shelter under a tree, that is all you need to know about this movie ! Yet, it reminded about those innocent and tenderly low-budget fairy tale movies one might catch on TV on Sundays or during Christmas time. If you are in the right mood, the movie might just hit your spot, of course if you expect another Braveheart, look elsewhere.

Richard Gere is puppy-eyed and his shy handsomeness makes for a good loner, although his transition to being a hero towards the end of the movie is not reflected in his performance and not really based within the narrative except for some vague reference to a troubled past. Sean Connery puts on the Role of Arthur like a glove and mumbles and smirks behind his mighty beard to recreate a truly "legendary" Arthur, legendary as in fairy-esque.

One nice thing about this movie are the locations and beautiful landscapes. That is, if you like to gaze upon the breathtaking British countryside (Oh Mother England !).

All in all, a romp and adventure movie with loots of cheesy schmonsens thrown in for good measure.

Page 1 of 149