I know that this movie is not very well-respected, but after rewatching it, I still cannot help but be amazed by Vanessa Redgrave's performance of Guenevere. Although I know Julie Andrews originated the role on Broadway to great success, I just cannot see her pulling off this kind of role. Reviewers often comment on Redgrave's lack of singing ability, but I thought she was fine and her rendition of "The Simple Joys of Maidenhood" is perfect in its simplicity.
share
You're right jlapps! As I mentioned in another posting, Julie Andrews could never convey the humor and irony of the message of each song. She sang all of them as if they had been written for Mary Poppins.
Most of the influential critics noted that while the film may have not been perfect, they all agreed that Redgrave made it worthwhile.The critics of Newsweek and Time said that casting Redgrave was the most notable improvement made by director Josh Logan over the stage version.A late respected female critic --her name escapes me at this moment-- called Redgrave spectacular.
That's because Vanessa is wonderful! She did a wonderful job and I agree with you both.
shareI remember the name of the female critic now. It's Pauline Kael!
shareIs that the same Pauline Kael who was fired from McCall`s for panning the Sound of Music? They said she was just not in tune with her readers.
Vanessa was the best choice. And hahaha to mit800. Also, Mit800, I thought I would tell you this because I got a kick out of it. My family and I were recently watching the sequel to The Princess Diaries (we wanted to hear Julie Sing. P.S. 30 million would not even cover the damage those doctors did.) and my father walked in while Julie was talking. He said, that woman sounds like a cross between Vanessa Redgrave and Julie Andrews. I told him it WAS Julie Andrews. very funny moment.
shareId also like to add that, of all his films, Chris Plummer hates The Sound of Music the most. Infact, he refers to it as "The sound of mucis"
share[deleted]
What the hell are you talking about? As I recall I was just giving a funny story and a fact and you took it as a childish remark. I found it as a suprise because it's his most successful film and he hates it. If anyone is being a child it's you. You linger about putting down everything anyone says i.e. The reviewer. This is about Camelot and yet The Sound of Music keeps finding it's way into it BY YOU! Everyone is entitled to their opinion and you have given yours...and I mine. And another fact, I met someone recently and the subject of movies came up. I asked him about Camelot and he said he'd never see the film because of the Broadway cast album he listened to. He said it was just annoying and boring so he wasn't going to bother with a film that was three hours long. Thanks Broadway! Also, there are about 23 people who I know that just LOVE the King Arthur legend. I asked them, of all the King Arthur films, which was their favorite? They ALL said Camelot, and I assure you these people have seen EVERY movie about this man. They've also listened to both soundtracks and ALL of them picked the FILM because it was simpler and the Broadway show sounded like it to goody-goody and the people didn't care.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I was always a huge fan of Julie Andrews BUT Redgrave put the "lusty" in "The Lusty Month of May" while Andrews would have just been "tra la la la la"-ing all over the place!
shareThank you Mikurtis, I'm glad people like you are responding now. It's been a headache having the same one person respond and we just go back and forth.
shareI also love Vanessa Redgrave's performance - while Julie Andrews is a great singer, (and might have done a great job) I don't think she would have done as well as Vanessa did. It does just depend on the message the actress is trying to convey - in Camelot (the movie)'s case, this was the drama, rather than just the comedy.
(Same thing with Richard Harris & Richard Burton: Burton was funny, but Harris really made you feel for the character of Arthur, in my opinion.)
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to kill you."
"You seem a decent fellow. I hate to die."
Yup, Pauline Kael was fired by McCall's for trashing The Sound of Music. (Sorry for mentioning this movie again on this post). Kael had a tendency to look down one xpensive Hollywood productions but as mit800 noted, she wasn't in tume with her readers. She could have underscored its assets as a family movie. After all, she was writing for a family magazine.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
Vanessa was wonderful! That plain, that simple, and Julie would have ruined the film even though she can sing (people also need to act-good!)
shareMy favorite song from Camelot is I Loved You Once in Silence and Julie Andrews
voice and clear diction really move me. Would she had done it on screen.
Bureaucrats need love
I have so many favorites and I loved you once in silence is one of them. Vanessa moved me with her version. You can feel the sadness and remorse she has with her voice. You can tell that she does love Lancelot, but must stay with Arthur because he's her husband and she still has feelings for him.
shareI finally learned how to read Pauline Kael reviews -- if she pronounced a movie amusing and funny, I knew it was going to be brutal and bloody. If she said a film was "murky and impenetrable" I knew it was going to be a film worth watching.
I never understood how she could make a living as a movie reviewer.
Say what you will, you just can't take your eyes off Vanessa Redgrave in this film. A dangerous woman, another Helen of Troy to fight for and lose kingdoms over. That's just not Julie Andrews.
shareResponse to the December 24 post:
Let's see, was it Time or Newsweek that about the same time as "Camelot" published a scathing review of "Bonnie and Clyde" and then a week later did a 180 degree about-face and pronounced it great?
[deleted]
It's not a matter of making a mistake. It's doing a complete and total 180 on a movie in a week's time--this shows utter confusion on the part of the critic. Can you give another example of a film critic changing his opinion so completely in so short a time? I'm already grown up, Louisville.
shareWas it the same critic that wrote the review of all the other films? People can have a change of heart, something I don't you can ever have with this film...oh, well. I've watched plenty of films and did not like them the first time, then, the second time around, ended up liking it. The reviewer did the same.
Your point doesn't even matter because Time or Newsweek or whatever magazine we're talking about, is still the magazine whose review they plaster all over the poster, t.v. and DVD/VHS case.
There is a new production of camelot and the woman who is to play Guenevere says this:
"Listening to Julie Andrews play the part has been enlightening because she emphasizes the character's sweetness," she reasons, "But listening to Vanessa Redgrave's take on the character is also interesting because she plays Guinevere with a lustiness and a willfulness."
"I'll be playing the part straight down the middle," Faber intimates. "Hopefully, I'll do the part justice."
"Gosh, Julie Andrews AND Vanessa Redgrave?" she says with an audible groan. "Those are big shoes to fill."
What have I sad all the time? Julie was too sweet when Guenevere need to be lusty and smart, not like Mary Poppins.
"You're right jlapps! As I mentioned in another posting, Julie Andrews could never convey the humor and irony of the message of each song. She sang all of them as if they had been written for Mary Poppins"
umm julie andrews starred in camelot on broadway before mary poppins was even in production...how could she then sing every song as if she was in a movie that didn't exist yet.
Vanessa is just perfect for the role. She is QUEEN GUINEVERE for ever.
share[deleted]
I listen to both soundtracks on a regular basis, and I have to give the nod to Vanessa. Andrews does come off a little too sweet for the role.
shareIt is true, when reading the book guinevere its not always a perfect character, theres a level of cunning and trechery about her that redgrave has perfectly.
I would have loved to see what impact Andrews in the film would have had on how popular it was was though.
Pefection in darkness
On the whole, I agree that Vanessa Redgrave is a more profound dramatic actress than Julie Andrews, and since this film version is more dramatic than the Broadway show, she was probably a better choice for the role. But, listening to Julie Andrews' renditions of the Camelot songs, it's not fair to call them too sweet and "Mary Poppins"-like. Her interpretations are witty, spirited and much more shaded than Redgrave's, and one should not underestimate Dame Julie's qualities as a great musical comedienne. Because that's what she is - not only a songbird.
shareexactly. she was rightly chosen to play the adulterous, yet beautiful queen. she is luminous and dangerous. people forget that with film, the image puts the music in the background, even if sung--scopophilia conquers all. extreme closeups would not have worked with ms. andrews, although she had a marvelous voice.
shareShe was perfect for this role. I do feel Julie Andrews should have been cast in "My Fair Lady",and would have improved that film.
shareSorry I have to disagree...I think the people who think that Julie Andrews couldnt have done this movie are too misled by Sound of Music....Anyone who can do what she did in Victor/Victoria or SOB is perfectly capable of commiting adultry. The point is those songs were written for Julie Andrews and her astounding vocal range and it annoys me to hear Vanessa act them instead of sing them....MOre to the point, I dont think Vanessa plays insecure/uncertain women well...shes better as women with the courage of their convictions.(and yes my fair lady would have been better with Julie too...cause theres no miracle in turning Audrey Hepburn into a princess)
It is not our abilities that make us who we are...it is our choices
Hachmom has a very interesting point about Julie. I'd like to point out, however, that Victor/Victoria and SOB were broad comedies which Julie is very good at. Camelot and My Fair Lady are vastly different. Julie may have been effective in the stage versions but on film, the camera doesn't lie. It picks up every false move, pretense and expression. It requires a more realistic approach which made Vanessa and Audrey very effective. It would have been contrived to make Julie stand out in the Embassy Ball on film and I don't think Julie could have handled Guenevere's final, heartbreaking scene with Arthur as well as Vanessa did. The tragedy of it all is imparted in that strong finish.
I'm not saying that Julie would have bad in the film versions. She just wouldn't have been great in them.
Agreed
Perfection in darkness
[deleted]
[deleted]
Julie Andrews' singing was beautiful in the stage show and she should have been cast in the film. But I realize that she turned down the role of Guenevere in the movie because she was busy with other film projects.
Robert Goulet should at least have been asked to recreate his Broadway role of Lancelot for the movie. Franco Nero was a handsome hunk who had the right appearance for the part. But his voice had to be dubbed for the singing.
In The Simple Joys of Maidenhood, were the lyrics "or start a little war" dropped because of Vanessa Redgrave's anti-war views? The movie was seen by me, but in 1969. So, what she sang I can't recall entirely.
shareI didn't find Guinevere all that alluring, but in a way I think that worked as it made her seem more girlish and innocent even as she was carrying on the affair. I actually found her acting rather flat at times. And in her final scene in the forest she went way over the top. I do think she had her moments but I was surprised at her lack of expressiveness through much of the film.
share