MovieChat Forums > Camelot (1967) Discussion > She didn't deserve him...

She didn't deserve him...

posted 17 years ago by Kappybelle
31 replies | jump to latest

Is there anyone else out there who thinks that Gienevere (sp?) didn't deserve King Arthur? I mean, he truly did love her and maybe sometimes he did get preoccupied with the formation of the round table, but does that justify cheating on him? She went exactly against the honest and truthful society that Arthur was trying to establish. Don't get me wrong, Lancelot was wrong too, but there's just something about her infidelity that irks me. Don't use the argument "But you can't help it when you fall in love." You CAN choose who to fall in love with and even if you do have a strong attraction to someone and it's wrong, you can quell it if you really try. Maybe it's really Vanessa Redgrave I didn't like...I was really sad that Julie Andrews wasn't able to make the film. But that's my opinion, maybe not a lot of supporting evidence, but it's how i feel. =)

[–] Emmywins305 13 years ago

No, I think that Guenevere was pressured into marrying Arthur. If she didn't, it could have caused a war! I think she confused affection and pity for Arthur with true love. If she had met Lancelot before Arthur, I don't hesitate for a moment to think that she would've picked Lancelot.

And, why is it that the woman always gets the blame in these situations? Didn't Arthur himself have an affair before marriage, thereby conceiving Mordred in the first place? If Guenevere had gotten pregnant before marriage, she probably would've been executed.

Actually, I found Arthur (or maybe just Richard Harris' portrayal of him) mostly boorish, over-the-top and unsympathetic. Lancelot was okay, but Franco Nero couldn't really act. It was the quiet, subtle and vulnerable Vanessa Redgrave as Guenevere that I ended up identifying with the most. I also thought her singing and the emotion behind it was the most pleasant and sincere of the three leads.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Blueghost 13 years ago

by Kappybelle (Wed Sep 19 2007 12:12:17)
Ignore this User | Report Abuse
Is there anyone else out there who thinks that Gienevere (sp?) didn't deserve King Arthur? I mean, he truly did love her and maybe sometimes he did get preoccupied with the formation of the round table, but does that justify cheating on him? She went exactly against the honest and truthful society that Arthur was trying to establish. Don't get me wrong, Lancelot was wrong too, but there's just something about her infidelity that irks me. Don't use the argument "But you can't help it when you fall in love." You CAN choose who to fall in love with and even if you do have a strong attraction to someone and it's wrong, you can quell it if you really try. Maybe it's really Vanessa Redgrave I didn't like...I was really sad that Julie Andrews wasn't able to make the film. But that's my opinion, maybe not a lot of supporting evidence, but it's how i feel. =)

In a matter of speaking. More like Arthur didn't deserve such a flighty woman, and some Gaullic male who is typical of the males of his land, and winds up accepting and foisting his affections from and for the queen. Not just another man's wife, but the king's wife.

To think otherwise is unintelligent.

[–] angelosdaughter (158) 4 years ago

Watched it on On Demand early this morning, first time in many years.
She certainly didn't deserve Arthur.
On the way to her wedding her voice and behavior indicted that she wanted to experience more of life and men before she had to marry. She was ripe for trouble. I think she came to love Arthur, but he was so caught up in his idealism which he wanted Guinevere to be a part of, that he became almost a living icon to her. She needed more attention than he spared for her even though he loved her to distraction.
He, a king cuckolded by his beloved wife and best friend, was so generous to them, even in his humiliation.
The last scenes of them together as they say good-bye forever are heart-wrenching, as is the reprise of the song "Camelot".
I am of the generation that was young during John Kennedy's tenure as president, and Martin Luther King's activism, a time of idealism and hope sadly lacking these days. This film and song have those associations for me.

[–] Otter (24464) 4 years ago

Well that's the thing... Arthur didn't think his vision of a just and honorable society through, or didn't think it through early enough. If he had, he might have realized that arranged marriages with unwilling brides were not honorable or just, and that a marriage contracted without feeling or the consent of one or more parties were inherently dishonorable and unjust, and were bound to lead to more dishonorable feelings. And maybe he'd have married a woman who wanted to marry him, instead of Guenivere.

I really wish that the script had gone into that. I mean, it shows her as going from being defiant to grudging acceptance of Arthur because she kind of likes him at first meeting, but it liking a guy at first meeting much of a basis for marriage?

I really wish that the script had included Arthur having a realization that his marriage had ended in dishonor because it began in a way that ought to be considered dishonorable, but that realization wasn't in the book and I can see the character of Arthur not getting it. He'd probably consider that he'd done his duty to his country and so had she, and he'd undoubtedly found a little passion in his life elsewhere, why was it a big deal that she'd found passion outside of a politically arranged marriage like anyone would. The saying "Where there is marriage without love, there will be love without marriage" goes back for centuries.

[–] melissah1982 (883) 3 years ago

Great post Otter.

Just saw the movie for the first time last Friday and I thought the same thing. Guinevere even sings about it in her first song about how she never had a chance to be loved by other men or is being traded to the highest bidder. She's forced into this marriage pretty much against her will. Even after she realizes the stranger she met was Author and he kinda gives her an opt out they both know it would be political suicide for her to do so. She may have found some sort of contentment or appreciation of the marriage but it wasn't love. It was duty. We also don't even know how old she was supposed to be here. 16? 20? People may call her spoiled but I think a 16 year old being forced to marry a man possibly twice her age without meeting him not for love but for politics is atrocious. It was the way back then but my modern sensibilities pity Guinevere and it doesn't surprise me that a young woman who has never known love or lust would easily fall for someone like Lancelot. Should she have known better for her situation? of course, but in no way is she a villain here. She's a victim of her circumstances. Same as Juliet in Romeo and Juliet

I'd also like to add in that I loved this idea in the film (i haven't seen the stage production yet) of Author going back trying to figure out where things went wrong. Did Guinevere and Lancelot happen because of Author's mistakes? Did Merlin know this would happen? Would things have been different if Author had been more grounded in his surroundings instead of eyeing this dream of Camelot? Merlin warned Author of Lancelot, Lancelot warned Author of Mordred. Even Guinevere warned Author of herself in their first meeting and he didn't listen to any of them. Could this whole disaster have been prevented at any point along this story? Very interesting.

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Apparently that sort of thing happened a lot in medieval courts, where there was a king or lord who employed a lot of knights, and the knights were either unmarried or their wives were back home running the estate. The whole "Courtly Love" thing that became fashionable in the 12th century was an acknowledgement that it was normal for a lonely knight to develop feelings for a married noblewoman (almost all the women at a court would be married), and the Courtly Love thing has been explained as an attempt to guide the actions of lonely knights and unhappy wives who were attracted to each other. Apparently adultery, elopement, and even rape were common enough that something had to be done, other than retelling how the love of Lancelot and Guinevere brought ruin unto England (apparently Arthurian legends were big in the 12th century).

Because yes, even then, people knew that marriage without love led to love without marriage, and all that could be done about that was to keep the social penalties for adultery so high that at least some people would refrain. Although it could be said that in this version of the story, the "sin" that really brought Camelot crashing down was Arthur's unwitting fling with his half-sister, the one that produced Mordred. Mordred is the real baddie here, in all versions of the story I've read the relationship between Lancelot and Guinevere is portrayed as sympathetic, but it meant a political weakness for Arthur, that Mordred was able to exploit.

I can't imagine what life was like for people who were stuck in those arranged marriages. I suppose some came to really love each other, and many were like like Arthur and Gwen, fond enough of each other and good life partners... as long as neither lost their head or other organs over someone else. But these marriages were considered their duty, to their family and government, and well. Mixing political duty with family life usually ruins the family life.