I like how Bradley has always been vocal about his criticisms of the show. I remember him being critical of how they handled his relationship with Gwen as well.
I can remember an interview in which he commented on how they were approaching Arthur's interest in Gwen in S2 compared to S1. I can't remember him being critical of the romance as a whole though.
Season 5 is really my favourite for one simple reason - we jumped forward 3 years and now finally the characters evolved. In previous years it could be very frustrating for me and others, because we had the sensation always of spinning the same tale. For example, we filmed an episode or something where Arthur was himself or affected by a situation. At the end of the episode, it seemed like he grew up and wouldn't make the same mistakes again. However, in the next episode, it was as if the these things never happened and Arthur once again acted like an idiot. It made me upset!
This is VERY clear. The actor playing Arthur thinks that TPTB didnt develop him enough. I've been saying for over a year that there was too many plot holes and contradictions and yet some people continued to act like there was nothing wrong with Merlin.
I can remember an interview in which he commented on how they were approaching Arthur's interest in Gwen in S2 compared to S1. I can't remember him being critical of the romance as a whole though.
I don't think he was critical of the romance, just how it was handled. I can't remember which interview (and..can't really be bothered to look) but it was something about how they rarely spoke and then suddenly were in love with each other.
Season 5 is really my favourite for one simple reason - we jumped forward 3 years and now finally the characters evolved. In previous years it could be very frustrating for me and others, because we had the sensation always of spinning the same tale. For example, we filmed an episode or something where Arthur was himself or affected by a situation. At the end of the episode, it seemed like he grew up and wouldn't make the same mistakes again. However, in the next episode, it was as if the these things never happened and Arthur once again acted like an idiot. It made me upset!
This is VERY clear. The actor playing Arthur thinks that TPTB didnt develop him enough. I've been saying for over a year that there was too many plot holes and contradictions and yet some people continued to act like there was nothing wrong with Merlin.
The writers found a formula/story arc which worked and so instead of moving on to try new things they just kept repeating it. Hence they had to make some characters, particularly Arthur and Morgana, look incredibly incompetent/stupid so that they could keep returning to the status quo. I'm not a Merlin basher, there were many things I loved about the show, hell I have every season on DVD, but its flaws were quite obvious.
The writers found a formula/story arc which worked and so instead of moving on to try new things they just kept repeating it. Hence they had to make some characters, particularly Arthur and Morgana, look incredibly incompetent/stupid so that they could keep returning to the status quo. I'm not a Merlin basher, there were many things I loved about the show, hell I have every season on DVD, but its flaws were quite obvious.
I totally agree with you franster. I adore Merlin, I'l watch it over and over again. Alot of things in it annoy me, most I've been very vocal about but it doesn't stop me watching/loving it
I wouldn't hold your breath yellowrose, it is going to be a BBC drama after all. At least one of the musketeers will end up dead by the end and the others will end up failures who have nothing but years of untold misery to look forward to. It's inevitable.
Noooo! I hope you are wrong but I wouldn't bet on it...
If the story is how I remember it, It's more or less Merlin with more flamboyant shirts but no magic...
There's loads of 'bromance' (woopy freakin' do ) a sweet heroine, a scheming villainess who gets her come-uppance in the end (that's new! :yawn:) and a scheming Count a bit like the Sheriff of Nottingham but with a dodgy French accent
BIB - I don't think they die or are failures in the end tbh, but every version I've seen of the story in the past made me wish they had by the time it had finished
PS: Obviously I won't be watching
Oh, I will be watching. I love swashbuckling...After 3x13 and the Round Table scene, I hoped we were going to see a bit more of it in Merlin, but well, we didn't...
They do in the original novels but most film and TV adaptations don't go right to the end of the story, only the first volume about The Three Musketeers
Could you please be a bit more specific here Cadiva? Which novel do they die in, and how old are they when they die? I've tried to research this, but couldn't find the answer. Thank you
...
I've heard it, it's about as compelling an argument as the one for those claiming Julian Murphy's comments regarding Merlin and Arthur's relationship always being a "love story" meant it had to be a sexual one.
It's also consistent with the show's canon!
It's also not "evident to anyone watching" considering the variety of people who've disagreed with your statements not only on this thread but on the series rewatch one.
Just because a lot of people agree on something doesn't mean they're all right about it. Remember that guy in 1492 who thought the world was round but everyone else said it was flat?
...
It'd be rather difficult for them to envisage a retelling of the Arthurian mythology and not have him dying at the end considering they've always spoken about everyone "knowing how the legend ends",...
No, it wouldn't. If JM and JC had wanted to show MERLIN as a success instead of failure, they could have ended it at one of the 12 Saxon battles Arthur had driven won and hinted at the events to come in Camlaan.
... so that comment makes complete sense but lends no weight to your argument that the show as a whole was about failure.
It sounds to me like you're cherry picking things to fit your argument which makes using the show's "canon" as a reason, an inconsistent one.
...
Arthur's death doesn't automatically equal failure and it certainly doesn't in this interpretation...
I never said it did. I have no problem with Arthur dying or the ratings. I never have.
The problem I have with Arthur is that he fails to develop into the character that would fulfill his Destiny in MERLIN which were the expectations during the story arc of his life. That's what makes him a failure as with Merlin.
And that Destiny was outlined in S1, Arthur and Merlin are to unite the lands to unite the old ways with the new ways to bring about peace and prosperity thus forming a united kingdom which Arthur would lead.
I thought I had made that clear?
... where the viewer is given repeated show canon information to the contrary.
That's just it, I never saw the show canon that Arthur's death led to a success much less avoided failure. But, I never saw that the series had underpinnings of a homoerotic nature, regarding the love between two men as JM said in S5x13 comments and I still don't, not really.
So, how about showing the "repeated show canon" in S1-4 foreshadowing Gwen's success as Queen or the repeated show canon in S5 showing her wisdom, her negotiating ability, her greatness as Queen that might show where Gwen would succeed in uniting the kingdoms under her rule whereas Arthur and Merlin failed?
And, no... don't rely upon the prior treaties made by Arthur because as show canon in S4 showed: once the ruler making the treaties died so did the terms of the treaties. Meaning: Gwen would have to be like the ruler Aggy wanted Arthur to be, more like Uther, and given Camelot's resources, her chances of survival are poor.
Add to that:
1) I never saw the terms of surrender or Armistice between Camelot and the Saxons much less a treaty showing the Saxons losing... did anyone? It's fairly evident from the anxious look of Percival and Leon and Gwen in the penultimate scene: they're worried about the future because it's all uncertain if the kingdom would survive without a King which Gwen herself realized would be crippling for a kingdom forcing her to deed away the lands to maintain a peace much as she planned with the Sarrum.
2) Throughout S5x13, and most of S5 for that matter, it's not the knights of Camelot who seem to control most of the territory, it's the Saxons! While the knights of C bravely huddle close to the castle without their leader, Morgana and her Saxons seem to have control of most of the rest of the kingdom roaming the lands, making allies, conquering and pillaging at will. And, when the dead are buried, as Morgana states Arthur won a battle but lost the war!
3) Now, do I discount the possibility that Gwen could lead Camelot to a golden age? No! After all, given enough time a roomful of chimps can reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare! But, it's not likely to happen in my lifetime.
4) And, finally, using the arguments posted by you and others regarding Gwen's success as Queen.
Using the show's canon:
A. The same could be said based on S5x13, Morgana might not be dead. Merlin only assumes she is but there's no body and no scene to confirm that she is. Because, after she's stabbed, Merlin twists the blade, he pulls the blade out, and there's no blood on her or on the blade! That's the show's canon, isn't it?
B. The comment by Morgana about no mortal blade being able to kill her because she's a High Priestess, might extend to those forged by a dragon's breath, if the show's canon of S5x13 regarding the hierarchy of magic: the older magic of the Sidhe and most likely the source of that magic, the Triple Goddess, can reverse the magic of others including those powerful sorcerers like the dragons, Merlin and Morgana. That close to Avalon, the mobility of the Sidhe, and the Triple Goddess, it wouldn't take much for Morgana to come back to life (or as what I suspect she is after S4x13: the Un-Dead) to fulfill her destiny, would it?
No! In fact, given MERLIN's propensity to retread things, it's even more likely for that to happen since it happened before! And, this is even more so:
C. What's even more likely than Gwen leading the way to a golden age?
Morgana to rally the Saxons against Camelot, for Merlin to wait idly at Avalon for Arthur to return (and he doesn't) while the kingdom crumbles to ashes while Gwen (willingly?) gives up her throne to Morgana, and for Gwen and her subjects to be enslaved by Morgana and her Saxon allies thus ushering in a golden age of rule under the Saxons.
D. And, the motive behind all this? It's all part of the Dragon's revenge against the Uther!
Without the show's canon
Morgana lives because she lives because she's Morgana who must live to fulfill her destiny. Just go to paragraph C!
In the end though, a more probable scenario and no matter which scenario is chosen, the outcome's still the same: the Saxons win!
Could you please be a bit more specific here Cadiva? Which novel do they die in, and how old are they when they die? I've tried to research this, but couldn't find the answer. Thank you
Yellowrose, the next book in the series is called 'Twenty Years After' and they - I refer to the 3 Musketeers (Athos, Porthos, Aramis) and D'Artagnan are certainly all alive for that one. There are 3 more books after 'Twenty Years After' but I forget who stays alive for the very end. Most film/tv versions only deal with the first book. I would say you were fairly safe for a one off series (not sure if they intend multiple series as they did for Merlin though).
Well, I have just watched 5:13 with the audio commentary. I was hoping it would cheer me up to hear Katie talking about it, rather than wallowing in the misery of the plot, but, you know what? I actually found her and JM's comments rather irritating and disrespectful at times. And there is no getting away from the fact that when they lost the screening (how rubbish is that? couldn't they get another copy to watch and carry on their commentary to the end? it felt really shabby to end the 65th and final episode with a commentary that just fizzles out) we are still left with Merlin sobbing his heart out, Gwen taking over as queen - something I have no interest in seeing and take no hope or inspiration from - and poor old Merlin trudging the lanes of Glastonbury. God, it is really so depressing!
So then I watched 5:11 because I felt this was one of the few really great episodes of S5. I find both Colin and Alex's performances breathtaking in this episode, and the writing of Arthur, unusually for S5, was sympathetic and well played by Bradley. But OMG, it is so dark and depressing and futile and miserable. No matter what Merlin or Arthur do, they are doomed to failure. It is like watching a baby antelope struggling in a muddy riverbank, knowing the lions are on the attack. Absolutely heartrending.
I am not sure how I can enjoy any of Merlin now, knowing the outcome awaiting Arthur and Merlin. JM said in his commentary for ep 13, did anyone really expect a different outcome? Well, yes, sorry to be the fly in your ointment JM, but I did! I know this has been done to death, but I just needed to get that out, having concluded my afternoon feeling like the joy and hope has been sucked out of me. :mad:
...
I am not sure how I can enjoy any of Merlin now, knowing the outcome awaiting Arthur and Merlin. JM said in his commentary for ep 13, did anyone really expect a different outcome? Well, yes, sorry to be the fly in your ointment JM, but I did! I know this has been done to death, but I just needed to get that out, having concluded my afternoon feeling like the joy and hope has been sucked out of me. :mad:
I agree with you until this point. I can enjoy MERLIN now because there is hope and joy arising from a very likely scenario where Arthur returns as the once and future king but not in the way it's been foisted onto me by JM and the cast comments.
I agree with you until this point. I can enjoy MERLIN now because there is hope and joy arising from a very likely scenario where Arthur returns as the once and future king but not in the way it's been foisted onto me by JM and the cast comments.
Whereas I absolutely adore all the Merthur comments! And I don't even really want a sequel any more because I'd be so gutted if they didn't follow through with all those veiled promises!
I agree that the ending can definitely be viewed as optimistic. When I see Merlin walking along and he glances sideways at the Tor, I imagine him thinking, 'Yep, something's definitely stirring. Time to shed the old man disguise! I think Arthur will like the beanie, though, so that can stay.'
Mike, as I've said now at least four times, the show canon has the Great Dragon tell Merlin all that he hoped to achieve has come to pass and that the kingdoms will be united. It really couldn't be much simpler than that.
You and I are going to have to agree to disagree over what the show is telling the viewer happens following Arthur's death.
Could you please be a bit more specific here Cadiva? Which novel do they die in, and how old are they when they die? I've tried to research this, but couldn't find the answer. Thank you
Yep, what's commonly referred to as The Three Musketeers is actually three separate stories, it's the first one which is most often filmed. They are, in order, The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later. It's in this final novel where the various musketeers come to their various ends.
People usually know of this final novel by the title of one of the three parts it's split into - The Man in the Iron Mask. Without going into too many spoilers, three of the four main characters who we see in The Three Musketeers end up dead
Yellowrose, the next book in the series is called 'Twenty Years After' and they - I refer to the 3 Musketeers (Athos, Porthos, Aramis) and D'Artagnan are certainly all alive for that one. There are 3 more books after 'Twenty Years After' but I forget who stays alive for the very end. Most film/tv versions only deal with the first book. I would say you were fairly safe for a one off series (not sure if they intend multiple series as they did for Merlin though).
I am not sure how I can enjoy any of Merlin now, knowing the outcome awaiting Arthur and Merlin. JM said in his commentary for ep 13, did anyone really expect a different outcome? Well, yes, sorry to be the fly in your ointment JM, but I did! I know this has been done to death, but I just needed to get that out, having concluded my afternoon feeling like the joy and hope has been sucked out of me. :mad:
Thank you so much for the info Avi At the moment, I'm only thinking of one series. Anything else would be a bonus. With regard to the commentary for 5x13, I haven't listened, but I can't say I'm surprised. It sounds very disrespectful to the fans. As for the JM comment, it's simply laughable. I agree with you that the argument has been done to death, but there is no justification for this ending, and I get so angry when people try to defend the indefensible. The story should not have progressed to the point of Arthur's death. They had not properly told the story of his life. This show should have ended after the victory of another battle, with Merlin and Arthur poised to unite the lands of Albion and build the golden age, as the dragon had prophesied. This is so obvious that it shouldn't even need to be stated. The idea that it is Gwen who will accomplish these things is an insult to the intelligence of the audience. However, I am determined not to allow the ending to spoil my enjoyment of earlier episodes which I enjoyed. This series still has a hold on me which shows no sign of waning. I suspect the same is true for many of us who frequent fan sites. I will remember the good parts and ignore those which I didn't like, such as 4x09 and the ending. Any other gaps will be filled with fanfiction.
I agree with you that the argument has been done to death, but there is no justification for this ending, and I get so angry when people try to defend the indefensible.
I'm sorry you feel that way but it's also rather disrespectful of you to not accept that other people don't have the same opinion. It is not indefensible, plenty of other people have defended it and given perfectly valid reasons for their opinions. As no-one's told those who are disappointed by the ending that they shouldn't be or that they should get over it, I fail to see why the same courtesy isn't then extended the other way.
Yep, what's commonly referred to as The Three Musketeers is actually three separate stories, it's the first one which is most often filmed. They are, in order, The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later. It's in this final novel where the various musketeers come to their various ends.
People usually know of this final novel by the title of one of the three parts it's split into - The Man in the Iron Mask. Without going into too many spoilers, three of the four main characters who we see in The Three Musketeers end up dead
Thank you for replying Cadiva So from the sound of it, there should be plenty of material to be used before any of the main characters are killed off. I hope it doesn't come to that, as I will always favour a happy ending, as you may have guessed
Thank you for replying Cadiva So from the sound of it, there should be plenty of material to be used before any of the main characters are killed off. I hope it doesn't come to that, as I will always favour a happy ending, as you may have guessed
From what I understand, they're planning on telling the story of The Three Musketeers rather than the D'Artagnan Romances so I'd expect we're only going to be seeing the events of that novel (as is most often the case with adaptations). In which case, that all ends happily ever after
I'm sorry you feel that way but it's also rather disrespectful of you to not accept that other people don't have the same opinion. It is not indefensible, plenty of other people have defended it and given perfectly valid reasons for their opinions. As no-one's told those who are disappointed by the ending that they shouldn't be or that they should get over it, I fail to see why the same courtesy isn't then extended the other way.
Oops, cross post again. No disrespect is intended, I'm sorry if it came across that way.
I've thought about quite a bit, I really do believe that Arthur and Merlin have failed their destiny.
1. Arthur never did legalize magic. It would have taken his authority to make it happen. Gwen was sitting a shaky throne.
2. Magic was still had the stigma as being evil; Morgana, Aithusa and all of the other wizards that had attacked Camelot over the years. Yes, Emrys did help defeat the Saxons, but the same people remember him as trying to kill Gwen and actually killing Uther.
3. Gwen succeeded to the throne, but with what authority? And for how long? Arthur was dead; the nobles certainly wouldn't accept a female Queen of peasant origins. Even if they did, Odin, Alined, Lott and the Saxons wouldn't have. Half of Camelot's warriors were dead; that was easy pickings for the other five kingdoms.
4. Merlin failed. He forgot his destiny out of love - and fear - of Arthur. He couldn't bring himself to confront Arthur on the issue. This is a situation where love actually brought doom.The Old Religion grew tired of his procrastination. The dragon warned him to kill Morgana and Mordred while he still could.
5. Arthur had a knack for making bad decisions, especially related to people whom he trusted. He lacked the savvy to be a politician. Yes, he believed in chivalry and "doing the right thing", but one must survive politically to do that. Capps and Murphy were right in making Arthur his own bane.
6. Maybe Arthur does arise in the future and restores magic. But that's not the destiny that the Dragon implied through out the story line. The Dragon knew more than he told Merlin, which didn't help at all. I still don't know what his agenda was.
It is regrettable that Capps and Murphy chose to end the story line this way, because of that I would never be optimistic about another of their productions. Whatever Atlantis will be, I would always assume that it will end tragically. It will end like Greek legends basically do end...in death of the heroes.
Now that Atlantis has been brought forth, and the Three Musketeers are soon to be on tap, Merlin won't resurface any more than Robin Hood. Even though I don't think much of Capps and Murphy, they brought high ratings to the BBC and they're king. They've moved on; so has the BBC. Atlantis was the clincher. Except for the faithful few, Merlin will just die.
So the actors really got what they wanted; new careers. Bradley wanted new opportunities..... hopefully he will find them. Katie seems to be moving in the right direction because of role in Dracula as far as financial growth and fame are concerned. I expect even if Bradley had received everything that he had wanted in Merlin, he still wouldn't have been happy.
Season 5 wasn't enjoyable for me. I have no idea how much more morbid, Capps and Murphy would have made a Season 6. Perhaps, the series had reached its high note since it seemed like the producers were stuck in a rut.
At least the BBC has commissioned two adventure or fantasy stories to replace it.
Oops, cross post again. No disrespect is intended, I'm sorry if it came across that way.
Believe me I do understand your (and others) frustration with the ending but, as one of the few people actually posting on here (I'd love to know where all the others who voted they thought the final was excellent are!) who was very happy with it minor a few niggles, it can become a little bit like I'm being beaten over the head repeatedly just because I didn't find it depressing
...
Season 5 wasn't enjoyable for me. I have no idea how much more morbid, Capps and Murphy would have made a Season 6. Perhaps, the series had reached its high note since it seemed like the producers were stuck in a rut...
That's easy... JC and JM make Arthur, Merlin and Morgana cannibals while Gwen watches helplessly as the rest of the kingdom is transformed. I mean Morgana's already part of the Un-Dead. She might as well be on in the George Romero mold.
Whereas I absolutely adore all the Merthur comments! And I don't even really want a sequel any more because I'd be so gutted if they didn't follow through with all those veiled promises!
I agree that the ending can definitely be viewed as optimistic. When I see Merlin walking along and he glances sideways at the Tor, I imagine him thinking, 'Yep, something's definitely stirring. Time to shed the old man disguise! I think Arthur will like the beanie, though, so that can stay.'
That's a nice thought MGH, and I can see that it would bring a smile to your heart.
But my grief doesn't stem from the thought that they are forever separated. I too can envisage a time when they are reunited. But that doesn't take away the pain of seeing them separated in the life set up for them in the show, if that makes sense. I don't want to argue with anyone, but, for me, Merlin and Arthur failed. I can see how people can argue otherwise, but the arguments don't touch me inside. They failed, they were separated, the whole struggle was pointless. The dragon (who I regard as the teller of truth) was wrong. That is overwhelmingly depressing to me.
I know it is a childish argument and I have made it several times before, but that ending was not what I expected from a family show. I feel it was way too harsh, too bleak. I feel that tptb thought they had done something daring and bold. I wish they hadn't. That's all.
Yep, what's commonly referred to as The Three Musketeers is actually three separate stories, it's the first one which is most often filmed. They are, in order, The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later. It's in this final novel where the various musketeers come to their various ends.
People usually know of this final novel by the title of one of the three parts it's split into - The Man in the Iron Mask. Without going into too many spoilers, three of the four main characters who we see in The Three Musketeers end up dead
Oh that's interesting Cadiva. I didn't know the Vicomte de Bragelonne covers the last 3 novels. I have 5 separate volumes and assumed they were 5 separate novels: The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years Later, The Vicomte de Bragelonne, Louise de la Valliere, and The Man in the Iron Mask.
Oh that's interesting Cadiva. I didn't know the Vicomte de Bragelonne covers the last 3 novels. I have 5 separate volumes and assumed they were 5 separate novels: The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years Later, The Vicomte de Bragelonne, Louise de la Valliere, and The Man in the Iron Mask.
Well, you learn something new everyday!
the Vicomte de Bragelonne has been issued as both three volume (like yours) and five volume sets over the years but it's technically all one novel. It's actually my favourite of the three.
Believe me I do understand your (and others) frustration with the ending but, as one of the few people actually posting on here (I'd love to know where all the others who voted they thought the final was excellent are!) who was very happy with it minor a few niggles, it can become a little bit like I'm being beaten over the head repeatedly just because I didn't find it depressing
Cadiva you know I love you but sometimes I swear we watched a different ending lol
Edit - This is in no way another 'beating you round the head' post, you know I adore you
Believe me I do understand your (and others) frustration with the ending but, as one of the few people actually posting on here (I'd love to know where all the others who voted they thought the final was excellent are!) who was very happy with it minor a few niggles, it can become a little bit like I'm being beaten over the head repeatedly just because I didn't find it depressing
Thank you I do feel strongly about it and I guess I get carried away sometimes. I never mean to offend anyone and certainly don't mean to beat you over the head with it, Cadiva. With regard to the finale, I didn't vote, but it could be that people were voting for the episode as a whole. I actually really liked the bromance, and the way the reveal was handled. It's just the last ten minutes which I found so depressing. If only Kilgarrah had arrived in time, taken Arthur to Avalon, where he had been healed, I would have been very happy. Then we could have seen Merlin and Arthur return to Camelot, have a rousing round table scene, with Arthur revealing Merlin to the court,and legalizing magic. That would have been an inspiring ending, and we could be left to imagine the rest for ourselves. I wish they had chosen that option but I do accept that not everyone feels the same way.
I voted excellent for the finale. I believe my reasoning was that I'd finally got my reveal and as a story it was very good. Also, I love this show and it was horrible seeing such low poll results!
However, I do agree that when you become properly invested in the result, we were screwed over by the writers. I could have forgiven them killing off Arthur as per the legends but it needed far fewer plot holes to succeed and the complete failure of Merlin was a very bitter pill to swallow.
So, in reply Cadiva, there is still someone here who voted excellent but I cannot agree that it wasn't depressing. In fact, the whole of series 5 was about as cheerful as Les Misérables.
Thank you I do feel strongly about it and I guess I get carried away sometimes. I never mean to offend anyone and certainly don't mean to beat you over the head with it, Cadiva. With regard to the finale, I didn't vote, but it could be that people were voting for the episode as a whole. I actually really liked the bromance, and the way the reveal was handled. It's just the last ten minutes which I found so depressing. If only Kilgarrah had arrived in time, taken Arthur to Avalon, where he had been healed, I would have been very happy. Then we could have seen Merlin and Arthur return to Camelot, have a rousing round table scene, with Arthur revealing Merlin to the court,and legalizing magic. That would have been an inspiring ending, and we could be left to imagine the rest for ourselves. I wish they had chosen that option but I do accept that not everyone feels the same way.
Comments
I can remember an interview in which he commented on how they were approaching Arthur's interest in Gwen in S2 compared to S1. I can't remember him being critical of the romance as a whole though.
This is VERY clear. The actor playing Arthur thinks that TPTB didnt develop him enough. I've been saying for over a year that there was too many plot holes and contradictions and yet some people continued to act like there was nothing wrong with Merlin.
I don't think he was critical of the romance, just how it was handled. I can't remember which interview (and..can't really be bothered to look) but it was something about how they rarely spoke and then suddenly were in love with each other.
The writers found a formula/story arc which worked and so instead of moving on to try new things they just kept repeating it. Hence they had to make some characters, particularly Arthur and Morgana, look incredibly incompetent/stupid so that they could keep returning to the status quo. I'm not a Merlin basher, there were many things I loved about the show, hell I have every season on DVD, but its flaws were quite obvious.
I totally agree with you franster. I adore Merlin, I'l watch it over and over again. Alot of things in it annoy me, most I've been very vocal about but it doesn't stop me watching/loving it
Thank you. That invitation is very enticing
Noooo! I hope you are wrong but I wouldn't bet on it...
Oh, I will be watching. I love swashbuckling...After 3x13 and the Round Table scene, I hoped we were going to see a bit more of it in Merlin, but well, we didn't...
Could you please be a bit more specific here Cadiva? Which novel do they die in, and how old are they when they die? I've tried to research this, but couldn't find the answer. Thank you
Just because a lot of people agree on something doesn't mean they're all right about it. Remember that guy in 1492 who thought the world was round but everyone else said it was flat?
No, it wouldn't. If JM and JC had wanted to show MERLIN as a success instead of failure, they could have ended it at one of the 12 Saxon battles Arthur had driven won and hinted at the events to come in Camlaan.
It sounds to me like you're cherry picking things to fit your argument which makes using the show's "canon" as a reason, an inconsistent one.
I never said it did. I have no problem with Arthur dying or the ratings. I never have.
The problem I have with Arthur is that he fails to develop into the character that would fulfill his Destiny in MERLIN which were the expectations during the story arc of his life. That's what makes him a failure as with Merlin.
And that Destiny was outlined in S1, Arthur and Merlin are to unite the lands to unite the old ways with the new ways to bring about peace and prosperity thus forming a united kingdom which Arthur would lead.
I thought I had made that clear?
That's just it, I never saw the show canon that Arthur's death led to a success much less avoided failure. But, I never saw that the series had underpinnings of a homoerotic nature, regarding the love between two men as JM said in S5x13 comments and I still don't, not really.
So, how about showing the "repeated show canon" in S1-4 foreshadowing Gwen's success as Queen or the repeated show canon in S5 showing her wisdom, her negotiating ability, her greatness as Queen that might show where Gwen would succeed in uniting the kingdoms under her rule whereas Arthur and Merlin failed?
And, no... don't rely upon the prior treaties made by Arthur because as show canon in S4 showed: once the ruler making the treaties died so did the terms of the treaties. Meaning: Gwen would have to be like the ruler Aggy wanted Arthur to be, more like Uther, and given Camelot's resources, her chances of survival are poor.
Add to that:
1) I never saw the terms of surrender or Armistice between Camelot and the Saxons much less a treaty showing the Saxons losing... did anyone? It's fairly evident from the anxious look of Percival and Leon and Gwen in the penultimate scene: they're worried about the future because it's all uncertain if the kingdom would survive without a King which Gwen herself realized would be crippling for a kingdom forcing her to deed away the lands to maintain a peace much as she planned with the Sarrum.
2) Throughout S5x13, and most of S5 for that matter, it's not the knights of Camelot who seem to control most of the territory, it's the Saxons! While the knights of C bravely huddle close to the castle without their leader, Morgana and her Saxons seem to have control of most of the rest of the kingdom roaming the lands, making allies, conquering and pillaging at will. And, when the dead are buried, as Morgana states Arthur won a battle but lost the war!
3) Now, do I discount the possibility that Gwen could lead Camelot to a golden age? No! After all, given enough time a roomful of chimps can reproduce the complete works of Shakespeare! But, it's not likely to happen in my lifetime.
4) And, finally, using the arguments posted by you and others regarding Gwen's success as Queen.
Using the show's canon:
A. The same could be said based on S5x13, Morgana might not be dead. Merlin only assumes she is but there's no body and no scene to confirm that she is. Because, after she's stabbed, Merlin twists the blade, he pulls the blade out, and there's no blood on her or on the blade! That's the show's canon, isn't it?
B. The comment by Morgana about no mortal blade being able to kill her because she's a High Priestess, might extend to those forged by a dragon's breath, if the show's canon of S5x13 regarding the hierarchy of magic: the older magic of the Sidhe and most likely the source of that magic, the Triple Goddess, can reverse the magic of others including those powerful sorcerers like the dragons, Merlin and Morgana. That close to Avalon, the mobility of the Sidhe, and the Triple Goddess, it wouldn't take much for Morgana to come back to life (or as what I suspect she is after S4x13: the Un-Dead) to fulfill her destiny, would it?
No! In fact, given MERLIN's propensity to retread things, it's even more likely for that to happen since it happened before! And, this is even more so:
C. What's even more likely than Gwen leading the way to a golden age?
Morgana to rally the Saxons against Camelot, for Merlin to wait idly at Avalon for Arthur to return (and he doesn't) while the kingdom crumbles to ashes while Gwen (willingly?) gives up her throne to Morgana, and for Gwen and her subjects to be enslaved by Morgana and her Saxon allies thus ushering in a golden age of rule under the Saxons.
D. And, the motive behind all this? It's all part of the Dragon's revenge against the Uther!
Without the show's canon
Morgana lives because she lives because she's Morgana who must live to fulfill her destiny. Just go to paragraph C!
In the end though, a more probable scenario and no matter which scenario is chosen, the outcome's still the same: the Saxons win!
Yellowrose, the next book in the series is called 'Twenty Years After' and they - I refer to the 3 Musketeers (Athos, Porthos, Aramis) and D'Artagnan are certainly all alive for that one. There are 3 more books after 'Twenty Years After' but I forget who stays alive for the very end. Most film/tv versions only deal with the first book. I would say you were fairly safe for a one off series (not sure if they intend multiple series as they did for Merlin though).
Well, I have just watched 5:13 with the audio commentary. I was hoping it would cheer me up to hear Katie talking about it, rather than wallowing in the misery of the plot, but, you know what? I actually found her and JM's comments rather irritating and disrespectful at times. And there is no getting away from the fact that when they lost the screening (how rubbish is that? couldn't they get another copy to watch and carry on their commentary to the end? it felt really shabby to end the 65th and final episode with a commentary that just fizzles out) we are still left with Merlin sobbing his heart out, Gwen taking over as queen - something I have no interest in seeing and take no hope or inspiration from - and poor old Merlin trudging the lanes of Glastonbury.
So then I watched 5:11 because I felt this was one of the few really great episodes of S5. I find both Colin and Alex's performances breathtaking in this episode, and the writing of Arthur, unusually for S5, was sympathetic and well played by Bradley. But OMG, it is so dark and depressing and futile and miserable. No matter what Merlin or Arthur do, they are doomed to failure. It is like watching a baby antelope struggling in a muddy riverbank, knowing the lions are on the attack. Absolutely heartrending.
I am not sure how I can enjoy any of Merlin now, knowing the outcome awaiting Arthur and Merlin. JM said in his commentary for ep 13, did anyone really expect a different outcome? Well, yes, sorry to be the fly in your ointment JM, but I did! I know this has been done to death, but I just needed to get that out, having concluded my afternoon feeling like the joy and hope has been sucked out of me. :mad:
Whereas I absolutely adore all the Merthur comments! And I don't even really want a sequel any more because I'd be so gutted if they didn't follow through with all those veiled promises!
I agree that the ending can definitely be viewed as optimistic. When I see Merlin walking along and he glances sideways at the Tor, I imagine him thinking, 'Yep, something's definitely stirring. Time to shed the old man disguise! I think Arthur will like the beanie, though, so that can stay.'
You and I are going to have to agree to disagree over what the show is telling the viewer happens following Arthur's death.
Yep, what's commonly referred to as The Three Musketeers is actually three separate stories, it's the first one which is most often filmed. They are, in order, The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years After and The Vicomte of Bragelonne: Ten Years Later. It's in this final novel where the various musketeers come to their various ends.
People usually know of this final novel by the title of one of the three parts it's split into - The Man in the Iron Mask. Without going into too many spoilers, three of the four main characters who we see in The Three Musketeers end up dead
Thank you so much for the info Avi
I'm sorry you feel that way but it's also rather disrespectful of you to not accept that other people don't have the same opinion. It is not indefensible, plenty of other people have defended it and given perfectly valid reasons for their opinions. As no-one's told those who are disappointed by the ending that they shouldn't be or that they should get over it, I fail to see why the same courtesy isn't then extended the other way.
Thank you for replying Cadiva
From what I understand, they're planning on telling the story of The Three Musketeers rather than the D'Artagnan Romances so I'd expect we're only going to be seeing the events of that novel (as is most often the case with adaptations). In which case, that all ends happily ever after
Oops, cross post again. No disrespect is intended, I'm sorry if it came across that way.
1. Arthur never did legalize magic. It would have taken his authority to make it happen. Gwen was sitting a shaky throne.
2. Magic was still had the stigma as being evil; Morgana, Aithusa and all of the other wizards that had attacked Camelot over the years. Yes, Emrys did help defeat the Saxons, but the same people remember him as trying to kill Gwen and actually killing Uther.
3. Gwen succeeded to the throne, but with what authority? And for how long? Arthur was dead; the nobles certainly wouldn't accept a female Queen of peasant origins. Even if they did, Odin, Alined, Lott and the Saxons wouldn't have. Half of Camelot's warriors were dead; that was easy pickings for the other five kingdoms.
4. Merlin failed. He forgot his destiny out of love - and fear - of Arthur. He couldn't bring himself to confront Arthur on the issue. This is a situation where love actually brought doom.The Old Religion grew tired of his procrastination. The dragon warned him to kill Morgana and Mordred while he still could.
5. Arthur had a knack for making bad decisions, especially related to people whom he trusted. He lacked the savvy to be a politician. Yes, he believed in chivalry and "doing the right thing", but one must survive politically to do that. Capps and Murphy were right in making Arthur his own bane.
6. Maybe Arthur does arise in the future and restores magic. But that's not the destiny that the Dragon implied through out the story line. The Dragon knew more than he told Merlin, which didn't help at all. I still don't know what his agenda was.
It is regrettable that Capps and Murphy chose to end the story line this way, because of that I would never be optimistic about another of their productions. Whatever Atlantis will be, I would always assume that it will end tragically. It will end like Greek legends basically do end...in death of the heroes.
Now that Atlantis has been brought forth, and the Three Musketeers are soon to be on tap, Merlin won't resurface any more than Robin Hood. Even though I don't think much of Capps and Murphy, they brought high ratings to the BBC and they're king. They've moved on; so has the BBC. Atlantis was the clincher. Except for the faithful few, Merlin will just die.
So the actors really got what they wanted; new careers. Bradley wanted new opportunities..... hopefully he will find them. Katie seems to be moving in the right direction because of role in Dracula as far as financial growth and fame are concerned. I expect even if Bradley had received everything that he had wanted in Merlin, he still wouldn't have been happy.
Season 5 wasn't enjoyable for me. I have no idea how much more morbid, Capps and Murphy would have made a Season 6. Perhaps, the series had reached its high note since it seemed like the producers were stuck in a rut.
At least the BBC has commissioned two adventure or fantasy stories to replace it.
Believe me I do understand your (and others) frustration with the ending but, as one of the few people actually posting on here (I'd love to know where all the others who voted they thought the final was excellent are!) who was very happy with it minor a few niggles, it can become a little bit like I'm being beaten over the head repeatedly just because I didn't find it depressing
That's a nice thought MGH, and I can see that it would bring a smile to your heart.
But my grief doesn't stem from the thought that they are forever separated. I too can envisage a time when they are reunited. But that doesn't take away the pain of seeing them separated in the life set up for them in the show, if that makes sense. I don't want to argue with anyone, but, for me, Merlin and Arthur failed. I can see how people can argue otherwise, but the arguments don't touch me inside. They failed, they were separated, the whole struggle was pointless. The dragon (who I regard as the teller of truth) was wrong. That is overwhelmingly depressing to me.
I know it is a childish argument and I have made it several times before, but that ending was not what I expected from a family show. I feel it was way too harsh, too bleak. I feel that tptb thought they had done something daring and bold. I wish they hadn't. That's all.
Oh that's interesting Cadiva. I didn't know the Vicomte de Bragelonne covers the last 3 novels. I have 5 separate volumes and assumed they were 5 separate novels: The Three Musketeers, Twenty Years Later, The Vicomte de Bragelonne, Louise de la Valliere, and The Man in the Iron Mask.
Well, you learn something new everyday!
Cadiva you know I love you but sometimes I swear we watched a different ending lol
Edit - This is in no way another 'beating you round the head' post, you know I adore you
Thank you
However, I do agree that when you become properly invested in the result, we were screwed over by the writers. I could have forgiven them killing off Arthur as per the legends but it needed far fewer plot holes to succeed and the complete failure of Merlin was a very bitter pill to swallow.
So, in reply Cadiva, there is still someone here who voted excellent but I cannot agree that it wasn't depressing. In fact, the whole of series 5 was about as cheerful as Les Misérables.
What a shame you weren't on the writing team!