User reviews

I've got to admit, I'm very confused by all of the negative reviews. Were people expecting A Knight's Tale? This is an A24 artsy movie, it's not a popcorn movie. That being said, I found it very engaging. It's slightly slow paced, only because each scene takes its time, but I did not find it boring. In fact, I found it fairly riveting and propulsive for a movie of its kind. There is a thick atmosphere by way I of very compelling visuals and music, which reminded me of an Alex Garland movie, like Annihilation or Men, but set in medieval times.

The movie is also extremely thought provoking. There are several interesting themes of the movie: 1) The nature of chivalry and honor, 2) The meaning or meaninglessness of life and death. There are also some interesting choices about race and color.

I will say, I did read the original legend before seeing the movie, and perhaps that increased my enjoyment of the movie. It's short, and will only take you a few hours. It was very interesting to see in what ways Lowery chose to stay true to the story, versus what says he chose to deviate. There was even an interesting meta line in the movie about making changes to an original work when it needs improvement.

Overall, if you're open to a thought provoking and artistically beautiful movie, I think you'll enjoy the movie.

Liked the first half, disliked the second half. The alterations to the original story were in some ways intriguing, like including the story of St. Winifred whose fate echoes Gawain's, but in other cases, went too far off the rails. Some of the wild ideas that got included to pad the film out to 130 long minutes should have been excised.

What is the green knight? Death, the green of the earth that will cover us all, the moss that will grow over our edifices when we're gone - I loved this interpretation. Facing the prospect of death with honor, resisting temptation - the basis for the original story may sound rather old-fashioned, but it's from the 14th century after all. Too many of the embellishments David Lowery made to the story - subplots, characters, hallucinations, etc - detracted from it, feeling at best inelegant and at worst pretentious. You certainly don't get the impression from the film that the story is about virtue or honor, and that's a shame. It started feeling like ambiguity for ambiguity's sake, which was irritating by the time the film ended.

The cinematography certainly had its moments, but I prefer less CGI, less darkness, and a more realistic look even to fantasy stories, at least as much as possible. Aesthetically I had a very mixed reaction, and in any event, the lighthearted tone of the poem was completely lost here. Dev Patel is wonderful though.

The Green Knight came highly recommended. I went in wanting to love it, but left disappointed. The cinematography and visual execution in the film are outstanding (with the exception of the weakly CGI'd fox). The movie drops the viewer into a fully realized medieval fantasy, complete with talking creatures, witchcraft, a ghost, and even a traveling crew of giants in a segment that made little sense. It's fortunate that the scenes are so dazzling, because you'll be staring at them a while. The movie trudges along for over two hours.

For plot, the Green Knight tells the story of Sir Gawain, King Arthur's unaccomplished nephew who appears to spend much of his time drinking or fraternizing with a prostitute he fancies but is unwilling to progress the relationship any further beyond transactional. On Christmas, at the King's feast, the eponymous Green Knight appears, a creature with a human shape but made of trees and plants. He proposes a game: anyone who strikes him will receive his powerful ax, but in one year, that individual must go to the Green Knight's home, an earthen chapel, and receive the same strike in return. Gawain beheads the Green Knight, achieving instant fame throughout the kingdom. As the following year slips away, Gawain then faces his obligations and sets off on the journey to meet the Green Knight.

It's a film that asks Big Questions, about the meaning of being human and facing one's death, about honor, duty, and chivalry, and even about love. After raising these issues early on, once Gawain begins his travels, the film then instead forefronts the slog of the journey. Maybe the unpleasantness of duty is part of the point, but it's not enjoyable viewing either. Several of the stops along the way seem nothing more than pretty, pretentious asides - dreamlike aspects of the film's world that they just couldn't cut during editing - rather than necessary portions of plot. The movie was stuffed with these aspects and overlong as a result, resulting in a viewing experience that felt tedious by the time the credits rolled.

Before I viewed this movie I was aware of the polarized reviews and ratings, some think it is great while others consider it a complete miss. So I was curious.

It is a lesser-known story on the fringes of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. Sir Gawain (they pronounce it 'GAW-in') is the King's nephew, it is Christmas, and a mysterious Green Knight shows up, inviting a challenge. None of the Knights step up but Gawain does.

Then a year later, on Christmas, he must travel 'six days north' to meet up with the Green Knight again, to settle the score.

My wife and I viewed it at home on BluRay from our public library. At just over two hours it was a fantastical, mystical movie. It has very accomplished actors who play their roles well. The locations (shot in Ireland) and cinematography are excellent all the way through. The sound track is really great. That's all the good stuff.

The not-so-good is that the story is very obscure much of the time. Things happened (like, what was up with the blindfolded woman who never spoke?) that cannot easily be interpreted as part of the story. So what we end up with is a pretty good viewing experience that leaves you figuratively scratching your head and wondering, "What was that all about?"

I am glad I watched it, I doubt that I will ever want to watch it again. The "making of" extra on the disc contains lots of discussion for those wanting to dig deeper into it. I viewed some of it. The cast and filmmakers clearly had a good time making it.

I really wanted to like this film, but other than the obvious care towards its execution, everything else is basically slow, pretentious, referencing stuff important to the writer/director and metaphorical. This is one of those movies that you have to research after watching it, trying to understand what it wanted to say. In short: a boy's rite of passage to becoming a man by facing his own death... stretched to more than two hours.

It certainly helps to know the 14th century poem the film is based on, its various interpretations and associated folklore, including the French versions. Not ready to do that? Well, you're out of luck! Because the film is purposely vague, explaining nothing, making no sense and adding stuff from poems from the same era as filler. In short: Gawain was this noble and kind knight, unless you read the French versions where he was a total dick or the later rewrites which feature Lancelot as the top good guy.

The film is slow, methodical, making you want to watch it at 1.5x speed, only you can't because you need to see every detail and divine its meaning. For example: King Arthur's coat has these little metal badges on it, which are references to previous projects of the writer/director and of other people in the team. What? You didn't get that while Arthur is walking around in a dark room and scenes are interspersed with scenes of Morgana Le Fay doing pagan magic? Well, I can't understand how, because the writer/director spent more than a year perfecting the scene until it was just right! And yes, I am sarcastic.

The only reason why I rated this so high is because the sets were nice and the actors did great work. However, this is one of those obscure works that carry meaning only to the creator and can't possibly bring any joy at the first viewing. Do I care about old British folk lore and how the writer/director wanted to tell the story so I would research all of this and then rewatch the film so I can revel in the details? Hell, no!

Told in the spirit of watching paint dry, waiting for water to boil, or watching golf...this an insanely boring telling of what should have been a great story.

Despite one of the biggest divides in critical reception (critical acclaim) and audience reactions (much more polarising, with a large amount of strong dislike) of any film seen by me, 'The Green Knight' was still seen anyway on high recommendation from my sister. Also like Dev Patel, with him coming on a long way as an actor, and have liked David Lowery's other work. Especially 'The Old Man and the Gun'. The subject did fascinate me a good deal and have no problem with symbolism or slow pacing, have even in the past defended films with heavy symbolism and/or slow pacing.

Somehow though, 'The Green Knight' was one of those difficult to rate and review films. Really wanted to like it, with how much it had going for it and how highly recommended it was, but it was wildly uneven. There are good things, and those good things are actually quite outstanding. There are also bad things, and a few of the bad things are worse than bad. Actually saw 'The Green Knight' last year, but it has taken a while for me to think over and adequately sum up what my thoughts were.

'The Green Knight' does have good things. Cannot fault the acting, with Patel giving perhaps his best performance to date in full command of a strongly written role. Alicia Vikander is suitably enigmatic and 'The Borgias' Sean Harris makes the most of his short screen time. Did think that it started off great, very thought provoking and with a very haunting, creepy mood. The Green Knight is pretty frightening.

Also cannot fault the production values, which are quite wonderful. Very handsome and atmospheric scenery enhanced by the vibrant yet also moody photography. The effects work shows a lot of professionalism and care. The music has a haunting ominous vibe and had no problem with how it was placed, also felt that it suited the tone of the story and didn't come over as too heavy.

On the other hand, the story felt dully paced and over-extended, starting off with great promise but meanders about a lot in the second half. If you read any synopsis that indicates that a lot goes on, it didn't feel like it to me with a lot of scenes going on for too long, everything that happens post the battlefield sequence (which was well done) to the arrival at the Green Chapel feels like forever. Lowery directs with ambition but sometimes it was very more style than substance and show offy.

Furthermore, the symbolism is very heavy handed and not easy to get the head round. Especially in the final act. Some interesting themes here, not dug into deeply or insightfully enough. The whole ending also felt confusing and it feels rather abrupt as well. Too much of the script is too rambling and there is not much fresh or insightful about it.

In conclusion, very difficult to rate and review. 5/10.

It's a good film, but modern filmmakers seem a little too obsessed with deconstructing characters and de-romanticising the hero's journey, and it's starting to become a cliche that is overplayed and almost insulting to the audience. The filmmakers seem to think that by making all the protagonists anti-heroes who are not as heroic as we think that it's intelligent storytelling, but it really isn't.

I find myself regularly asking, "Where have all the good guys gone?" and "why isn't there romance in films anymore?"

Is it a little too much to ask for a righteous protagonist and a little love in films?

The modern landscape of cynical filmmaking that creates nihilistic stories has become very tedious.

I'm writing this seconds after finishing the movie so forgive my frustration. While this is generally a well-made movie from every technical perspective, it is completely destroyed for me by two things. One, it's one of the most boring movies ever. And two, it's made up almost entirely of metaphors and symbolism with nothing concrete to hold onto.

I may not be the best with abstract movies but I normally have at least some sense of what they're going for. In this movie, I didn't have the slightest clue about the meaning behind anything and everything. It's all straight nonsense. So many weird random parts seem to have nothing to do with the rest of the story. It's all style, no substance and fully pretentious.

There is a lot I liked, even loved. The visuals are stunning. So many beautiful shots. Great cinematography combined with intense music create such an affecting atmosphere. Some really cool camera movements and overall fine directing.

Even with all those likes, this movie completely drained my patience. And when it ended, I wanted to yell at the screen in exasperation that I watched the entire thing and still have no idea what it's about. I hate this movie. (1 viewing, 2/20/2022)

The Green Knight follows the general plot of the poem, embellishing along the way. The film stands out in the sumptuous details of scenery, costuming, writing, and acting. This is not a sword action film. This is a lyrical presentation of seeking honor and one's center of life. Dev Patel as Gawain strikes a meek figure as he strives to achieve his quest, assumed to be a knight, but he continually denies this. He embodies the meaning of what a knight is, but he doesn't have the confidence to act in accordance with this chivalrous code when challenged with his own urges and emotions. Allegorical, the film won't answer most questions of plotting dtraihht forwardly or easily in its details, but at the end, one may recognize the importance of how one answers, not whether it is correct. While linear in structure, the mystical aspect of the film may be difficult for many to sustain their attention, but if you enjoy absorbing the feeling that a film can project, The Green Knight offers a lush display to be had.

The Green Knight is both unabashedly Arthurian and a very timely cautionary tale. In one of my favorite sequences in recent memory, Sir Gawain, who has spent the entire film in staunch defiance of death and nature is shown a vision of a world in which he does not keep his promise to the Green Knight and rides away unscathed. The world he is shown is one of dishonor, bloodshed and moral degradation.

It's a world that feels not unlike the one we live in. Lowery is somehow able to preserve the authenticity of a centuries-old myth, while simultaneously giving us a hyper-relevant story about the cost of our modern inability to humble ourselves before nature.

I don't know what kind of drugs David Lowery took but it seems like that stuff was doing its job. The Green Knight is well filmed, I'll give them that, but the story itself is slow, making no sense for the majority of the time. It's just a weird movie, and normally that doesn't mean it's bad but in this case it was. The acting wasn't bad either so it wasn't their fault this whole movie was a mess. Apart of the good cinematography and the decent acting it's just not good. I wouldn't waste your time with this one if I were you.

I could see how this movie could put some to sleep or how other people could say it's not faithful to its source material, but this is genuinely one of the most intriguing movies I have ever seen, and if you have enjoyed the past styles of a24 you will definitely enjoy this movie, as it has its high moments. Most of the negativity I see stems from people going into this movie expecting an epic tale of Game of Thrones proportions. This is not the case, and anyone who knows a24 should really have known better. This movie is enjoyable and a sight to see, so giving it your time could change your perspective.

The interstitial credits give such a great sense of suspense and dread. The design, cinematography, costumes, art direction are absolutely 10/10. Will be slow for some viewers but it felt perfect and the ending is great. Absolutely will be one of the best films of the year. Entrancing. A work of art on the screen from beginning to end.

You would have to go back to "Excalibur" to find an Arthurian movie that looked or sounded remotely like David Lowery's "The Green Knight". This is the Middle-Ages as gritty and downright dirty as they come, (think Richard Lester or "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"), while still aiming to deliver the fantastical, magical goods a genre picture like this requires.

The hero of our tale is Gawain, (Dev Patel, excellent given the material he has to work with), who, in the film's opening scene, becomes something of a hero after defeating the Green Knight who has challenged him to a Christmas duel in what appears to be the court of King Arthur but there's a catch; there's an addendum to the duel and Gawain's life isn't quite the same afterwards as he rides off to meet the Green Knight for round two the following Christmas.

Lowery's film is certainly no "Ivanhoe" but an adult fairytale that deliberately sets out to alienate a mass audience. This is an art-house movie that might please the critics but is unlikely to prove popular at the box-office. Indeed it's hard to figure out exactly what audience it's aimed at.

Visually, it's often remarkable, again mixing fantasy and realism to good effect. The cast are also well chosen but, Patel aside, are given very little to do though that most brilliant of young Irish actors, Barry Keoghan, has no trouble stealing the movie in his couple of scenes. The real problem lies both in the film's length and almost total lack of action. Gawain's adventures are singularly unadventurous and ultimately the film comes across as both boring and pretentious, unforgiveable sins in a film of this kind. Still I can see Razzie glory come the awards season.

Though it may seem unknightly, The Green Knight (2021) will not hold your hand. It takes its sweet time, it doesn't try to engage the viewer with adrenaline-fueled swashbuckling sequences of adventure. It does not care if you can't clearly understand the English of old.

All of these seem like flaws but they're actually the movie's greatest strengths. The Green Knight does not actively try to be easy to follow both visually or through dialogue, and in doing so becomes so much more immersive and hypnotic. Instead of relying on drawn-out action sequences, David Lowery tries to enchant you with The Green Knight's cinematography and mise-en-scene, and succeeds.

The film is very light on plot as it is a decidedly simple adaptation of a simple legend. So if you're into movies with a particularly ambitious story, this definitely isn't the movie for you. What The Green Knight lacks in terms of being a commercially appealing film, it makes up for by being cinema. And as cinema, it is profound.

This is an exquisite treat for the eyes and the ears. The score, the sound design, the camerawork, the lighting, the editing, the costumes, the effects, everything superbly comes together to create something wholly original.

This is not an action film. It is a film about honor. It's not a big-budget extravaganza but very evidently arthouse cinema that serves another purpose- just so you know what to expect.

If you appreciate cinema as an art form, watch this in a theater.

This was a well made movie with a lot of metaphor and symbolism that I enjoyed. There were a lot of things you could take away from this story, even if you don't understand everything. The 1-3 star reviews must be from folks who were expecting another marvel movie. It's a good movie worth a watch.

Really sad all this bad reviews complaining 'nothing is happening' People are getting used to all this cheap ass crap movies Hollywood serves us. Films that only have action and form but not an ounce of substance. In the end you raise a nation of spectators who are completely unable to recognise content at all and call it boring because people aren't killing each other all the time.

When people can no longer tell the difference between a sampler and a piano, why continue to make pianos? Fortunately, even in superficial America there are still directors who like to listen to classical music. I would call this a relief. A little haute cuisine in an ocean of hamburger.

What does it all mean? I don't know, but it's a stunningly beautiful audio-visual experience. An early favorite for best original score and cinematography Academy Awards. Don't get lost in what it isn't. Sign on for what it is, even if you can't quite put your finger on it.

As most artisanal movies go, the visually were breathtaking, with this aura hanging over ever scene. However, the storyline plot and dialogue were downright nonsensical, what the hell were even half those scenes about? I have no idea. Made no sense, I got lost and bored ten minutes in.