Talk:Knights of the Round Table (film)

Fair use rationale for Image:Knights of the round table.jpeg

Image:Knights of the round table.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Source ??

The film credits may say this is based on Malory's Morte D'Arthur, but that's very loose. In this film, Mordred is already grown by the time that Arthur even attempts to claim the throne of England, and Arthur has to conquer him. In virtually all other versions, Mordred has not even been born at this time, and only appears when he begins to (successfully) plot the downfall of a Camelot that has been established for several years. I realize that to be family-friendly, they have to avoid the motif of Mordred being the product of unknowing incest, but this is ridiculous. The article should mention that in spite of claiming to be based on Malory, it radically, almost wholly deviates from him.--WickerGuy (talk) 05:53, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely, it should be pointed out. But nobody was ever under oath about sources when transmitting or inventing Arthurian material. The credits are in the tradition of Geoffrey of Monmouth's claim he based his History of the Kings of Britain on "a certain most ancient book in the British language" he got from Walter of Oxford. And as for being ridiculous, that fiber too twists through the length of the line. The legend is so robust, so diverse in its appeal, that it is immune to travesty. If there's a Three Stooges short with Moe as Arthur, Curly as Lancelot, and Larry as Merlin, the fidelity it owes the tradition is to provide a stirring narrative. Jackaroodave (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree. In the original Modred is the incestuous offspring of Arthur and his half-sister Morgan Le Fay. That would probably be unacceptable in a commercial Hollywood production in the early 1950s - and they would have the Hays Office to deal with. Instead they show Modred and Morgan as (unmarried) lovers, but so discreetly that the audience is left to figure that out for itself. The couple are never shown kissing, or even embracing, until Modred is dying and a tearful Morgan is keening over him. I've always found this moment impressive, even moving. Richard Thorpe was a better director than he was usually credited with being - certainly not a studio hack. O Murr (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Battle scenes

The battle scenes in this film appear to be massively cribbed from Laurence Olivier's film of Henry V from 1944. Similar music, similar shots, similar color schemes down to a T.--WickerGuy (talk) 05:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)