Featured Audience Ratings

• Universal D

  
  Not a serious historical piece (and what do we really know of Pendragon anyway?) but a children's fable extolling virtue, the Zuckers take a chance with this glittering fairy tale. Connery is the Arthur the story wants, or is it that we want Connery to be Arthur, its hard to… More
  Not a serious historical piece (and what do we really know of Pendragon anyway?) but a children's fable extolling virtue, the Zuckers take a chance with this glittering fairy tale. Connery is the Arthur the story wants, or is it that we want Connery to be Arthur, its hard to tell. Gere supplies the dashing derring-do as Lancelot, and Ormond fills the difficult position of being torn between two lovers fetchingly.

• Mike S

  
  Starts off mediocerly, but once Sean Connery enters the stage as the fabled King Arthur, the quality level is instantly raised. Richard Gere looks a bit misplaced as the fearless Sir Lancelot, and wouldn't have been my first pick for the role, but he still takes it on to the best… More
  Starts off mediocerly, but once Sean Connery enters the stage as the fabled King Arthur, the quality level is instantly raised. Richard Gere looks a bit misplaced as the fearless Sir Lancelot, and wouldn't have been my first pick for the role, but he still takes it on to the best of his abilities. As for Julia Ormond, she's quite lovely as Princess Guinevere, altough I would have very much liked to see her put a little more energy into her performance. What speaks for the film in positive terms, however, is the atmosphere and action, along with a highly enchanting music score by the brilliant Jerry Goldsmith. It's so good, in fact, that I've made it a part of my inspirational music library. If there is one thing I could change though, it would be the costumes. They look a little plain and cheap for what is essentially a period piece. Maybe they ran out of money when it came to clothing the actors? Apart from said maladies though, it remains a captivating tale of love, chivalry and sweeping adventure. Easily one of the better renditions of the Arthurian legend.

• Conner R

  
  Another terrible rendition of King Arthur. Turning the story into nothing more than a romantic threesome is just pure slander. To change the story to fit a movie is one thing, but this should've just left Arthur's name all together. The acting is terrible, quite possibly… More
  Another terrible rendition of King Arthur. Turning the story into nothing more than a romantic threesome is just pure slander. To change the story to fit a movie is one thing, but this should've just left Arthur's name all together. The acting is terrible, quite possibly Sean Connery's worst performance and the usual Richard Gere treatment.

• Jon L

  
  I saw this one in the theatre and can't quite remember the whole film, but I do remember enjoying it.

• Jason O

  
  "First Knight" is a version of the Camelot legend. I'm not familiar at all with the legend of Camelot, but I do know one thing, I really like "First Knight." Sean Connery plays the part as King Arthur, Julia Ormond is the Queen, and Richard Gere plays as Sir… More
  "First Knight" is a version of the Camelot legend. I'm not familiar at all with the legend of Camelot, but I do know one thing, I really like "First Knight." Sean Connery plays the part as King Arthur, Julia Ormond is the Queen, and Richard Gere plays as Sir Lancelot. Lancelot is a wanderer who doesn't have a home or any place to stay, but he is satisfied living alone with just his superior sword-fighting skills. That is, until he meets the soon to be Queen and falls in love with her. Will Lancelot be successful in making the Queen change her mind about who she wants to be with, or will her top priority still be King Arthur? Don't get me wrong, "First Knight" is not only a love story. There is a lot of exciting fighting, mostly with swords, it's easy to tell the movie is an epic with the huge castles and the many knights on horses, and throughout the whole movie, everybody, especially the three main stars (Ormond, Connery, and Gere), all do a great job of acting to make the movie captivating and believable. The bottom line is, "First Knight" is an exciting epic about the story of Camelot, and all the while with all the fighting and other conflicts, there's an underlying love story to make it even more interesting. Even if you're not that crazy about epic films, give "First Knight" a chance. If you are a big fan of great epic movies, I recommend purchasing "First Knight" as soon as possible! NOTE: That was my Amazon review from the year 2001. To this day, this is still one of my absolute favorite epic films, and my favorite Sean Connery flick.

• Film C

  
  Its ok but i didnt finish it all but its ok but not as good as the old braveheart

• Red L

  
  It is always fun to watch another version about Camelot. This one suffers the indignity of having Richard Gere looking like he is from the 20th century playing Lancelot. Sean Connery does a tremendous job playing King Arthur. The ending is just too hokey - one minute Aurthur is… More
  It is always fun to watch another version about Camelot. This one suffers the indignity of having Richard Gere looking like he is from the 20th century playing Lancelot. Sean Connery does a tremendous job playing King Arthur. The ending is just too hokey - one minute Aurthur is sentencing Lancelot to death and the next minute bequeathing his kingdom to him.

• Bobby H

  
  Pretty good movie. No disrespect to Richard Gere or Sean Connery, because there both wonderful actors but there not convincing as these legendary men. The story carries on awhile to but nothing ever progresses, and its only a few well done fight scenes and the end of this movie that… More
  Pretty good movie. No disrespect to Richard Gere or Sean Connery, because there both wonderful actors but there not convincing as these legendary men. The story carries on awhile to but nothing ever progresses, and its only a few well done fight scenes and the end of this movie that makes it pretty good. It's worth watching, if your interested in this period. If not, then you probably dont want to see it because there are a lot better films of this period and of these men out there that can give you a loving of this legend and time.

• Lenny M

  
  I don't know why critics hated this movie, Sean Connery as King Arthur, amazing, forget Richard Gere it's Sean Connery.

• Dean M

  
  Apart from the anachronistic performance by Richard Gere as a kung-fu fighting Lancelot, this is a memorable retelling of the King Arthur legend, with its emphasis on a historical, romantic approach as opposed to fantasy. Director Jerry Zucker keeps it big and impressive, developing… More
  Apart from the anachronistic performance by Richard Gere as a kung-fu fighting Lancelot, this is a memorable retelling of the King Arthur legend, with its emphasis on a historical, romantic approach as opposed to fantasy. Director Jerry Zucker keeps it big and impressive, developing his characters in a believable fashion.

• Candy R

  
  Another great cast and period costume movie about Guinevere who is torn between Arthur and Lancelot.

• Curtis L

  
  lame.

• Dan S

  
  For a Gere movie, not too bad, but I wouldn't see it again.

• Summer W

  
  cheesy...I think you'll enjoy this if you're 12. A horrible retelling of Aurthurian legend.

• Dean !

  
  A pretty good swordplay film with a strong cast....but this type of film has been done better, many times since.

• xGary X

  
  Uniformly dreadful retelling of the Arthurian legend full of wooden performances, laughably anachronistic production design and illogical plotting. One for Seans nest egg, I suspect.

• Jason S

  
  I liked it but it was meant for the ladies.

• Matthew Y

  
  Blah! Despite being Scottish Sean Connery seemed born to play the role of King Arthur. Finally we get a big screen film adaptation of the legendary tale with Connery as the fabled King and it is poorly written and weakly plotted drub. Why is Arthur so old and Lancelot/Guinevere so… More
  Blah! Despite being Scottish Sean Connery seemed born to play the role of King Arthur. Finally we get a big screen film adaptation of the legendary tale with Connery as the fabled King and it is poorly written and weakly plotted drub. Why is Arthur so old and Lancelot/Guinevere so young? The film really is more of a Shakespearean forbidden love tale than a film about the great King and his Knights of the Round Table. God damn it! Why can't we get an entertaining and intelligent King Arthur movie!

• Steven V

  
  Great movie. Nicely paced action and brilliant performance by Sean Connery. The story seem short but it lift up to the legend of King Arthur.

• Nicolas K

  
  Quite uninspiring film for a tale that has fascinated so many...

Read all 20 featured audience ratings