everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Cornel Wilde has a reputation as a independent writer, director, actor type, in the vein of Sylvester Stallone, Woody Allen, and others. He did some fine pieces of work; the best of which was Naked Prey. He also did a pretty good job with Beach Red. But this effort was a little too big for his britches. He tried to pull off a Kirk Douglas or Mel Gibson (both successful as independent producers of Spartacus and Braveheart), but he could not do it. There was too much ham in the film from the supporting cast. More ham than in a German deli. The battle scenes were rife with mistakes (one guy is standing around with an arrow in his heart). The early love scenes are very good, and believable, but Merlin reminded me more of a rabbi than a wizard or magician. All he did was give advice. The secondary characters, except for Arthur, were just not that believable. All in all, a watchable film, but be ready to wince every once in a while.

This is probably the best film on the subject, that usually gets boggled up in romanticised legends and Hollywood schmalz and nonsense. The script is very apt and convincing, and the action is thoroughly efficient, never admitting a dull moment and never getting lost in pathetic sentimentality. Jean Wallace as the Queen is alwaýs a difficult character to interpret, but here for once she is not overdone in her wanton weakness or outrageous shamefulness. Cornel Wilde started as an Olympian master at fencing, and this film must have been something of the ultimate realization of his dreams. He makes a very convincing Frenchman, and there are two great battle scenes which alone make the film outstanding. The one thing to object against is the king. Brian Ahearne makes the best of it in a reliable performance as usual, but why has the king to be so old? In another version Sean Connery was equally old, but there is nothing in any legend to imply that King Arthur must have been an old man when he married Guinevere. Both Joshua Logan's 'Camelot' (two years later) and the excellent TV screening of 'The Mists of Avalon' both make the king as young and fresh as Guinevere, and both Arthurs are more convincing. For some reason Morgan le Fay is absent here, Merlin is rather second hand, and Sir Mordred is not given much of a character. Of course, the centerpiece is Lancelot and Guinevere, they need no one else, and their story is quite good enough to give Mordred and Morgan as little space as possible. The highest credit though goes to the script, which actually Cornel Wilde himself was part of besides directing the whole thing himself.

Cornel Wilde started his career as a matinée idol specializing in romantic and swashbuckling roles,later going on to direct his own films.Some are best forgotten but films like "The Naked Prey" and "Beach Red" are cult classics.Lancelot and Guinevere,his take on the Camelot legend,while not an unqualified success is by no means a bad film,what does however stretch ones credibility is the ages of some of the leading players. Cornel Wilde who played Lancelot, although still fit and muscular looking, was pushing fifty.Likewise his real life wife Jean Wallace who played Guinevere was in her forties.Although still an attractive woman no amount of soft focus photography could disguise the fact.For reasons best known to himself Wilde decided to portray Lancelot as a french man so he dusted off the accent he perfected in "Centennial Summer" and "The Greatest Show On Earth",one wonders if that was the inspiration for Peter Sellers role as Inspector Clouseau in the Pink Panther films.Yes its that bad.The love scenes were considered quite explicit for the time but they come across today as more tasteful than erotic.The whole film is down to earth with no magic or mysticism and certainly no Excalibur.Merlin spends his time inventing a wondrous new substance called soap.Indeed is it a product placement opportunity for Proctor and Gamble? After this there is precious little humour to be found.Wilde uses a good second eleven team of British actors such as Brian Aherne,George Baker,Archie Duncan,Adrienne Corri,Reginald Beckworth,Richard Thorpe,Graham Stark and John Barrie.They all do sterling work but not enough to interest "Oscar".Also the editing is a little abrupt at times perhaps due to budget restraints.Wilde really comes into his own in the battle scenes which are quite spectacular courtesy of the Yugoslavian Army who enter into the spirit with gusto.For those who like looking for goofs watch out for the two extras who thought they were off camera having a crafty smoke with arrows sticking out all over them.The eagle eyed may also notice the odd wristwatch.At the beginning and end of the film there are two particularly bloody hand to hand combat scenes which leave one in no doubt as to the effectiveness of medieval weaponry.For all that by far the best sequence in the film is when Wilde and his men rescue a Saxon village which has been captured by Vikings,it certainly doesn't pull its punches especially in the scene where the village women, who have been violated, watch with grim satisfaction as their attackers are slaughtered to a man.In this reviewers opinion a far superior scene than anything you will find in "The Vikings".Everybody knows the plot,the doomed love affair,the destruction of Camelot and Guinevere finishing up in a nunnery,all very sad.One wishes they could make a version where they all live happy ever after.Come on it is only a fairy tale.Finally I would like to doff my hat to the young lady who plays the french serving maid,her heroic cleavage would not be out of place in a Russ Meyer film,it made for a pleasant interlude among all the doom and gloom.It certainly made a big impression on me as a spotty teenager when I first saw the film.

SWORD OF LANCELOT, crafted as Cornel Wilde's gift to himself, shows Guinevere as a strong and determined character—far from an 'etiolated princess …--and her character is also played with brio and charm.From the whole tale, the script picked as characters truly brought out the love triangle—the knight, his queen, and the oldster—and, in fact, only the couple of lovers—the others are too marginal …. Yet this couple of characters who are indeed defined and portrayed are alive and interesting. The score is, on the other hand, conventional and banal.It is not a kids' movie; it's occasionally piquant and playful, a nice French woman at an inn is introduced by her tits. As an adventure flick, it features a tournament and a battle with the pagan invaders, and it ends with the defeat of Mordred.Directed by Wilde, the movie has something sincere and straight and respectable, even a note of originality.