I don't think she'd ever consider that Morgause was using her tbh. She loved her sister more than anything. And if Morgause really was using her, she wouldn't have prioritised saving Morgana over her life's work of taking out Uther. She gave up everything to save Morgana. Yes, she should have explained the plan in detail and not just said 'do you agree to help me?' but I could never see Morgana thinking that Merlin was right there and Morgause was wrong. I mean, based upon everything Katie and Emilia have ever said about their relationship, it's clear that it's completely genuine. And I like that. Often 'villains' aren't allowed to have such a bond and end up just screwing each other over. Their genuine love was refreshing.
And when she finds out about his magic, that betrayal is going to the be even deeper.
I think Arthur and Gwen she could come to an understanding with - they'll never be what they once were to each other but there can be a truce. I don't think she'll ever have anything but disdain at best for Merlin and what he's done.
No I don't think she'll think Morgause was wrong, more a case that she will see Merlin had no choice but to do what he did because she's been on the other side of the coin and has done some fairly awful things "in the name of furthering a cause" orself-preservation, if you see what I mean.
I also do believe Morgause genuinely loved Morgana once she got to know her. I do think, though, that at first she was only out to use her and her potential power at the heart of Uther's court. It was as they spent time together that she began to value her as her sister more I think.
I think Morgana will also be able to remember back to those moments when Merlin was trying to tell her something and "help" her in the only way he could without coming out clean about his magic. This is why I can see a reconciliation if not a full blown friendship between the two along the lines of the original mythology where they were colleagues and not enemies.
I also do believe Morgause genuinely loved Morgana once she got to know her.
I can't agree with that personally only because Morgause's reaction when she first meets Morgana is so very vulnerable. She's desperate to talk to her and have this first meeting and the way she reacts certainly suggests to me that she wants her sister not just a tool. Which seems 'right' when you consider Morgause hasn't had family in a very long time.
I think later on she wanted Morgana to be strong, to get what she thought Morgana deserved and not feel good about herself. I think Morgause's biggest failing is that she was so focused on helping Morgana be 'awesome' that she didn't always get her psychology and understand how she was mentally struggling. Like when she found out Morgana was Uther's daughter she instantly thought 'brilliant, you should be queen and I will see that you get it' and only secondly realised what affect this would have on Morgana's mind. She thought Morgana was like her and she wasn't - she's much more emotionally volatile.
Which is why I don't think she'd ever forgive Merlin - there's too much painful emotion behind what he did to her for her to rationalise it.
One of those interpretations where we're going to have to agree to disagree then Claire
While I agree that she wanted to meet Morgana, I still believe at the very beginning Morgause's only thought, as High Priestess of the Old Religion, was revenge on Uther. Once she saw Morgana had powerful magic hidden away I believe her purpose changed to help her realise those powers but that she still firmly intended for to be used against Uther and Camlelot. I don't think her loving Morgana ever removed those ambitions to bring down Uther's Camelot.
As I said though, I do believe Morgause's love for Morgana was genuine.
I can't see Morgana redeeming herself anytime soon, JC/JM said that 'she's going to be more powerful and committed'. The trouble that she can cause has only just begun, to see her alliance with Mordred also come to a close as soon as series 5 would be anticlimactic. As long as the writers give her a bit more depth to the irrational bitterness of her character, I'm quite content to see Morgana stay on the scene as a main antagonist. What Katie said about her costume being more 'medieval couture', could this indicate an improvement of her fortune in the future, perhaps an alliance or even a marriage with King Lot?
I can't see Morgana redeeming herself anytime soon, JC/JM said that 'she's going to be more powerful and committed'.
Actually, this is part of the MONOMYTH that samidd, Claire and Cadiva have been talking about in the last few posts--- even if they won't admit it. I was going to post something but after those I decided to wait and see how things develop.
The trouble that she can cause has only just begun, to see her alliance with Mordred also come to a close as soon as series 5 would be anticlimactic. As long as the writers give her a bit more depth to the irrational bitterness of her character, I'm quite content to see Morgana stay on the scene as a main antagonist.
And, this bit, you've just brought up three elements of MONOMYTH using the Heroine's Journey variation (For some reason, this sort of reminds me of my chess playing days). And, we can speculate that Mordred could very well be around as a loyal subject to Arthur, Merlin and Morgana being a "trickster" archetype as well as a "magician" archetype and not be revealed as a traitor early on (as Agravaine had) but much later when he finally decides whose side he's on.
What Katie said about her costume being more 'medieval couture', could this indicate an improvement of her fortune in the future, perhaps an alliance or even a marriage with King Lot?
Now, a fourth... The other possibility would be that she charms men like Lot, Mark, Beowulf, or any (Green) Knight into doing her bidding. This is a variant of the "wild woman archetype" who's not afraid to exploit her wiles and charms to seduce others into doing what she wants as Morgana did so skillfully to Arthur and Uther from S01 to S03 but abandoned during S03E13.
I don't think her loving Morgana ever removed those ambitions to bring down Uther's Camelot.
Oh, nor do I. But I've always believed that the two rather went hand in hand. She wanted justice for her sister and to see no powerful magic user living in the fear that Morgana was. The fact she was her sister just gave her that extra tie to her.
I can't see Morgana redeeming herself anytime soon, JC/JM said that 'she's going to be more powerful and committed'.
Nope. It won't be happening or even starting to happen before the end of series 5. They still need her as an antagonist.
What Katie said about her costume being more 'medieval couture', could this indicate an improvement of her fortune in the future, perhaps an alliance or even a marriage with King Lot?
I'm not sure I can see Morgana happily agreeing to that. She isn't going to play second fiddle to anyone imo, even a king. She may use him the way Morgause used Cenred but I doubt that would end well for Lot! Nor can I see a powerful king wanting a wife who is very much more powerful than he is.
All ANY kind of myth. All the monomyth does is put an interpretation on how any classical mythology works, it doesn't introduce anything new to the format of a myth.
Oh, nor do I. But I've always believed that the two rather went hand in hand. She wanted justice for her sister and to see no powerful magic user living in the fear that Morgana was. The fact she was her sister just gave her that extra tie to her.
All ANY kind of myth. All the monomyth does is put an interpretation on how any classical mythology works, it doesn't introduce anything new to the format of a myth.
Absolutely yes.
Yes. Of course, that's what makes something "classic"--- it has withstood the test of time across generations and even cultures. And, it's the interpretation of the story tellers that introduce what's "new".
Actually, this is part of the MONOMYTH that samidd, Claire and Cadiva have been talking about in the last few posts--- even if they won't admit it.
It's nothing to do with not wanting to admit it. It's simply that, yes, this story has elements seen in many others of its type, I just don't personally think it's particularly relevant to my discussion on this show.
The writers aren't purposely following this, they're simply doing what they want with their story. If it follows any particularly theory it's because, like all writers, they're influenced by what they've commonly seen in other stories.
Yes. Of course, that's what makes something "classic"--- it has withstood the test of time across generations and even cultures. And, it's the interpretation of the story tellers that introduce what's "new".
Which is why I have repeatedly said they're following the lines of classic mythological story telling and it's something I will stand by. They're not reinventing the wheel, they're rolling it along a different pathway that's all. So of course the monomyth fits into what they're doing, it's based on classic mythology.
It doesn't mean, however, that they're using the monomyth exclusively as their guiding principle. You could say, just as accurately, that they're following the traditional style of a western, or a rom/com, in specific episodes.
After all, didn't George Lucas admit to being heavily influenced by The Magnificent Seven when it came to creating the Star Wars story, and that's a direct remake of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, which is, itself, directly influenced by the traditions and mythology of the Ronin and their society. He's also said that Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and Once Upon A Time In The West were an influence on his style. He's also said that the first draft for Star Wars was basically a rewrite of Akira Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress.
That it turned out to be the insane money maker it later was with the Expanded Universe, the prequels, the books, the graphic novels, the cartoon TV series etc, is a lot to do with George Lucas' skills as a businessman, his divorce from his first wife and the fact nothing had been seen like it in 1977 when it first came out.
There are copious other examples of films which follow the exact same formula but which suck hugely, usually down to poor writing, inconsistent characters or badly cast actors etc the 2000 Dungeons & Dragons adaptation being a perfect example. It contains all the same elements of the monomyth, it's based on a massively popular fantasy franchise with some superb authors working on it but it's utter crap.
All of which, again, is hugely off topic but addresses the use of the monomyth in other genres. Yes, someone created the idea of the monomyth and looked at things which fit it, all of which, in my opinion anyway, are all absolute examples of a storyline following classical mythology or traditional legend/fairy tale formatting.
It's nothing to do with not wanting to admit it. It's simply that, yes, this story has elements seen in many others of its type, I just don't personally think it's particularly relevant to my discussion on this show.
The writers aren't purposely following this, they're simply doing what they want with their story. If it follows any particularly theory it's because, like all writers, they're influenced by what they've commonly seen in other stories.
I'm not sure I can see Morgana happily agreeing to that. She isn't going to play second fiddle to anyone imo, even a king. She may use him the way Morgause used Cenred but I doubt that would end well for Lot! Nor can I see a powerful king wanting a wife who is very much more powerful than he is.
I can't either. Morgana is not the character to allow herself to be used by others. Marriage probably won't be involved but I can see her exploiting the lust for greater power of Lot just as she did with Helios. It could be that Lot is one of the kings who decides to oppose Arthur's authority when he proposes a united Kingdom of Albion. As Mike commented, I can also see them take Morgana along the dark seductress route although the writers are obviously restricted with what they can do due to the family audience, it would be much more subtle like the relationship between Morgause and Cenred.
Guys regarding the debate on the method behind the writing, can we just agree to disagree? Both of you are knowledgeable and eloquent writers that can sustain an argument for a long time, for the sake of the rest of us can we please just go back to sharing our passion for the show and speculating its future?
It's nothing to do with not wanting to admit it. It's simply that, yes, this story has elements seen in many others of its type, I just don't personally think it's particularly relevant to my discussion on this show.
It is relevant because that provides insights into the motivation and behavior of the characters--- it makes sense when analyzed in terms of the MONOMYTH. And, that's what I see in the Interviews Murphy's giving. And, to me, it just reinforces that the MONOMYTH is there.
The writers aren't purposely following this, they're simply doing what they want with their story. If it follows any particularly theory it's because, like all writers, they're influenced by what they've commonly seen in other stories.
And that too, is part of the MONOMYTH.
Since the 1960s and perhaps earlier, the MONOMYTH is so ingrained and pervasive in popular culture that people don’t think about it until they’ve been informed of it. Like all good writers and artists--- including film makers and musicians, artists borrow liberally from others providing a fresh take and presentation--- their own twist and turn--- to make the underlying message inherent in the story: the “universal truths valued by society” accessible to the audience. And, the standard bearers of that popular culture like all good artists followed the Picasoo dictum: “good artists borrow, great artists steal” otherwise, they starve OR as George Lucas opined: ''People feed on each other's ideas and it moves them up the ladder.''
An example of this: Bob Dylan who admits to consciously using in his compositions and album arrangements a number of themes of the MONOMYTH… if not the MONOMYTH itself. In his songs like Mr. Tambourine Man or his albums like The Time They are a Changing, you can hear the MONOMYTH Mantra of Separation, Initiation, and Return. In turn, he urged others including four lads from Liverpool to do use the same themes in theirs to have a meaningful experience. While none admit they did use the MONOMYTH, they did admit they were heavily influenced by Dylan which is shown in much of their music. And, Lennon, Harrison and McCartney have all admitted that they were "inspired" by others besides Dylan including many groups like the Loving Spoonful who in turn were "inspired" by Dylan. And, in their works we can see the MONOMYTH Mantra of Separation, Initiation, and Return as themes in their album arrangements, if not their songs.
There's this wonderful album from the 1960's that in song form tells the story of a traveling show/circus that captures the imagination of a young girl who runs off, enjoys her new life but sickens her parents who. According to McCartney, the album was at first to be a series of original songs played one after another so that the entire album was one song--- that idea failed--- but each song would center on one or more of the central themes of Separation/Departure, Initiation, and Return in the day of the life of someone and the arrangement was set so that those themes could be heard outlined in the album. And, the Pepper album does just that that.
Now do I believe that John Lennon consciously borrowed the work of others? Well, Chuck Barry did sue him over a song or two as a solo artist... Harrison? Sued by Johnny Mack over My Sweet Lord during his solo career. McCartney? Admits to being inspired by Dylan, the Beach Boys, and any number of groups including the Spoonful during his earlier days and as a soloist knowing what the pop culture wanted. None of them admit to using the MONOMYTH but it is there in their Albums, especially as that group from Liverpool.
And, some artists don't believe in the MONOMYTH. George Lucas admits that he didn't believe in the power of myth but while writing the story line for Star Wars he wondered whatever happened to myth in modern society. He stumbled upon the MONOMYTH and then, he found that the story line he wrote was following the Hero’s Journey. He then used that to check his work after he was done modifying the story line as he needed. Other writers saw the same.
As for Mag 7, Lucas noted: ''As a Western, The Magnificent Seven was a pretty good film. I don't think it was as interesting or as multi-faceted as Seven Samurai.''
Lucas admits he used the visual and cultural aspects of the film as the basis for his Jedi Knights but he admits he could never write characters so complex as in the Seven Samurai. I watched it a long time ago and as Lucas said:
''I mean, it's a brilliant, brilliant film, and every time I see it I can't believe the magic mixture of a great story and great acting and humour and action and suspense - wonderful cinema. The art of moving pictures is on every frame of this movie.''
''But I think Seven Samurai influenced me a lot more, in terms of understanding how cinema works and how to tell a very exciting story and still have it be very funny and very human.''
And, you can literally see the visual influences of the film on Lucas but outside the Monomyth structure within both films the two films are different. The story of the Seven Samurai’s very simple (if you saw The Moment of Truth in Merlin S01 then you’ve got the basics of parts of this film: a town seeks help against bandits threatening to take their harvest, they hire Samurai to defend it against the bandits--- it follows the basic proto-MONOMYTH theory of Bastien from the 19th Century--- telling the tale of Separation, Initiation, and Return) but the characters are very complex and Lucas admits he would never do a film with characters with that level of complexity.
I’d actually think Hidden Fortress had a bit more to do with Star Wars in terms of story telling but as Lucas explained: ''The influence of Hidden Fortress comes up a lot because it was printed in a book once. The truth is, the only thing I was inspired by was the fact that it's told from the point of view of two peasants, who get mixed up with a samurai and princess and a lot of very high-level people. I said that is a great device, and that's how I ended up with R2-D2 and C-3PO.”
And, the MONOMYTH is relevant in analyzing the motivation and behavior of the characters in film. Quoting Lucas again regarding Seven Samurai: ''Most of my characters are pretty simple, and I don't have a lot of them… One of the amazing things about Seven Samurai is that there are a lot of characters. And considering you have so many, and they all have shaved heads, and you've got good guys and bad guys and peasants, you get to understand a lot of them without too much being said.
''Then you watch a modern movie like, say, Black Hawk Down, which is a brilliant movie, but the director, Ridley Scott, wasn't able to do what Kurosawa was able to do, which was to take all those characters and make you understand each one of them, understand what their motives were, where they were coming from, make you care about them. It's a very, very hard thing to do.''
And, if you watch the film you’ll see that Kurosawa could do this mainly because he relied upon archetypal characters in his tale of the Hero’s Journey and good story telling technique in film.
It is relevant because that provides insights into the motivation and behavior of the characters
So does any understanding of psychology or good writing.
Monomyth - nice theory, interesting in a literature class, no more to say about it here. There's far more intriguing things to talk about as regards the specifics of this show since that theory can no more accurately speculate what can happen than any other.
Guys regarding the debate on the method behind the writing, can we just agree to disagree? Both of you are knowledgeable and eloquent writers that can sustain an argument for a long time, for the sake of the rest of us can we please just go back to sharing our passion for the show and speculating its future?
I've been trying, believe me. I've already mentioned twice that I think it's out of place in this thread but I'm afraid I'm too opinionated to just shut up when someone makes a point I don't think is relevant to the discussion.
I promise to keep my fingers to myself now though
And apologies, for some reason it won't let me quote you properly.
I agree that we'll probably need a 6th series to see Morgana's redemption.
I'm not sure they're going to be able to sign the big four up for a sixth series though unless they do something fairly spectacular this series which guarantees a sixth.
While I'm fairly ambivalent about Merlin's magic remaining hidden, I'm also sensible enough to know it's not going to go into a sixth unless they reveal it this year and it has some pretty big fall out effects.
I'm not sure they're going to be able to sign the big four up for a sixth series though unless they do something fairly spectacular this series which guarantees a sixth.
While I'm fairly ambivalent about Merlin's magic remaining hidden, I'm also sensible enough to know it's not going to go into a sixth unless they reveal it this year and it has some pretty big fall out effects.
I'm not sure, but the boys seem to be enjoying it. Bradley said that Series 4 was his favourite to work on and I can see why, while Colin talked recently about the privilege playing the title role in such a big show, and I have no doubt he meant it. I think Merlin offers enough variety for the two of them to enjoy the work. They know the show is becoming bigger and more popular every year, and it just started to hit the stride with Series 3 and 4. I'm even more convinced after I saw their proud faces at the NTA's in January. Regarding the ladies, Katie seems to be a bigger geek than me and always enthusiastic about the show. I think she would be on board for some more. I have to admit though I have doubts about Angel. Her role is the least engaging of the big four.
All in all I am optimistic, but if Series 5 won't be as good as 3 and 4, I'm sure the actors will quit. And in this scenario they better do so.
(This whole magic reveal is overvalued in the Merlin fandom imho. )
I have to admit though I have doubts about Angel. Her role is the least engaging of the big four.
I would agree that she is the most openly disenchanted by what she's been given to do so hopefully they have taken that into consideration and given her more to do outside of just being Arthur's wife. She needs some agenda and plot of her own to make her more interesting to play.
(This whole magic reveal is overvalued in the Merlin fandom imho. )
I'm not a massive fangirl of the Merlin/Arthur friendship so it's not the be all and end all to me. However, I do think that if they do it, they have to do it properly i.e Arthur should understandably be very angry that Merlin has lied to him for nearly a decade. If it doesn't happen, I'd like to see Merlin acknowledge the fact that it's a barrier to them being truly friends because Arthur doesn't actually know him.
I'm not sure, but the boys seem to be enjoying it. Bradley said that Series 4 was his favourite to work on and I can see why, while Colin talked recently about the privilege playing the title role in such a big show, and I have no doubt he meant it. I think Merlin offers enough variety for the two of them to enjoy the work. They know the show is becoming bigger and more popular every year, and it just started to hit the stride with Series 3 and 4. I'm even more convinced after I saw their proud faces at the NTA's in January. Regarding the ladies, Katie seems to be a bigger geek than me and always enthusiastic about the show. I think she would be on board for some more. I have to admit though I have doubts about Angel. Her role is the least engaging of the big four.
All in all I am optimistic, but if Series 5 won't be as good as 3 and 4, I'm sure the actors will quit. And in this scenario they better do so.
(This whole magic reveal is overvalued in the Merlin fandom imho. )
Yes they all seem to take pride in the show, I'm sure they would all be keen for another series. The biggest obstacle to overcome is the BBC, whether after budget cuts they are willing to commission series 6. Given that its so popular, competes well against other on demand Saturday night TV and sells very well abroad, it would be in their interests to. The thing is that they have made misjudgments in the past, the most recent being cutting the Fades which was a big hit when it was broadcast in autumn last year. I also think as many others do that the BBC are unappreciative of Merlin.
I am surprised to read on here that Angel is unsatisfied with her role in series 4 when it gave her more to do than any of the previous series. I was quite pleased with the way her character progressed in guiding Arthur to his true self and particularly in the opener when she challenged Agravaine on closing the gates to refugees. Her actions gave us a taste of what she would be like as as queen. Based on what we've seen so far and what they've teased in the interviews, I think 'Merlin' will give Gwen much more to do as queen than her character in the legend. In the variants I am aware of Arthur doesn't confide in his queen that much, and its really Merlin and the inner circle of the Knights of the Round table that advise him on matters of policy.
Yes they all seem to take pride in the show, I'm sure they would all be keen for another series. The biggest obstacle to overcome is the BBC, whether after budget cuts they are willing to commission series 6. Given that its so popular, competes well against other on demand Saturday night TV and sells very well abroad, it would be in their interests to. The thing is that they have made misjudgments in the past, the most recent being cutting the Fades which was a big hit when it was broadcast in autumn last year. I also think as many others do that the BBC are unappreciative of Merlin.
Yes, the BBC needs programmes that sell well and make them money to supplement the lost income from the license fee freeze. Problem is : Merlin isn't one of those programmes. All rights to Merlin's licensing, distribution, merchandising, DVD's etc... belong to FreemantleMedia Enterprises/Shine Corp.
After S2 Merlin was on the verge of being axed by BBC1. They wanted a second Dr. Who in terms of ratings and merchandising possibilties and Merlin just wasn't doing it for them (it's coming close to DW ratings now but S2 was the lowest rated of the 4) and on top of that it's a fairly expensive series to make. Seems at that point Freemantle came in and brokered a deal where they took over part of the productions cost in exchange for all the international rights and BBC kept the UK rights (first broadcast) for the part of production costs they contribute. Of course since the BBC isn't a pay channel the right to broadcast first doesn't actually make them any money, and they need money.
It also explains why people think the BBC don't appreciate Merlin. Why spend a lot of money on PR/BBC Merlin website when you don't make a profit (Shine should do that but they have the worst PR dept. in history). DVD rights went from BBC (2 Entertain) to Freemantle so BBC 3 cancelled Secrets & Magic and the Video Diaries disappeared. Why put money in BTS stuff to put on the dvds when the income of those dvds goes to somebody else.
BBC1 has announced the commissioning of a new family drama yesterday "Musketeers" an in-house production co-produced with BBC Worldwide for internation sales that could make them a lot of money if successful. That together with the 50th anniversary year of Dr. Who in 2013 could maybe be the end of Merlin. At least they got the 5 years they wanted and weren't cancelled on a whim like The Fades. If they decide to cancel Merlin, I just hope they inform the producers in time so we can have a proper ending to the series with no cliffhangers that will never get resolved.
Thank you for your post, I think you've answered some key questions that have intrigued many Merlin fans for a while. The BBC point of view Merlin thread is constantly full of clamours for unedited repeats of the show where at the moment they're stuck on CBBC with at least a quarter of the episode removed because some of it is deemed unsuitable for children. Doctor Who by contrast gets endless repeats every year on BBC3.
I did wonder why the DVD's changed to Free Mantle Enterprises. Good on them for stepping in to save the show, they obviously recognized its potential and are now profiting from its success. The BBC should have known that it takes a while for an audience to warm to a new show, the reason why Doctor Who quickly pulled vast audiences in was because of its well known history.
If the BBC make so much money out of DW, it explains why they are willing to fight tooth and nail for it even over petty cases such as the Virgin media advert while they are more than happy for Merlin to lay hidden in the back pages of the radio times. I understand that money is an issue, but they must not forget that they are a public institution at heart and therefore they should be accountable to the people. If there is so much support for Merlin, then it should not be a problem to commission another series especially since Free Mantle are partly paying for the production costs. However I fear you may be right, if they have a new family drama alongside Doctor Who then it could be that it is filling in the gap after series 5. If this is the case though, wouldn't JC/JM know whether or not S5 will be the last already? If they did then why would they have reason to put us on false pretenses that a 6th series is possible ? I suppose its possible that the BBC could have made enough savings to keep Merlin going.
(This whole magic reveal is overvalued in the Merlin fandom imho. )
The whole magic reveal doesn't bother me in the slightest, I've always understood this Merlin is based on Smallville - ie the driving rationale behind it is that it's set in a time before Merlin is the great sorcerer. But then I was a huge fan of Smallville as well
If this is the case though, wouldn't JC/JM know whether or not S5 will be the last already? If they did then why would they have reason to put us on false pretenses that a 6th series is possible ? I suppose its possible that the BBC could have made enough savings to keep Merlin going.
Not necessarily no, the commissioning doesn't usually take place until the summer, that's why they're going to have to have a Series Five finale that "wraps" most things up as they may not know whether they will get a series six.
I think, given the majority of the costs have been picked up by Freemantle, that a Sixth series is a real possibility, the DVD and overseas sales for Merlin are pretty good so Freemantle will probably be happy to keep funding it.
If you look at the BBC commissioning website, almost half the slots for drama for 2013/14 have already been ordered. That may already include Merlin and they've been told to keep it quite, it's more likely that it doesn't and the BBC will wait and see how the first couple of episodes of series five do before commissioning a sixth.
To be honest, I can't see this going as long as Smallville, five series' is probably a good length given the brief for - before Merlin was famous - there's only so much they can do without a magic reveal and once they do that, the show's whole ethos changes drastically.
I hope that whenever they do the reveal they give plenty of time for it to sink in. I don't want it to be near the very end as a kind of "end of an era" finish/cliffhanger, in the same way that we weren't allowed to see much of superman in smallville. Hope that makes sense, I know what I mean
It concerns me that the BBC don't make much money from Merlin because unfortunately, it is money that talks nowadays. Although to look on the bright side, we will have had 65 episodes (~48.75 hours) of a brilliant show that we can watch over and over until the dvds wear out!
I hope that whenever they do the reveal they give plenty of time for it to sink in. I don't want it to be near the very end as a kind of "end of an era" finish/cliffhanger, in the same way that we weren't allowed to see much of superman in smallville. Hope that makes sense, I know what I mean
It concerns me that the BBC don't make much money from Merlin because unfortunately, it is money that talks nowadays. Although to look on the bright side, we will have had 65 episodes (~48.75 hours) of a brilliant show that we can watch over and over until the dvds wear out!
If they do it, I suspect it will be exactly like they did in Smallville Lowri. That, after all, was the point of the show, that it was Clark Kent's life before he became Superman and that everyone knows what happens next
I'm fairly sure it will a similar thing with Merlin. Once his magic is out then there's nothing really new about the series, there's been plenty done on the all powerful warlock at the heart of King Arthur's court.
I can appreciate why they did it with Smallville, in fact, I don't think they originally intended it to get that far. It's a good analogy for my concerns though.
Personally, I think there could be plenty of material for a couple of series after the reveal. They could even drag it out a la Smallville and have minor characters finding out first (I know this certainly isn't a new idea). Colin Morgan has said that there will be a huge fallout once Arthur finds out, it wouldn't be fair to keep that from us would it?
Although, you have got a point and I would be disappointed but not surprised if that's exactly what they do!
As for prefacing the legends, whilst I am interested in those, I watch Merlin because I love the characters and storylines as the BBC have made them, they could leave the legend behind and I would still enjoy it.
Even if the BBC cancels the regular series of Merlin they could still order specials like they do for Absolutely Fabulous or The Royle Family for Xmas or Easter. Maybe they no longer have the money or a place in the schedule for a 13 parter but the series is still very popular and a Xmas "Camelot in the snow" special could be a major ratings winner. Of course that depends on how they end the series. If we go as far as Camlan and Arthur dead and carried of to Avalon there won't be much use for a special.
Or Freemantle/Shine could do a "Primeval" and find extra funding elsewhere if they can persuade the BBC to release the copyright. Of course, if I remember correctly, it took more than a year to get that deal done and by that time half the cast/writers had gone to greener pastures. When they finaly got Primeval on air viewers didn't like the new cast or stories so it tanked. Maybe better to end Merlin on a high note
Comments
No I don't think she'll think Morgause was wrong, more a case that she will see Merlin had no choice but to do what he did because she's been on the other side of the coin and has done some fairly awful things "in the name of furthering a cause" orself-preservation, if you see what I mean.
I also do believe Morgause genuinely loved Morgana once she got to know her. I do think, though, that at first she was only out to use her and her potential power at the heart of Uther's court. It was as they spent time together that she began to value her as her sister more I think.
I think Morgana will also be able to remember back to those moments when Merlin was trying to tell her something and "help" her in the only way he could without coming out clean about his magic. This is why I can see a reconciliation if not a full blown friendship between the two along the lines of the original mythology where they were colleagues and not enemies.
I can't agree with that personally only because Morgause's reaction when she first meets Morgana is so very vulnerable. She's desperate to talk to her and have this first meeting and the way she reacts certainly suggests to me that she wants her sister not just a tool. Which seems 'right' when you consider Morgause hasn't had family in a very long time.
I think later on she wanted Morgana to be strong, to get what she thought Morgana deserved and not feel good about herself. I think Morgause's biggest failing is that she was so focused on helping Morgana be 'awesome' that she didn't always get her psychology and understand how she was mentally struggling. Like when she found out Morgana was Uther's daughter she instantly thought 'brilliant, you should be queen and I will see that you get it' and only secondly realised what affect this would have on Morgana's mind. She thought Morgana was like her and she wasn't - she's much more emotionally volatile.
Which is why I don't think she'd ever forgive Merlin - there's too much painful emotion behind what he did to her for her to rationalise it.
While I agree that she wanted to meet Morgana, I still believe at the very beginning Morgause's only thought, as High Priestess of the Old Religion, was revenge on Uther. Once she saw Morgana had powerful magic hidden away I believe her purpose changed to help her realise those powers but that she still firmly intended for to be used against Uther and Camlelot. I don't think her loving Morgana ever removed those ambitions to bring down Uther's Camelot.
As I said though, I do believe Morgause's love for Morgana was genuine.
Actually, this is part of the MONOMYTH that samidd, Claire and Cadiva have been talking about in the last few posts--- even if they won't admit it. I was going to post something but after those I decided to wait and see how things develop.
And, this bit, you've just brought up three elements of MONOMYTH using the Heroine's Journey variation (For some reason, this sort of reminds me of my chess playing days). And, we can speculate that Mordred could very well be around as a loyal subject to Arthur, Merlin and Morgana being a "trickster" archetype as well as a "magician" archetype and not be revealed as a traitor early on (as Agravaine had) but much later when he finally decides whose side he's on.
Now, a fourth... The other possibility would be that she charms men like Lot, Mark, Beowulf, or any (Green) Knight into doing her bidding. This is a variant of the "wild woman archetype" who's not afraid to exploit her wiles and charms to seduce others into doing what she wants as Morgana did so skillfully to Arthur and Uther from S01 to S03 but abandoned during S03E13.
All MONOMYTH...
Oh, nor do I. But I've always believed that the two rather went hand in hand. She wanted justice for her sister and to see no powerful magic user living in the fear that Morgana was. The fact she was her sister just gave her that extra tie to her.
Nope. It won't be happening or even starting to happen before the end of series 5. They still need her as an antagonist.
I'm not sure I can see Morgana happily agreeing to that. She isn't going to play second fiddle to anyone imo, even a king. She may use him the way Morgause used Cenred but I doubt that would end well for Lot! Nor can I see a powerful king wanting a wife who is very much more powerful than he is.
All ANY kind of myth. All the monomyth does is put an interpretation on how any classical mythology works, it doesn't introduce anything new to the format of a myth.
Absolutely yes.
Yes. Of course, that's what makes something "classic"--- it has withstood the test of time across generations and even cultures. And, it's the interpretation of the story tellers that introduce what's "new".
It's nothing to do with not wanting to admit it. It's simply that, yes, this story has elements seen in many others of its type, I just don't personally think it's particularly relevant to my discussion on this show.
The writers aren't purposely following this, they're simply doing what they want with their story. If it follows any particularly theory it's because, like all writers, they're influenced by what they've commonly seen in other stories.
Which is why I have repeatedly said they're following the lines of classic mythological story telling and it's something I will stand by. They're not reinventing the wheel, they're rolling it along a different pathway that's all. So of course the monomyth fits into what they're doing, it's based on classic mythology.
It doesn't mean, however, that they're using the monomyth exclusively as their guiding principle. You could say, just as accurately, that they're following the traditional style of a western, or a rom/com, in specific episodes.
After all, didn't George Lucas admit to being heavily influenced by The Magnificent Seven when it came to creating the Star Wars story, and that's a direct remake of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, which is, itself, directly influenced by the traditions and mythology of the Ronin and their society. He's also said that Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly and Once Upon A Time In The West were an influence on his style. He's also said that the first draft for Star Wars was basically a rewrite of Akira Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress.
That it turned out to be the insane money maker it later was with the Expanded Universe, the prequels, the books, the graphic novels, the cartoon TV series etc, is a lot to do with George Lucas' skills as a businessman, his divorce from his first wife and the fact nothing had been seen like it in 1977 when it first came out.
There are copious other examples of films which follow the exact same formula but which suck hugely, usually down to poor writing, inconsistent characters or badly cast actors etc the 2000 Dungeons & Dragons adaptation being a perfect example. It contains all the same elements of the monomyth, it's based on a massively popular fantasy franchise with some superb authors working on it but it's utter crap.
All of which, again, is hugely off topic but addresses the use of the monomyth in other genres. Yes, someone created the idea of the monomyth and looked at things which fit it, all of which, in my opinion anyway, are all absolute examples of a storyline following classical mythology or traditional legend/fairy tale formatting.
Exactly
I can't either. Morgana is not the character to allow herself to be used by others. Marriage probably won't be involved but I can see her exploiting the lust for greater power of Lot just as she did with Helios. It could be that Lot is one of the kings who decides to oppose Arthur's authority when he proposes a united Kingdom of Albion. As Mike commented, I can also see them take Morgana along the dark seductress route although the writers are obviously restricted with what they can do due to the family audience, it would be much more subtle like the relationship between Morgause and Cenred.
Guys regarding the debate on the method behind the writing, can we just agree to disagree? Both of you are knowledgeable and eloquent writers that can sustain an argument for a long time, for the sake of the rest of us can we please just go back to sharing our passion for the show and speculating its future?
And they can't deny they've seen a lot of Star Wars and Indiana Jones.
They could do Morgana's redemption during S05 if they wanted. But, only time will tell. And, that would depend on which Monomyth variant they chose.
It is relevant because that provides insights into the motivation and behavior of the characters--- it makes sense when analyzed in terms of the MONOMYTH. And, that's what I see in the Interviews Murphy's giving. And, to me, it just reinforces that the MONOMYTH is there.
And that too, is part of the MONOMYTH.
Since the 1960s and perhaps earlier, the MONOMYTH is so ingrained and pervasive in popular culture that people don’t think about it until they’ve been informed of it. Like all good writers and artists--- including film makers and musicians, artists borrow liberally from others providing a fresh take and presentation--- their own twist and turn--- to make the underlying message inherent in the story: the “universal truths valued by society” accessible to the audience. And, the standard bearers of that popular culture like all good artists followed the Picasoo dictum: “good artists borrow, great artists steal” otherwise, they starve OR as George Lucas opined: ''People feed on each other's ideas and it moves them up the ladder.''
An example of this: Bob Dylan who admits to consciously using in his compositions and album arrangements a number of themes of the MONOMYTH… if not the MONOMYTH itself. In his songs like Mr. Tambourine Man or his albums like The Time They are a Changing, you can hear the MONOMYTH Mantra of Separation, Initiation, and Return. In turn, he urged others including four lads from Liverpool to do use the same themes in theirs to have a meaningful experience. While none admit they did use the MONOMYTH, they did admit they were heavily influenced by Dylan which is shown in much of their music. And, Lennon, Harrison and McCartney have all admitted that they were "inspired" by others besides Dylan including many groups like the Loving Spoonful who in turn were "inspired" by Dylan. And, in their works we can see the MONOMYTH Mantra of Separation, Initiation, and Return as themes in their album arrangements, if not their songs.
There's this wonderful album from the 1960's that in song form tells the story of a traveling show/circus that captures the imagination of a young girl who runs off, enjoys her new life but sickens her parents who. According to McCartney, the album was at first to be a series of original songs played one after another so that the entire album was one song--- that idea failed--- but each song would center on one or more of the central themes of Separation/Departure, Initiation, and Return in the day of the life of someone and the arrangement was set so that those themes could be heard outlined in the album. And, the Pepper album does just that that.
Now do I believe that John Lennon consciously borrowed the work of others? Well, Chuck Barry did sue him over a song or two as a solo artist... Harrison? Sued by Johnny Mack over My Sweet Lord during his solo career. McCartney? Admits to being inspired by Dylan, the Beach Boys, and any number of groups including the Spoonful during his earlier days and as a soloist knowing what the pop culture wanted. None of them admit to using the MONOMYTH but it is there in their Albums, especially as that group from Liverpool.
And, some artists don't believe in the MONOMYTH. George Lucas admits that he didn't believe in the power of myth but while writing the story line for Star Wars he wondered whatever happened to myth in modern society. He stumbled upon the MONOMYTH and then, he found that the story line he wrote was following the Hero’s Journey. He then used that to check his work after he was done modifying the story line as he needed. Other writers saw the same.
As for Mag 7, Lucas noted: ''As a Western, The Magnificent Seven was a pretty good film. I don't think it was as interesting or as multi-faceted as Seven Samurai.''
Lucas admits he used the visual and cultural aspects of the film as the basis for his Jedi Knights but he admits he could never write characters so complex as in the Seven Samurai. I watched it a long time ago and as Lucas said:
''I mean, it's a brilliant, brilliant film, and every time I see it I can't believe the magic mixture of a great story and great acting and humour and action and suspense - wonderful cinema. The art of moving pictures is on every frame of this movie.''
''But I think Seven Samurai influenced me a lot more, in terms of understanding how cinema works and how to tell a very exciting story and still have it be very funny and very human.''
And, you can literally see the visual influences of the film on Lucas but outside the Monomyth structure within both films the two films are different. The story of the Seven Samurai’s very simple (if you saw The Moment of Truth in Merlin S01 then you’ve got the basics of parts of this film: a town seeks help against bandits threatening to take their harvest, they hire Samurai to defend it against the bandits--- it follows the basic proto-MONOMYTH theory of Bastien from the 19th Century--- telling the tale of Separation, Initiation, and Return) but the characters are very complex and Lucas admits he would never do a film with characters with that level of complexity.
I’d actually think Hidden Fortress had a bit more to do with Star Wars in terms of story telling but as Lucas explained: ''The influence of Hidden Fortress comes up a lot because it was printed in a book once. The truth is, the only thing I was inspired by was the fact that it's told from the point of view of two peasants, who get mixed up with a samurai and princess and a lot of very high-level people. I said that is a great device, and that's how I ended up with R2-D2 and C-3PO.”
And, the MONOMYTH is relevant in analyzing the motivation and behavior of the characters in film. Quoting Lucas again regarding Seven Samurai: ''Most of my characters are pretty simple, and I don't have a lot of them… One of the amazing things about Seven Samurai is that there are a lot of characters. And considering you have so many, and they all have shaved heads, and you've got good guys and bad guys and peasants, you get to understand a lot of them without too much being said.
''Then you watch a modern movie like, say, Black Hawk Down, which is a brilliant movie, but the director, Ridley Scott, wasn't able to do what Kurosawa was able to do, which was to take all those characters and make you understand each one of them, understand what their motives were, where they were coming from, make you care about them. It's a very, very hard thing to do.''
And, if you watch the film you’ll see that Kurosawa could do this mainly because he relied upon archetypal characters in his tale of the Hero’s Journey and good story telling technique in film.
So does any understanding of psychology or good writing.
Monomyth - nice theory, interesting in a literature class, no more to say about it here. There's far more intriguing things to talk about as regards the specifics of this show since that theory can no more accurately speculate what can happen than any other.
I've been trying, believe me. I've already mentioned twice that I think it's out of place in this thread but I'm afraid I'm too opinionated to just shut up when someone makes a point I don't think is relevant to the discussion.
I promise to keep my fingers to myself now though
And apologies, for some reason it won't let me quote you properly.
Or a basic education in the Classics.
I'm not sure they're going to be able to sign the big four up for a sixth series though unless they do something fairly spectacular this series which guarantees a sixth.
While I'm fairly ambivalent about Merlin's magic remaining hidden, I'm also sensible enough to know it's not going to go into a sixth unless they reveal it this year and it has some pretty big fall out effects.
I'm not sure, but the boys seem to be enjoying it. Bradley said that Series 4 was his favourite to work on and I can see why, while Colin talked recently about the privilege playing the title role in such a big show, and I have no doubt he meant it. I think Merlin offers enough variety for the two of them to enjoy the work. They know the show is becoming bigger and more popular every year, and it just started to hit the stride with Series 3 and 4. I'm even more convinced after I saw their proud faces at the NTA's in January. Regarding the ladies, Katie seems to be a bigger geek than me and always enthusiastic about the show. I think she would be on board for some more. I have to admit though I have doubts about Angel. Her role is the least engaging of the big four.
All in all I am optimistic, but if Series 5 won't be as good as 3 and 4, I'm sure the actors will quit. And in this scenario they better do so.
(This whole magic reveal is overvalued in the Merlin fandom imho.
I would agree that she is the most openly disenchanted by what she's been given to do so hopefully they have taken that into consideration and given her more to do outside of just being Arthur's wife. She needs some agenda and plot of her own to make her more interesting to play.
I'm not a massive fangirl of the Merlin/Arthur friendship so it's not the be all and end all to me. However, I do think that if they do it, they have to do it properly i.e Arthur should understandably be very angry that Merlin has lied to him for nearly a decade. If it doesn't happen, I'd like to see Merlin acknowledge the fact that it's a barrier to them being truly friends because Arthur doesn't actually know him.
Yes they all seem to take pride in the show, I'm sure they would all be keen for another series. The biggest obstacle to overcome is the BBC, whether after budget cuts they are willing to commission series 6. Given that its so popular, competes well against other on demand Saturday night TV and sells very well abroad, it would be in their interests to. The thing is that they have made misjudgments in the past, the most recent being cutting the Fades which was a big hit when it was broadcast in autumn last year. I also think as many others do that the BBC are unappreciative of Merlin.
I am surprised to read on here that Angel is unsatisfied with her role in series 4 when it gave her more to do than any of the previous series. I was quite pleased with the way her character progressed in guiding Arthur to his true self and particularly in the opener when she challenged Agravaine on closing the gates to refugees. Her actions gave us a taste of what she would be like as as queen. Based on what we've seen so far and what they've teased in the interviews, I think 'Merlin' will give Gwen much more to do as queen than her character in the legend. In the variants I am aware of Arthur doesn't confide in his queen that much, and its really Merlin and the inner circle of the Knights of the Round table that advise him on matters of policy.
Yes, the BBC needs programmes that sell well and make them money to supplement the lost income from the license fee freeze. Problem is : Merlin isn't one of those programmes. All rights to Merlin's licensing, distribution, merchandising, DVD's etc... belong to FreemantleMedia Enterprises/Shine Corp.
After S2 Merlin was on the verge of being axed by BBC1. They wanted a second Dr. Who in terms of ratings and merchandising possibilties and Merlin just wasn't doing it for them (it's coming close to DW ratings now but S2 was the lowest rated of the 4) and on top of that it's a fairly expensive series to make. Seems at that point Freemantle came in and brokered a deal where they took over part of the productions cost in exchange for all the international rights and BBC kept the UK rights (first broadcast) for the part of production costs they contribute. Of course since the BBC isn't a pay channel the right to broadcast first doesn't actually make them any money, and they need money.
It also explains why people think the BBC don't appreciate Merlin. Why spend a lot of money on PR/BBC Merlin website when you don't make a profit (Shine should do that but they have the worst PR dept. in history). DVD rights went from BBC (2 Entertain) to Freemantle so BBC 3 cancelled Secrets & Magic and the Video Diaries disappeared. Why put money in BTS stuff to put on the dvds when the income of those dvds goes to somebody else.
BBC1 has announced the commissioning of a new family drama yesterday "Musketeers" an in-house production co-produced with BBC Worldwide for internation sales that could make them a lot of money if successful. That together with the 50th anniversary year of Dr. Who in 2013 could maybe be the end of Merlin. At least they got the 5 years they wanted and weren't cancelled on a whim like The Fades. If they decide to cancel Merlin, I just hope they inform the producers in time so we can have a proper ending to the series with no cliffhangers that will never get resolved.
I did wonder why the DVD's changed to Free Mantle Enterprises. Good on them for stepping in to save the show, they obviously recognized its potential and are now profiting from its success. The BBC should have known that it takes a while for an audience to warm to a new show, the reason why Doctor Who quickly pulled vast audiences in was because of its well known history.
If the BBC make so much money out of DW, it explains why they are willing to fight tooth and nail for it even over petty cases such as the Virgin media advert while they are more than happy for Merlin to lay hidden in the back pages of the radio times. I understand that money is an issue, but they must not forget that they are a public institution at heart and therefore they should be accountable to the people. If there is so much support for Merlin, then it should not be a problem to commission another series especially since Free Mantle are partly paying for the production costs. However I fear you may be right, if they have a new family drama alongside Doctor Who then it could be that it is filling in the gap after series 5. If this is the case though, wouldn't JC/JM know whether or not S5 will be the last already? If they did then why would they have reason to put us on false pretenses that a 6th series is possible ? I suppose its possible that the BBC could have made enough savings to keep Merlin going.
The whole magic reveal doesn't bother me in the slightest, I've always understood this Merlin is based on Smallville - ie the driving rationale behind it is that it's set in a time before Merlin is the great sorcerer. But then I was a huge fan of Smallville as well
Not necessarily no, the commissioning doesn't usually take place until the summer, that's why they're going to have to have a Series Five finale that "wraps" most things up as they may not know whether they will get a series six.
I think, given the majority of the costs have been picked up by Freemantle, that a Sixth series is a real possibility, the DVD and overseas sales for Merlin are pretty good so Freemantle will probably be happy to keep funding it.
If you look at the BBC commissioning website, almost half the slots for drama for 2013/14 have already been ordered. That may already include Merlin and they've been told to keep it quite, it's more likely that it doesn't and the BBC will wait and see how the first couple of episodes of series five do before commissioning a sixth.
To be honest, I can't see this going as long as Smallville, five series' is probably a good length given the brief for - before Merlin was famous - there's only so much they can do without a magic reveal and once they do that, the show's whole ethos changes drastically.
It concerns me that the BBC don't make much money from Merlin because unfortunately, it is money that talks nowadays. Although to look on the bright side, we will have had 65 episodes (~48.75 hours) of a brilliant show that we can watch over and over until the dvds wear out!
If they do it, I suspect it will be exactly like they did in Smallville Lowri. That, after all, was the point of the show, that it was Clark Kent's life before he became Superman and that everyone knows what happens next
I'm fairly sure it will a similar thing with Merlin. Once his magic is out then there's nothing really new about the series, there's been plenty done on the all powerful warlock at the heart of King Arthur's court.
Personally, I think there could be plenty of material for a couple of series after the reveal. They could even drag it out a la Smallville and have minor characters finding out first (I know this certainly isn't a new idea). Colin Morgan has said that there will be a huge fallout once Arthur finds out, it wouldn't be fair to keep that from us would it?
Although, you have got a point and I would be disappointed but not surprised if that's exactly what they do!
As for prefacing the legends, whilst I am interested in those, I watch Merlin because I love the characters and storylines as the BBC have made them, they could leave the legend behind and I would still enjoy it.
Or Freemantle/Shine could do a "Primeval" and find extra funding elsewhere if they can persuade the BBC to release the copyright. Of course, if I remember correctly, it took more than a year to get that deal done and by that time half the cast/writers had gone to greener pastures. When they finaly got Primeval on air viewers didn't like the new cast or stories so it tanked. Maybe better to end Merlin on a high note