Like Smallville did for Superman, Merlin is a new drama series that updates the story of the infamous sorcerer of Arthurian legend for a new audience. In a time before history began, the mythical city of Camelot was a fantastical realm and a dangerous world in which magic has been banned by the ruthless tyrant Uther Pendragon. When Merlin, a young man gifted with extraordinary magical powers, arrives in the kingdom, he discovers his destiny and that of the kingdom’s young leader in waiting, Arthur, are inextricably linked.The creators of Merlin position their hero as the original Harry Potter: a headstrong young wizard with mixed feelings about–and sometimes outright hostility toward–the destiny that’s been thrust upon him. Merlin is a reboot of Arthurian legend, starting when all the heroes and sorcerous folk were teenagers, bursting with hormones and wrestling with the powers-that-be, particularly Arthur’s heavy-handed father, Uther Pendragon (Anthony Head, best known as Giles from Buffy the Vampire Slayer), a benevolent tyrant who’s banished magic from Camelot. Merlin (Colin Morgan, an impish lad with prominent ears) comes to the kingdom with high hopes and innate magical powers. He’s taken under the wing of the court physician, Gaius (Richard Wilson, One Foot in the Grave), but additionally becomes the servant of young Arthur (Bradley James), a handsome and talented fighter who’s also a bully and a snob. Rounding out the main cast are Morgana (Katie McGrath), who will one day be Merlin’s foe but is now Uther’s ward, and Gwen (Angel Coulby), a.k.a. Guinevere, the woman who will one day be the center of a legendary love triangle–but who is now Morgana’s maid. Clearly, Merlin wants to shake up any preconception about these stuffy old stories, presenting a multi-ethnic Camelot with contemporary language and attitudes.
Despite all this, Merlin quickly becomes addictive. The dialogue and special effects can be cheesy (particularly when the CGI monsters have to interact with actors), but the cast is charming and the stories, while a tad formulaic, keep things moving. Morgan is appropriately dweeby (but also has killer cheekbones), James combines football-quarterback good looks with a hint of sensitivity, McGrath is luscious and impetuous, and Coulby has earthy spunk. The heavy lifting, acting-wise, is ably handled by Head and Wilson. The first season deftly explores the origins of the pillars of Arthurian mythos, from the sword Excalibur to a very dashing (but born of peasant stock) Lancelot to the mysterious birth of Arthur himself. Add to it all an imprisoned dragon, voiced by John Hurt (Alien, The Elephant Man) and prone to cryptic but sometimes helpful advice, and you have an engaging fantasy series. In addition to 13 episodes, there’s an additional disk with making-of features and video diaries of the young cast gallivanting around France. –Bret Fetzer
Buy “Merlin: The Complete First Season” For Only $34.49
March 5, 2010
#1
All in all I enjoyed this first season quite a lot.
Professionally scripted, filmed and acted, it heavily relies on the charm of the Arthurian myth and on the free use of magic so fashionable these years providing the viewer with hours of easy entertainment. A little TOO easy at times.
Said viewer could be even a child of about 10 if a parent is there to do some explaining.
It was only halfway through it that I began to wonder and doubts are now rooted and disturbing.
That the main purpose of this series be entertainment is perfectly legitimate, but I am convinced things could and should have been done better even within this limited scope.
First and foremost there are heavy qualitative differences in the 13 episodes: scripted and directed by different people they are remarkably different in achievements. Take for instance the episode before the last: throughout there is great attention paid to lighting, to framing and composition. The result is that this episode is vastly superior from every point of view. And it shows, it really does. Why was this attention not paid to all of them?
Another irritating problem is the actors’ diction: in the first episode it is very theatrical, cristal clear, perfect. Elsewhere, but not everywhere, the same actors slur whole sentences forcing me to use subtitles. Why? Have the creators not established guidelines?
They should have. The series is full of inconsistencies (and sketchy plots/characterization/ethics). For example at the start Merlin is said to be capable of making spells with no mouthed incantation. Elsewhere he has to pronounce it just to open a closed door. Sorry, but these mistakes irritate me a lot.
To talk about some inconsistencies forces me to introduce others that may be less relevant if one accepts this series were originally meant for entertainment only. I can see that it might as well be only me who wishes more attention paid to details, even in entertainment.
The Arthurian myth is extraordinarily confused and I would love the support of an expert before stating my doubts, but I have no expert handy and will have to rely on my knowledge only.
If I am not wrong the life of Arthur is supposed to be set in the first centuries A.D. when the Roman army was retiring from Britain and the Latin-Celtic world was collapsing into small states, often at war with each other and facing the first waves of the Anglo-Saxon invasion.
I might be wrong but this series seems to be set much later, when Anglo-Saxons were already established and mixed with the rest: Arthur’s father is called Uther, for instance, and there are runes -which are Germanic only- everywhere. I am under the impression that most incantations are pronounced in Old English instead of some kind of Celtic. Camelot itself is an enormous, full fledged castle, something I would expect in the X century or even later and several details in the scenes appear to be wrong.
Another point is the choice of black actors. Those playing Gwen and her father especially, but there were quite a lot of extras too.
Do NOT misunderstand me: they are fine professionals, I loved them, but I somehow doubt that in V century Britain there were so many people of colour, not to mention among the knights.
A further point is that the dialogues/gestures and even ethics sound too modern for the time. Was this really necessary for entertainment’s sake? Was it not possible to fetch an historian and have him revise the production?
There are several other points I could make but I shall leave it to you to decide for yourself, but allow me to stress that a little more accuracy would have been welcomed.
Some less sketchy dialogues would have been too: all actors do a decent job and could surely afford better lines and deeper ethics/attitudes.
An interesting issue other reviewers have pointed out are the homosexual undertones in the series, especially -and understandably- in the relationship between Arthur and Merlin. Nothing for prudes to worry about though, there is nothing explicit as there is nothing sexual of any sort in any line of the script for any character in the whole first season. It is just a texture, a feeling. An interesting one.
March 5, 2010
#2
Well – where to begin? I suppose that after you watch the first few episodes it begins to occur to you that all the main characters are slightly stupid. In fighting a flying monster they try to use swords and spears instead of crossbows for example. They never seem to learn from one episode to the next and always make the same basic mistakes regarding misjudging appearances and each other. There is no real growth or progression in the relationships or maturity of the younger characters and the older ones are so inflexible and foolish that it strains all credulity. Great liberties are taken with the original Arthurian myth so one finds Guinevere a serving maid, for example! Their attitudes are completely modern and speech likewise makes it hard to place them from anywhere else than 21st century London. Basic plot of an episode will be a stranger shows up who will pretend to be something they aren’t in order to get at the royal family. The king is oblivious, despite having this happen repeatedly, to the idea that somebody might use a disguise or lie to deceive him. Merlin tries to warn him, not believed, ends up having to use magic to save the day. Other than the tired plot devices there are occasional plot holes and inconsistencies and special effects are rather dull. I’d guess the target audience is young teens.
March 5, 2010
#3
My sister and I have a hard time tearing ourselves away from Merlin whenever we are able to watch it. The show is amazing! It’s a special thing for the two of us to do together, and let me tell you, waiting for her to watch another episode with me is torturous! I look into Colin Morgan’s eyes and all I can think is, MERLIN, I LOVE YOU. Arthur and Gaius are amazing, too, though. :] I recommend it to anyone and everyone who likes a good fantasy storyline mixed with a bit of mystery and action!
March 5, 2010
#4
That is the only way to put this show into words. We fell in love with it from the moment we saw it. It’s extremely well written and very different from anything I’ve seen on TV before. Rob Lane does an amazing job with the music for the series as well.
March 5, 2010
#5
This is an excellent family film which is probably why we won’t see future episodes in the USA. I’m thrilled that it is offered to the USA on DVD format; however, how about keeping up with technology and offer this on Blu-Ray?