It would be demeaning to refer to "Camelot" as mere television. Airing on Starz, it is only available by paid subscription to the premium cable channel. That being said, this is a show worth buying. The cast is suburb, the costumes flawless, the set stunning and the story complex. Though it is by no means an original retelling of the traditional tale of King Arthur, it nevertheless provides a beautiful illustration to this well?known text.
Jamie Campbell Bower as King Arthur, Joseph Fiennes as the wizard Merlin and Eva Green as Morgan stand out among a stellar and renowned cast, and the dynamics among the three are phenomenal. Arthur is the illegitimate son and heir of the late King Uther, while Morgan is the king's banished but publically known biological daughter who wishes to become queen. The two half?siblings make normal family quarrels appear trivial as they fight for the throne.
While Morgan acts as an opposing force to Arthur, Merlin acts as his mentor. Yet Merlin doubles as a puppeteer, as he sees Arthur as a key to his power. Still, Merlin feels genuine affection for Arthur, adding a deeper layer to their dynamic. Their conversation is witty and their dialogue amusing.
Tension among Arthur, Merlin and Morgan is further cemented when Morgan hints at a former romantic relationship between her and Merlin, suggesting that his behavior could be perceived as an attempt at a lover's revenge.
As a mixture of sex, humor and drama, "Camelot" is far more mature than previous adaptations of the Arthurian legend may suggest. The sex and nudity is full frontal, shown as a manipulative tool, a source of amusement and an indication of affection. The humor is rare, but used to lighten otherwise dark and tense scenes. In a sense, the lighter undertone helps to mitigate a deep intensity.
The illumination of humor within such a dark story is due to the people behind the scenes. Produced by Graham King, Michael Hirst and Morgan O'Sullivan, the show is clearly influenced by popular movies and shows. King is behind movies such as "The Town" (2010) and "The Departed" (2006), and Hirst is known for his work writing the "Elizabeth" films (1998, 2007) and "The Tudors" (2007?10). Their experiences lend perfectly to this multifaceted, historically based story: "Camelot" has the depth of an Oscar?winning movie but the drama of an extravagant television series.
Yet this seriousness causes one to question the function of "Camelot." Is it a short movie or an over?the?top TV show? With advances in technology, television has progressively moved further into the realm of highbrow entertainment. Now, TV shows have the quality and special effects to rival many theatrical films.
This further raises the question regarding the status of shows of this genre. In watching this, how does one's experience differ from watching a similar movie? "Camelot," with its A?list actors and lavish sets, is a hugely laborious endeavor. Forgoing the experience of a physical theater, this one?hour show more closely resembles a segmented made?for?TV movie in scope and extravagance.
Though the show has been capped at 10 episodes for the first season, the producers have indicated that more seasons will follow depending on its success. And a show of this caliber deserves a second season - it is captivating, weaving an intricate but fascinating plot between well?known characters. Though it airs on pay?cable, it's a steal when compared to what a show of this quality would cost in a theater.
