One beautiful depiction about chivalry, its adventurous romance, fairy legends and christian virtues. What makes the difference is also the reflective-poetical fiction touch which is typical from Bresson. Better than an other French film of the same name directed in 1970 by Santelli.
My Ukrainian landlord looks just like Lancelot, the pinched lips, the 14th century armor that he wears over his pajamas, his flippancy in victory--like when he raises my rent every year the maximum allowed by Los Angeles law--hand delivering the notice at my door then returning to the bottom half of his horse for a gallop back to his tent up the road. Funny, his parents are dead ringers for Straub & Huillet.
Bresson creates his poetry by resisting poetry. He reveals in the process of concealing. He removes everything that can disturb the expression, then he removes the expression. A dialogue between the filmmaker, the actors and the audience fills the void that remains. This communication happens below human consciousness, and it is divine because it is made by humans in their most human state.
it was far from my expectations ... I understand that this movie completed with non proffesional actors because of this situation I m not going to make criticism about actors. I didn't like cinematography ... there are many reason to explain this problem. I think this film bresson's most weak film.
8 - Not my favorite Bresson (though not my least-favorite, either), but possibly his most richly textured work, definitely from an auditory perspective. There is something inherently beautiful about an austere and mechanized take on something as inherently grandiose as the Arthurian legend; a sort of inverted mythification, where our folk heroes are reduced to powerless men and not the other way around. A great film.
I wish I didn't have to choose a star rating whenever I wanted to comment on a film. Anyway, an extremely interesting work in terms of the possibilities of treating a completely distant past context. I didn't know you could get away with the stuff Bresson does here. The armor clamor is the equivalent of the car noise in other Bresson's late works. What's with the funky colors of the pants and saddles though?
Probably only in some Straub/Huillet films and Oliveira's "Non" a period film was so semiotically staged, where the visual signs correspond to an exposure of a way and a time, and the sound, in its largest more-than-the-visible concrete dimensionality, the fill for an engaging and wide realistic approach, however ilogic such idea may seems. Or not, see the tournament sequence and the armors sound: (im)pure realism.
Chiseling away romantic excess for an ascetic lore of anti-humanism, Bresson deconstructs and accentuates the mundane. Knights are pawns of an intangible force, decreeing them to be prisoners of self-honor as a pretext to sin in lust, murder and betrayal. Queen Guinevere is neither a trophy of ideal love nor an emblem of dark deceit but simply a woman. When the Holy Grail is materialised, the quest for God is lost.
I'd like to know why Bresson refused the 1974 Cannes prize for this film. There's a six minute youtube video of his press conference at Cannes in '74, and he makes a lively argument or explanation to the press. Unfortunately I don't speak French. Would love to know what he said to them, and why he refused the prize.