alcazar

iTrader: (2)

They seem to have re-written the whole story, and have Merlin using expressions like, "No way".

When one of the women was getting changed, I'm sure I saw a bit of bra strap. At that time? I think not.

I mean, is it SUPPOSED to be serious, tongue in cheek, or just Americanised pap like so much else these days, (CSI, NCIS, Law and Order, Herculaes, Xena), where facts and history are not really taken seriously.

Another miss for Auntie, I feel.

Alcazar

oldsplice

I saw about the first 20 minutes, and it irritated me so much that I turned it off.

myblackwrx

iTrader: (1)

Simply put the BBC don't ,imo, do the quality programming we are paying for and hasn't done for a long time.

PaulC72

I actually enjoyed it, giving to the fact the amount of actual crap they show it was at least an effort on something new, it has potential but will probably fail in the end as most of their tries do, eitherway I shall follow it for a while longer.

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

The first thing I noticed was the architecture was hundreds of years ahead of when the story is supposed to be set in.

It won't go down in history as a television classic, but it passed the time before i went out to the pub.

Lee247

I forgot about it and ended up watching The Two Towers.

Seems I didn't miss much then

oldsplice

And everything was so clean.

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

Does seem now that anything on BBC1 or ITV on a Sat night is just aimed at the lowest market - Merlin, X Factor, Family Fortunes, Strictly Come Dancing - all great excuses for getting a video in.

ScoobyDoo555

light-hearted, bit of entertainment.
I enjoyed it, as did my 7yr old daughter.

SVXNUT

It has potential. You have to remember it is from the team the modernised Robin Hood. I thought that wasn't bad. If you want something factually straight go the history channel. If you want something to pass the time until Doctor who comes back with all its continuity errors, I think was a good laugh with an excellent cast. Oh and I collect Dragons, so anything with one as a central charactor is got to be worth watching!!!!!.

twotonekarma

Get Sam Neill back

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

If Arthur ever actually existed then he was around in the Fifth or Sixth Century, meaning EVERY version of the legend is wrong. I can get over the knights wearing plate mail centuries before it was invented (it is fiction after all) but they were also playing fast and loose with the legend itself, for instance: Arthur built Camelot after he became king, so how could he go there as a youth?


M