![]() But the specifically here-and-now aspects of his persona that led to the considerable success of both “An Officer and a Gentleman” and “Pretty Woman” betray him here. This is not meant as a slur on Gere’s ability. The problem for him, and the film, comes when the non-physical acting begins. ![]() And Gere, coached by Bob Anderson, who worked with Errol Flynn 40-some years ago, not only did his own sword-fighting but is actually quite good at it. Sean Connery scores points for typecasting as the noble Arthur Julia Ormond, the ingenue of the moment, is appropriately fetching and feisty as Guinevere his bride, and 91-year-old Sir John Gielgud puts in a brief appearance to show everyone how it ought to be done.Īnd though certain over-choreographed segments play like halftime at the Camelot Bowl, “First Knight’s” large-scale action set pieces are capably done and more than tolerably exciting. But Gere is such a completely contemporary actor, so at sea in a suit of armor, that seeing him saunter through medieval halls as if he were a vice cop strolling Sunset Boulevard is shock enough to take us out of the story whenever he appears.Īside from Gere, “First Knight” acquits itself honorably enough. It is a measure of the surprising resilience of “First Knight” that its casting of Gere as a cocky street tough who becomes Sir Lancelot does not decimate director Jerry Zucker’s version of the King Arthur legend. And anyone who made it through “King David” knows that taking Richard Gere out of the 20th Century is an extremely risky proposition. Those who survived “Yes, Giorgio” won’t be rushing to see Luciano Pavarotti as a romantic lead any time soon, just as veterans of “The Jazz Singer” were not disturbed that Laurence Olivier never managed another film with Neil Diamond. Wary filmgoers with long memories have learned the hard way what to avoid.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |