I don't think Gavin Scott was the right person for the teleplay. I was hoping a fan or someone who had worked with MZB would do the teleplay.
To be blunt - I'm surprised a woman didn't write it!
Overall, for a TV movie I'd call it good despite the flaws. I really don't think it kept the spirit of the book in mind, so as a stand alone fantasy TV movie I think it was well done, its just to bad that non readers didn't' get some of the important motivations that made the book so good.
Things they got wrong: First of all if you have read the book you know that it is done in three parts, relatively equal in size, so why wasn't this a three part miniseries? Second, why did they change Morgaine and Arthur's Beltane experience? The movie got that Morgaine bore the burden of Modred by herself, but the actual event was much harder on Arthur, and this in fact creates the motivation for him turning towards Christianity! Also, this provides the reason for him thinking that Gwenevere's barrenness is his fault. Third is the relationship of Lancelot and Morgaine was missing. Lastly, there were some major casting flaws. Anjelica Huston did not suit Viviane; Viviane was a small, almost faery like, and very kind! She wasn't supposed to look like she was powerful, and she was tormented by many of the decisions she made to keep Avalon alive. Gwenevere, although not entirely a sympathetic character, really needed to be shown less friendly to her sister in law - it was a power struggle not an attention struggle between the two women. Lastly, not enough of Morgaine being a priestess, most of her motivation for travelling was that she doing her duty for Avalon, not for visiting. Oh, one more, why did the women often look scared? Raven was much stronger than that, and Morgaine was not afraid of the Stag King in the book.
Things they did get right: Morgaine, for the most part JM was a very good choice for the main character. Casting for Arthur and Lancelot were fine. Joan Allen as Morgause, despite a previous comment I think she did look ageless, and her look changed through the film, which was exactly how she was described through the book. Avalon was well done. The first scenes were right on, the meeting between Igraine and Uther were fine (other than the actor for Uther didn't so a very good job) and the scene of Uther in disguise was good.
The Arthurian legends are about heroes, MZB wrote a tale that showed heroines as well. Arthur was a myth, and the tales of him have changed so much throughout the past few centuries, this is just one more take. I think revisionist is highly inappropriate for describing this version (if that were the case we should be calling the inclusion of Lancelot as French revisionist!) The underlying story of Arthur as a noble warrior that tried to save Briton was still there, which is the reason for the myth anyway.
To be blunt - I'm surprised a woman didn't write it!
Overall, for a TV movie I'd call it good despite the flaws. I really don't think it kept the spirit of the book in mind, so as a stand alone fantasy TV movie I think it was well done, its just to bad that non readers didn't' get some of the important motivations that made the book so good.
Things they got wrong: First of all if you have read the book you know that it is done in three parts, relatively equal in size, so why wasn't this a three part miniseries? Second, why did they change Morgaine and Arthur's Beltane experience? The movie got that Morgaine bore the burden of Modred by herself, but the actual event was much harder on Arthur, and this in fact creates the motivation for him turning towards Christianity! Also, this provides the reason for him thinking that Gwenevere's barrenness is his fault. Third is the relationship of Lancelot and Morgaine was missing. Lastly, there were some major casting flaws. Anjelica Huston did not suit Viviane; Viviane was a small, almost faery like, and very kind! She wasn't supposed to look like she was powerful, and she was tormented by many of the decisions she made to keep Avalon alive. Gwenevere, although not entirely a sympathetic character, really needed to be shown less friendly to her sister in law - it was a power struggle not an attention struggle between the two women. Lastly, not enough of Morgaine being a priestess, most of her motivation for travelling was that she doing her duty for Avalon, not for visiting. Oh, one more, why did the women often look scared? Raven was much stronger than that, and Morgaine was not afraid of the Stag King in the book.
Things they did get right: Morgaine, for the most part JM was a very good choice for the main character. Casting for Arthur and Lancelot were fine. Joan Allen as Morgause, despite a previous comment I think she did look ageless, and her look changed through the film, which was exactly how she was described through the book. Avalon was well done. The first scenes were right on, the meeting between Igraine and Uther were fine (other than the actor for Uther didn't so a very good job) and the scene of Uther in disguise was good.
The Arthurian legends are about heroes, MZB wrote a tale that showed heroines as well. Arthur was a myth, and the tales of him have changed so much throughout the past few centuries, this is just one more take. I think revisionist is highly inappropriate for describing this version (if that were the case we should be calling the inclusion of Lancelot as French revisionist!) The underlying story of Arthur as a noble warrior that tried to save Briton was still there, which is the reason for the myth anyway.