I rewatched 'Mists of Avalon' again yesterday. I'm trying to come to terms with what I feel is wrong with it. As its own movie, it is decent, I guess. But as a representation of Marion Zimmer Bradleys book? Not good.

This contains spoilers for both the book and the movie so leave if you don't want to be spoiled.

*

*

*

*

1. The Virgin Huntress/King Stag encounter. There was no reason to change this in the movie. In fact, the plot of the book often references the love that Arthur has for Morgaine, the Huntress, even though she is his sister. It adds to the love connections as Arthur is married to Gwen but loves Morgaine as his first love; Gwen is married to Arthur, but loves Lancelot as her first love; Lancelot is married to Elaine, through Morgaines doing and has romantic entaglements with Morgaine, but love Gwen as his first love; and Morgaine loves Lancelot, then Accalon. It is a meeting as important as Gwen and Lancelot meeting at the Tor, as it forms the basis for certain character traits. To change it in the movie so that Morgaine knows but not Arthur changes this, something that didn't need to be changed.

2. Morgaine not returning to Avalon. She does return. A different successor has been choosen for Vivaine, but they work together. She does go back. In the movie she doesn't. Why?

3. Kevin the Harper isn't even in the movie. Nor are a number of Avalon characters. Which brings me to...

4. The general acceptance of Christianity and the taking over of Avalon by it. Avalon is closed forever and Morgaine lives in a convent at the end of the movie. End of the book states 'And he died, just as the mists rose and the sun shone full over the shores of Avalon'. She continues to live in Avalon, even though it is in existance, time passes slower - it is compared to Fairy country. Igraine becomes a head Nun in the movie - in the book she dies at a convent, not a wearer of the 'black of their slave nuns'. At the end, morgaine is accepting of Mary, which happens to a smaller degree of the book, however, with some critiques.

5. The movie makes no reference to the quest for the holy grail. How could any king arthur story not make that reference?

These are just some of my critiques. The acting was good, the sets wonderful, but damn, why so many critical and important differences?

(0 comments)

<<