A Knight in Camelot
November. 08,1998Yet another variation on Mark Twain's "A Connecticut Yankee At King Arthur's Court." Here, a computer malfunction causes a science researcher to be sent back in time with her laptop, which she uses to amaze the court.
Similar titles
Reviews
Disappointment for a huge fan!
This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.
The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.
Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.
Something odd today but regular in earlier times really makes me giggle, and the way whoopi do and feels those things makes more fun.
As I have read the above comment about costumes, I do have to say that the costumes do not match the time period (I forgot what Clarence said the year was, 750 I believe?). I am studying up on the 14th century clothing for both my illustrations in my book, as well as for my SCA garb. I saw the short tunics with the tights (Most notably with the acrobats), and also the armour. You're probably right that they are just spoofing some medieval movie (or the story of Arthur itself) with the full armour and costumes, but as a fan of medieval movies myself, it kind of gnaws at you about the historical accuracy itself. I like Whoopi anyway, so her performance was her usual self. This movie, in my opinion, parallels Martin Lawrence's "Black Knight" movie. I give it a five because I like Whoopi, and it's one of those movies that doesn't leave you stranded at the end. At least the sword fighting was not half as bad as this one medieval kid's movie (A movie so bad the name escapes me), where the child actor held the sword straight up and down while the henchman strained himself with every blow trying to get his sword past this child's perfect defense by holding the sword up and down, at arm's length no doubt.
Admittedly, I only rented this movie because it was free due to a Blockbuster promotion. However, I generally like Whoopi Goldberg's work so I was hopeful.Whoopi provides her usual spunk in the movie but she's failed by a pretty insipid script that had gaping loopholes - like Clarence didn't actually defeat Sir Sagramour, and a lack of payoffs - the treacherous 'hos Guinnie and Lancelot didn't get theirs, and Whoopi never gets to deck Merlin.I was all prepared to give this movie a 6/10, which is a marginal thumbs up for me, since the movie did give a couple of laughs and Whoopi was fun, but then it ended abruptly when it was supposed to deliver the two payoffs stated above. So I'm giving it a 5/10 instead, a marginal thumbs down.
This movie caught my eye at my local video store simply because I am a fan of medieval movies no matter what the title is or what it is about. But since I am not a big fan of Whoopie, I figured that I could check this one out anyway. Boy, what a flop it was. The only thing that was good about this film was the costumes!!! This movie stars big named actors/actresses with lame speaking parts. They would have been alot better if they would have kept their mouths quiet. Whoopie with her pathetic one line jokes did not fit in with this century or this movie. I think that for the most part medieval movies should not even be turned into a comedy. Jon Voight as King Author just did not fit in the film as well. And then we see him dressed as a slave. There were many parts in this film that contradicted what the characters were suppose to be. is he a king or a slave? Is Whoopie a witch or a knight? This movie was terrible and there are many other recomeded childrens movies to watch other than this. I give it a 3, simply because of the costumes.