4.09: Lancelot Du Lac

[Rooky]

Having just watched this weeks episode I have to add my 2 pence! I appreciate that this is a family show and kids love it;a friends daughter came to our wedding in August and I wore a Medieval style dress and she is still talking to her friends about going to a Merlin Wedding! But is there to be no redress to Arthurian Legend??? Don't get me wrong, I love it, but sometimes it really annoys me and this episode is one of them. Too annoyed to write any more just now, need to calm down!

[ctg]

Originally Posted by HareBrain

Still, at least they came up with a cute reason for the ‘du Lac’.

Yes, but not the right reason as Lancelot is 'the' son for 'the' lady of the lake. And for that reason alone, he is supposed to be better than mere humans that Arthur and the knights of the round table presents. And you can see that from the reason that his skills are equivalent or even better to Arthur's, and I wish I would have the old legends to prove this, but I don't ... pah.

The part of me wishes that this whole thing was just an illusion and that real Lancelot comes back from the underworld to deliver the real truth on the matter, and in one way, Morgana's dream is a proof that something is going to happen in the future. That Gwen is going to sit next to the throne and Lancelot is going to play a pivotal role at latter part of the legend to bring Arthur to his death.

Therefore, I do believe or I rather want to believe that these five (including this one) remaining episodes are really going to propel the story to another atmosphere.

What annoyed me really much and I believe it was voiced not so long ago is that Merlin is holding so much by staying in the closet. Yet, there isn't a really good way for him to come out and just slap back of Arthur's head and say, "Are you blind? Or stupid? Or both at the same time?"

But in the same time it is the same thing that keeps the audience in their seats as they wish that Merlin will take his place on Arthur's side as an advisor. And to do that he needs to get rid of the bloody uncle. And if I would be in his shoes, I would had arranged something, a loose tile at the battlements or something...

Just think about it, would it be good for the story to see Morgana's having to have to take a reins in her hands, Arthur taking the role as the King and Merlin on his side.

Another thing that many of you have voiced about Morgana is that why Merlin doesn't do her away is because Morgana is Merlin's doom as she lures Merlin to take a shape as a tree, (if my memory serves me well). And if that is true then seeing or even wanting the major villain to kick the bucket isn't going to happen.

Not if they want to keep at least somewhat honest to the series.

And this episode, as Mrs Ctg has shown above, isn't coming close to the legends. Not even by a far stretch. No matter how well written this episode was to put a wedge in Arthur's plans.

Yes, you read it well. It was well written and very well executed plan that to me as a writer felt as part of the story continuum and not a filler.

All the things that happen are meant to happen in one way or another, and Merlin as a series is one interpretation of the legend.

[Dave]

Off topic, but:

Originally Posted by HareBrain

Please, please, please, let ... it not be that John lewis ad.

Have you seen the Gordon Ramsay spoof ad for his Christmas Show when he tells the boy he is late and hands him a potato peeler? The boy drops the present and there is the sound of broken glass.

Originally Posted by springs1971

...speaking of ads, at least Lancelot did exactly what he said on the tin; sowed the seeds of destruction, brought Camelot low, split up Gwen and Arthur, but we did laugh at him being a "shadow of his former self" in great Shakesperian tones from Richard Wilson.

I agree, I can't really fault this episode - there was no reset button - we were left thinking "how does Gwen get out of that?" The motives of Agravaine's were much more clearly and explicitly explained. Morgana actually used a magical artifact that we have already seen before and knew existed, and not something she found for that episode. And it was a somewhat unusual but plausible way to bring back a dead character.

Originally Posted by HareBrain

One reason the Lancelot/Guinevere/Arthur triangle was such a strong element of the Malory tradition is that despite all the sorcery and miracles flying around in the story as a whole, that part came down in the end to flawed human beings and their emotions. But according to the makers of this series, human beings aren’t interesting enough on their own – so Lancelot has to be an enchanted creature and Gwen’s reciprocation is caused by a magical bracelet, thus leaving the audience untroubled by moral ambiguity. Pah, pah and thrice pah.

Firstly, they have already messed about with the legend so much that you can hardly complain about that any more, it would be more unusual if it followed the legend.

Secondly, remember that the children are watching! Never mind the moral ambiguity, you just couldn't have all that rampant sex before the watershed. Gwen and Lancelot were accused of adultery after merely stealing a few kisses - if this was The Jeremy Kyle Show he'd have to cancel every single one of the infidelity cases he covers with lie detectors and DNA paternity tests. I think that Uther's old laws were a bit harsh though; beheading someone for a quick kiss behind a pillar. What did you get for holding hands? And Arthur never asked Agravaine how he knew - probably phone hacking and searching her bins for letters.

[TL Rese]

Originally Posted by HareBrain

Alas, I have harsh words to say about this one.

One reason the Lancelot/Guinevere/Arthur triangle was such a strong element of the Malory tradition is that despite all the sorcery and miracles flying around in the story as a whole, that part came down in the end to flawed human beings and their emotions. But according to the makers of this series, human beings aren’t interesting enough on their own – so Lancelot has to be an enchanted creature and Gwen’s reciprocation is caused by a magical bracelet, thus leaving the audience untroubled by moral ambiguity. Pah, pah and thrice pah.

Still, at least they came up with a cute reason for the ‘du Lac’.

yea, i agree - but it is a kid's show, so i guess it'll have to be somewhat cartoonish w/ the cartoony characters. and i too liked the twist on "du lac".

merlin's inaction was the annoying thing for me, and a major plot hole. why doesn't he tell arthur about agravaine being evil, again? and why didn't he somehow get rid of lancelot's shade the moment he found out? surely, as a powerful wizard, he could've figured something out, rather than just letting the shade run around.

[HareBrain]

If nothing else, the episode has prompted me to watch Excalibur again, so I thank it for that.

[Mouse]

Originally Posted by Dave

Off topic, but:Have you seen the Gordon Ramsay spoof ad for his Christmas Show when he tells the boy he is late and hands him a potato peeler? The boy drops the present and there is the sound of broken glass.

Yes! And now I watch it with mixed emotions, not knowing whether I'm gonna be sad or whether I'll be 'aha, it's only Gordon!'

On topic, I agree with all of the rest of your post.

[Overread]

I'll second the view that its best to view this as names and themes from the Arthurian legends only and not in any way an attempt to retell the story - its a total re-writing and whilst I fully sympathies with fans of the original tales for hating retellings, I feel that this has been so much a break from them from the start that if you're still watching 4 series in then its too late to complain

As for this episode was I the only one to think that Gewn needs to update her wardrobe? Future queen and she was still wearing such similar garb that she stood out of place more so than she should have. I'm not expecting her in queens garb, but something a little more upmarket than her servents garb once in a while would have helped.

Otherwise something in the writing of this weeks episode felt, rush or at least speedy. I felt like if I blinked I'd have missed it, which might account for them fitting a fair bit into the episode all at once; but still a bit hasty. Otherwise generally good, though I do wonder about Gyas a bit (ok ok I can't spell his name) it seems that each time magic appears he tells Merlin, but never quite wants to tell Arthur. He never reveals the secrete about the amulet when his father died by it and here we see him again knowing about the necromancy and again not revealing any details - not even the smallest hint.

Granted he's not got to appear to magical knowing, but he's withholding more info and it does no one any help = not merlin nor Arthur and it feels a little like a plot gap (a bit like how each time they fight Morganna and she ends up with a bump on her head but nothing more).

[HareBrain]

I wasn't complaining about the divergence from the original so much as pointing out that replacing human emotions as a driving force with magic makes the story (whether faithful to or wildly different from the original) much less dramatic. I think. But OK, it's a kids' show.