First Knight - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

First Knight Reviews

Page 1 of 3
Brian Webster
Apollo Guide
April 23, 2008
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.
| Original Score: 72/100
Peter Canavese
Groucho Reviews
April 21, 2008
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.
| Original Score: 2.5/4
Emanuel Levy
August 16, 2005
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.
Full Review | Original Score: C
Michael Dequina
August 7, 2004
The out-of-place [Richard] Gere doesn't do justice to the fine performance of [Julia] Ormond.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Kevin A. Ranson
April 6, 2003
No Merlin, no magic, no way.
| Original Score: 1/5
Brian Mckay
March 21, 2003
Bland and over-romanticized treatment of the Arthurian legend. Gere ridiculously miscast as Lancelot. Watch Boorman's EXCALIBUR instead.
| Original Score: 2/5
Rob Vaux
Flipside Movie Emporium
January 11, 2003
Whoever thought Richard Gere would make a good Lancelot needs to be found and sterilized.
| Original Score: 1/5
Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat
Spirituality and Practice
August 30, 2002
Spectacular entertainment with a king-sized serving of romance and ritual.
Top Critic
Peter Travers
Rolling Stone
May 12, 2001
Whenever Zucker stops piling on battle scenes as if he were directing Braveheart, his film casts a romantic spell.
| Original Score: 3.5/4
Top Critic
Kenneth Turan
Los Angeles Times
February 13, 2001
The problem for him[Gere], and the film, comes when the non-physical acting begins.
Top Critic
Todd McCarthy
February 13, 2001
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.
Top Critic
James Berardinelli
January 1, 2000
Bad acting, dumb dialogue, and confusing cinematography abound, creating one of the most shoddy Camelot stories to date.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Top Critic
Roger Ebert
Chicago Sun-Times
January 1, 2000
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.
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Top Critic
John Teegarden
January 1, 2000
I've never seen a film -- whether it was based on a book, a play, or in this case a timeless legend -- treat its source material with such cavalier disregard.
Top Critic
Sean P. Means
January 1, 2000
...lots of action and chivalrous pomp, but no magic.
Christine James
Boxoffice Magazine
January 1, 2000
Braveheart and Rob Roy told the story better.
Full Review | Original Score: 3/5
Top Critic
Rita Kempley
Washington Post
January 1, 2000
Pillaged of such mainstays as Merlin and Morgan le Fay-as well as magic, majesty and depth-'Camelot' has become 'Camelite.'
Top Critic
Eve Zibart
Washington Post
January 1, 2000
There's swordplay to the hilt, but the story itself never quite gets in Gere.
Bruce Kirkland
Jam! Movies
January 1, 2000
With guys like Connery and Gere as your heroes, you don't need cheap tricks. First Knight is just slightly second rate as a result.
| Original Score: 3/5
Madeleine Williams
January 1, 2000
Colorful, but ultimately disappointing...
Full Review | Original Score: 2/4
Page 1 of 3