• Network: Starz
  • Series Premiere Date: Apr 1, 2011
  • Season #: 1
User Score
5.3

Mixed or average reviews- based on 44 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 23 out of 44
  2. Negative: 10 out of 44

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Sep 24, 2013
    0
    Just watched first episode of Camelot... won't be watching anymore! Absolute rubbish! The guy playing the role of King Arthur is a joke! A puny, weak little wimp... killed it for me! A complete miscast. He was so goofy and his hair always seemed to be filthy, uncombed, and matted! He was not powerful enough and he just didn't make the role of Arthur believable at all. He's more like a gangly awkward teenager with acne. Now his foster brother, Kay, would have made a great King Arthur in this series, as he had more charisma, presence, looked more grown up and manly, and was far better looking too! It badly needed a stronger character for Arthur as the lead character has to be very good otherwise you lose the whole series and its just a flop! Expand
  2. Dec 1, 2011
    8
    A sadly unappreciated gem. The first season set off to bumpy beginnings - sadly now that it has found its feet it will not get the chance to achieve the glory it was working toward. It seems like setting up the chess board for checkmate and then scrapping the entire game. At it's weakest it was average - though when it was strong it was very strong. Eva Green is remarkable as Morgan - I would recommend watching this show if only for her performance. Hopefully the decision to not renew for a second season is changed. This show is good enough to deserve a shot at a second season - the season finale is proof of that. Expand
  3. Jul 17, 2011
    6
    I wanted to love this show, and really get into it. I have watched all 10 episodes, and i am disappointed. This show has a lot of potential, good actors, and good premise. Its King Arthur, that is enough just to get people to tune in to it. All they have to do is just have a good story. Maybe it will get better with time...
  4. May 19, 2011
    3
    I started watching this to help battle my withdrawal symptoms from waiting for the next episode of Game of Thrones. I'm up to episode 07 now, and I'm finding this increasingly more unwatchable every episode. While the young King Arthur might be good looking, I find his character completely unsympathetic, rather unbelievable and and even somewhat annoying. The thing that bothers me the most perhaps is that this whole thing has the feel of a cross between Robin Hood and Days of Our Lives, or even better yet, one of the Spanish Novelas that run nightly. Didn't the Knights of the Round Table wear Armor? I haven't seen any yet. I'm watching this on my computer and frequently just skip ahead a bit because what is happening onscreen is soooooo trite.

    I suppose I'll keep watching. I just wish I could find something better to watch.
    Expand
  5. May 2, 2011
    8
    This show is much better than I expected, based on some reviews and comparisons to Game of Thrones. It does seem to be a notch or two lower in quality (acting, production, writing) than GOT, but it is definitely worth watching and very entertaining. Love Joseph Feinnes in this role. What an improvement over Flashforward.
  6. May 1, 2011
    0
    I loved the trailers!!! The actual series... Not so much. I figured that this would be very entertaining story driven series sort of like a mix of the tutors and Spartacus. Although I didn't work that way, I could somewhat tolerate the poor story and slow moments in the episodes. However, the lack to make this series feel like it happened in the past was just awful.
  7. Apr 9, 2011
    7
    Two words make this show worth watching: Eva Green is absolutely delicious as the evil Morgan Le Fey. The story of King Arthur has been done to death but the events that led to his crowning is an interesting angle. Definitely interesting enough for continued viewing.
  8. Apr 6, 2011
    5
    As a huge fan of all Arthurian myths and legends I am hugely disappointed at the lack of any mythology above and beyond what you can find in the disney movie. I was hoping for either a modern retelling ala Jack Whyte's the sky stone or a true to the roots once and future king mythology soaked epic, instead we get main characters that seem better suited to the disney version as well, only the villains really shine as intriguing and well acted whereas the rest of the cast and writers seem to squander what is some amazing potential with the budget and channel they have at their disposal. I will watch a few more episodes in hopes that it will blossom into something more mature and deep but in the meantime a have a gut feeling that in terms of acting/writing we should expect more BBC's Merlin than the station's previous Spartacus series or even HBO's upcoming Game of thrones which I think I will be watching instead come April 17th. Manage your expectations accordingly. Expand
  9. Apr 5, 2011
    8
    Quit Whining! Ugh, who cares about the the Aurthur legends? This is a good show, not great, but definitely worth watching. The show is full of action, and if it doesn't follow the legend exactly, it's probably because it doesn't translate well to a series. Aurthur himself is a mediocre actor, but hopefully he grows into the character. This is a well done fantasy series, but if you're a real hardcore geek, you may want to check out Game of Thrones on HBO April 17th. Expand
  10. Apr 4, 2011
    4
    Lightweight is the only way to describe this re-telling of Arthur. I was expecting Son's of Anarchy medieval and instead we got BBC's Merlin with boobs and swearing. Oh! Joseph what did you sign up to?
  11. Apr 4, 2011
    7
    What's with the complaining about historical anachronism? What history is relevant? The 5th or 6th century in which Arthur probably didn't live? The 12th in which his legends began to take shape? The 15th, era of the comprehensive Morte d'Arthur? The figure of Arthur always takes on the ideals of the current age, so it should surprise no one that "Camelot" teems with hot young actors in leather and see-through chemises that magically drop off so they can have sex--bestial rutting for the bad guys and erotic worship for the good guys--before dashing off to kill someone. In that respect, "Camelot" is a lot like "Spartacus." It is, however, cheesier, largely due to its heavy-handed infusion of democratic ideals into Arthur's kingship--a fate "Spartacus" escaped by not managing to get out of the ludus and into the rebellion proper, where stirring speeches about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness would doubtless abound. Also cheesy is the constant reiteration of the wise nurture theme: Arthur was born a barbarian prince but raised by kindly Christians, and that rearing Makes All the Difference, although, as it seems not to have kept Arthur from ravishing the local virgins, I'm not entirely convinced. So what's good about the show? Unlike some others, I like the baby Arthur struggling with a role he never imagined--or wanted--and I think Jamie Campbell Bower is quite good in the part, showing flashes of incipient greatness as well as the insecurity one would expect of a 20-year-old insta-king. I like Joseph Fiennes's hard-assed Merlin, and I'm looking forward to learning more about the magic he abjured, which he recognizes in Morgan. As for Morgan, I wish the show's creators had been as creative in conceiving and casting her role as they were with Merlin, but here she is again with her signature pale skin and long, dark hair plotting the ruination of everything. Yawn. I did like her sparring with King Lot (James Purefoy, amazing as usual), but the solo glowering was a bit one-dimensional and overly indebted to dark eyeliner for its menace. Other plusses include great sets, especially Uther's/Morgan's palace and sections of the ruined Camelot. Oh, and it's nice to see Philip Winchester again, even with the improbable Beatle haircut. Expand
  12. Apr 3, 2011
    6
    I watched the first episode streaming at the Starz website and was pleasantly surprised. I am more Walking Dead than The Tudors -- I assume the latter's is the target audience -- but this is a fun watch so far!
  13. Apr 2, 2011
    4
    The show fails to live up to the Arthurian legends. Overall Morgan La Fey resembles too much on the original character of Queen Mab from the Merlin movie, especially her silly tries to imitate her voice. The rest of the cast is pretty much the same - boring and unoriginal. The plot is even worse, the way Merlin acquires Arthur from his foster parents its so "seen before" moment that will make you cry. Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, and any other similar books and films include this introduction. "You are a King", "You are a Wizard", "You are a Greek demigod", "That's not me I am just an ordinary boy", "No you aren't, you are special and destined for something even greater"... Dialog SO REPETITIVE in the modern fiction that makes you wanna die. The only reason I give this show a grade so high is because of the Camelot castle itself and the great visuals. Overall not the worst show on earth, but only because its based on something very popular... Expand
  14. Apr 2, 2011
    3
    Unlike Spartacus Blood and Sand, this one doesn't even try to sell you that it's a historical reenactment. Morgan La Fay apparently shops for her clothes on Hollowood Blvd., and buys her make up there while she's at it. No matter, there's plenty of sorcery too account for those dominatrix meets party at mom's skimpy clothing, and not too many actual cheap woolen mantles of the time period, not to mention lots of phrases like The King is Dead, Long Live the King, which wasn't used until the time of Charles VII, which aws in the 15th century, almost 1,000 years later. The show gets a ten for James Purefoy, being all manly and capable, and a -7 for all the other things wrong with it. Hey at lest there
    some improbable female nudify - those hollywood blvd. party outfits that look like a vogue editorial shoot get featured quite a bit, but the plot mking sense? Fuggedaboudit.
    Expand
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 26 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 26
  2. Negative: 2 out of 26
  1. Reviewed by: Nancy DeWolf Smith
    Apr 8, 2011
    70
    Some fans apparently don't think the sloe-eyed blond actor Jamie Campbell Bower is studly and thrusting enough for Arthur. But boyishness gives him room to grow, and there is plenty that's masterly about Joseph Fiennes as Merlin, who is occasionally seen in a studded hoodie and always shrouded in mystery, but other otherwise all man.
  2. Reviewed by: Phillip Maciak
    Apr 7, 2011
    50
    It's not easy, with all the silly one-liners, oddball plot twists, and frat-party ambience, to get terribly invested in who will win the power struggle that Camelot dramatizes. But if Fiennes and Green could stage a coup, wresting control of the show from its tawdrier impulses, then that might just be something worth watching.
  3. Reviewed by: Glenn Garvin
    Apr 7, 2011
    80
    Starz, however, has re-imagined the doings of Arthur, Guinevere and the gang as a bloody, bodice-ripping medieval soap opera, and the result is surprisingly satisfying.