ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,3/10
19 k
MA NOTE
Une fille intrépide, un jeune ermite aveugle et un dragon à deux têtes loufoque se lancent dans une course pour retrouver l'épée perdue d'Excalibur et sauver le Roi Arthur et Camelot d'un dé... Tout lireUne fille intrépide, un jeune ermite aveugle et un dragon à deux têtes loufoque se lancent dans une course pour retrouver l'épée perdue d'Excalibur et sauver le Roi Arthur et Camelot d'un désastre.Une fille intrépide, un jeune ermite aveugle et un dragon à deux têtes loufoque se lancent dans une course pour retrouver l'épée perdue d'Excalibur et sauver le Roi Arthur et Camelot d'un désastre.
- Nommé pour 1 oscar
- 1 victoire et 6 nominations au total
Jessalyn Gilsig
- Kayley
- (voice)
Cary Elwes
- Garrett
- (voice)
Andrea Corr
- Kayley
- (singing voice)
Bryan White
- Garrett
- (singing voice)
Gary Oldman
- Ruber
- (voice)
Don Rickles
- Cornwall
- (voice)
Jane Seymour
- Juliana
- (voice)
Céline Dion
- Juliana
- (singing voice)
- (as Celine Dion)
Pierce Brosnan
- King Arthur
- (voice)
Steve Perry
- King Arthur
- (singing voice)
Bronson Pinchot
- Griffin
- (voice)
Jaleel White
- Bladebeak
- (voice)
Gabriel Byrne
- Lionel
- (voice)
John Gielgud
- Merlin
- (voice)
- (as Sir John Gielgud)
Frank Welker
- Ayden
- (voice)
Sarah Rayne
- Young Kayley
- (voice)
Al Roker
- Additional Voices
- (voice)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesBill Kroyer, the original director of this movie, intended to make a darker movie, more faithful in tone to the original book. Following the phenomenal successes of the movies of the Disney Renaissance, Warner Bros. among many other studios, moved into Warner Bros. Feature Animation hoping to replicate similar successes with their own animated movies. At Warner Brothers' behest, Kroyer's vision for this movie was rejected, in favor of a more Disney animated musical movie-style, and the movie was put into production before the story was even finalized. The complex plot and dark nature of the novel, The King's Damousel, were replaced with several animation trademarks of the 1990s-era: musical numbers, a strong female heroine, a power hungry antagonist who wants to usurp the kingdom, a romantic subplot where the couple lives happily ever after, talking animal sidekicks, and family-friendly comedy gags.
- GaffesWhen Devon and Cornwall make shadow puppets on the wall, Garrett (who is supposedly blind), looks at the shadow puppets on the wall.
- Générique farfeluOn the On Demand print, during the closing credits, the offer for the movie's soundtrack on CD & Cassette, that is seen before the movie begins, plays again.
- Autres versionsIn the version released on Netflix and YouTube, the Warner Bros. Family Entertainment logo is plastered by the Warner Bros. Television logo.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Troldspejlet: Episode #19.6 (1998)
- Bandes originalesUnited We Stand
Written by Carole Bayer Sager and David Foster
Produced by David Foster and Carole Bayer Sager
Performed by Steve Perry
Courtesy of Columbia Records
Commentaire en vedette
This is a film that I have watched several times now with the kids and find myself enjoying it more each time.
Previous comments have compared it unfavourably to Disney but this seems unfair - it is clearly a separate product, darker and more cynical than the works of that other company. The song by dragons Devon and Cornwall - 'Without You'- stands in stark contrast to, say, the sentiments of 'You and Me Together' in Disney's Oliver and Company. Neither could I imagine Ruber, with his particular vein of sarcastic villainy, appearing in the products of that more family centred studio.
The weakest individual moment, for me at least, is anachronistic. Devon and Cornwall sing about their mutual hostility, and their song is animated with some twentieth century props and in-jokes. This is a jarring note in a film which otherwise tries to maintain some sort of historical integrity. It is funny but creates a disruption that is hard to forget. (More acceptable is the 'Do you feel clucky?' line later on)
There has been some criticism of the animation quality, and it does seem to vary. Some of the movements of animals, in particular, seem jumpy at a distance. However balancing out these weaknesses are such scenes as the evocation of a cold morning, when Kayley hears of her father's death, and Ruber's splendid witchcraft scene.
Overall the film suffers from being underwritten - one wishes more time was taken in filling out character and incident before the final attack on Camelot. Cayley and Garrett fall in love too easily, while Devon and Cornwall (delightfully witty and charming creations) have too little to do. And what happens to Merlin? He's reduced to flying a bird. It's a shame as other supporting characters, like the Gryphon and the axe chicken are very well judged, and completely memorable. More unforgivable is the character of King Arthur, who is just bland.
On the plus side, this is still a good film, utterly free of pretension. Ruber's magical creation of his henchman is a highlight, a demoniac sequence that is quite thrilling, a brilliant musical set piece that moves the plot forward, sparking huge suspense. His creations are delightfully original in themselves, frightening and intriguing in equal measure. Watching it again I was reminded of how little of this quality of real wonder appears in another non-Disney animation, Prince of Egypt - a much more favourably received work, and far more earnest in tone.
This Arthurian adventure can be quite revealing in comparison when taken this as an unofficial sequel to The Sword in The Stone, throwing stereotypical Disney values and methods into greater relief. In its own right it is very enjoyable in any case, although it could have been even better with some extended work on the script.
Previous comments have compared it unfavourably to Disney but this seems unfair - it is clearly a separate product, darker and more cynical than the works of that other company. The song by dragons Devon and Cornwall - 'Without You'- stands in stark contrast to, say, the sentiments of 'You and Me Together' in Disney's Oliver and Company. Neither could I imagine Ruber, with his particular vein of sarcastic villainy, appearing in the products of that more family centred studio.
The weakest individual moment, for me at least, is anachronistic. Devon and Cornwall sing about their mutual hostility, and their song is animated with some twentieth century props and in-jokes. This is a jarring note in a film which otherwise tries to maintain some sort of historical integrity. It is funny but creates a disruption that is hard to forget. (More acceptable is the 'Do you feel clucky?' line later on)
There has been some criticism of the animation quality, and it does seem to vary. Some of the movements of animals, in particular, seem jumpy at a distance. However balancing out these weaknesses are such scenes as the evocation of a cold morning, when Kayley hears of her father's death, and Ruber's splendid witchcraft scene.
Overall the film suffers from being underwritten - one wishes more time was taken in filling out character and incident before the final attack on Camelot. Cayley and Garrett fall in love too easily, while Devon and Cornwall (delightfully witty and charming creations) have too little to do. And what happens to Merlin? He's reduced to flying a bird. It's a shame as other supporting characters, like the Gryphon and the axe chicken are very well judged, and completely memorable. More unforgivable is the character of King Arthur, who is just bland.
On the plus side, this is still a good film, utterly free of pretension. Ruber's magical creation of his henchman is a highlight, a demoniac sequence that is quite thrilling, a brilliant musical set piece that moves the plot forward, sparking huge suspense. His creations are delightfully original in themselves, frightening and intriguing in equal measure. Watching it again I was reminded of how little of this quality of real wonder appears in another non-Disney animation, Prince of Egypt - a much more favourably received work, and far more earnest in tone.
This Arthurian adventure can be quite revealing in comparison when taken this as an unofficial sequel to The Sword in The Stone, throwing stereotypical Disney values and methods into greater relief. In its own right it is very enjoyable in any case, although it could have been even better with some extended work on the script.
- FilmFlaneur
- 16 oct. 2000
- Lien permanent
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Quest for Camelot?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Quest for Camelot
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 40 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 22 510 798 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 6 041 602 $ US
- 17 mai 1998
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 22 510 798 $ US
- Durée1 heure 26 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.66 : 1(original & negative ratio)
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was La légende de Camelot (1998) officially released in India in English?
Répondre