<\/a>Movie poster for the 1981 film
"Excalibur". (Copyright Warner Bros.)<\/p><\/div>\n
John Boorman’s
Excalibur<\/strong>. We’re firmly into ‘Knights In
Armour’ territory here, which means the usual relegation of
women to being prizes to be fought over, silent Queens, or love
interests whose own opinions aren’t asked for, and
absolutely nothing else. There’s a debate about whether
showing this dynamic is itself feminist if you use it to highlight
how unequal and appalling the situation was for women historically
(HBO’s recent series
Game of Thrones<\/strong> is reigniting this argument, although
the source material books for that one are clearer: they start
from a position of female oppression and have several characters
rebel against it precisely
because<\/em> of the extreme power difference, and makes the
readers acknowledge and dislike the inequality).<\/p>\n
At first glance though,
Excalibur <\/strong>isn’t even trying for feminism
points. Its famous heroes are a male King and a male
Wizard, some men who all get to be equal to other men
around a table, and a man who starts a war over someone
else’s wife. And everything goes to hell when one of
the few named women sleeps with the man she actually
loves. <\/p>\n
Looking at the main female characters in detail, we have
Igraine<\/strong> who is a pouting, mostly naked
object of lust, and played by (somewhat creepily)
director John Boorman\u2019s daughter Katrine. She is
famously – and this causes wincing every time
– naked while being given loving attentions by a
man in full plate-mail (surely that would
chafe?!).<\/p>\n
We also have
Guinevere<\/strong>, played excellently by
Cherie Lunghi<\/strong> as someone spirited, but
increasingly trapped and fragile. I don\u2019t
think it counts as a spoiler to reveal that
Guinevere falls in love with Lancelot. The fact
that she chooses to act on it in defiance of the
strict rules around sexual conduct could be seen
as empowering (even if it does result in her
being sentenced to death, from which she has to
be rescued by him).<\/p>\n
And we have…
Morgana<\/strong>. Played by
Helen Goddamn Mirren<\/em>.<\/p>\n
Which is the point at which the film
redeems itself a hell of a lot.
It’s not just the power of the
performances (several of which are
brilliant despite the very-1980 effects
and pomp) it’s that as well as
being the best cinematic retelling of
popular Arthurian Legend even today, the
movie is filled with iconic archetypes,
and they stand out way beyond the
plot.<\/p>\n
We\u2019re reaching a bit to find any
feminism in the movie up to this point,
I agree. The source material was put
together (in the
best-known version<\/a>) just around the
time women
were reduced to princesses in
towers<\/a> in storytelling, so maybe
it’s not surprising that
they’re mostly given similar
treatment here. But there is one ray of
hope.<\/p>\n
Whether this movie counts as having a
strong positive female lead eventually
depends entirely on whether you think
the archetype of The Witch is a positive
one.<\/p>\n
Morgana is absolutely the classic
dangerous magical female. She\u2019s
immensely threatening: ambitious,
capable, cunning, sexual, malevolent,
but also completely outside the rules.
She uses seduction as a weapon, and is
utterly transgressive \u2013 her hate
drives her to sleep with Arthur (her
half-brother) and have a child
(Mordred). This in turn breaks the
whole of nature<\/em>, and
specifically the King\u2019s link with
the Land.<\/p>\n
The only other magic-user (Merlin)
is also chaotic and mysterious, but
very careful to stay within the
boundaries. Morgana is not. She is
uncontrolled and uncontrollable,
stronger than the King, and stronger
than Merlin (and she proves it in
both cases). She
sees clearly<\/em>, which (due to
the aforementioned sex-in-armour
incident) is what sets her on a
path of vengeance in the first
place. She is owned by no man,
with her own desires and plans for
her family to gain power. And she
succeeds at a great deal of
it.<\/p>\n
Now okay, it’s not going
to raise the banner of feminism
very high when this character is
unequivocally the Baddie –
meant to be feared and
mistrusted from the outset.
Witches are outcasts, however
independent or fearsome that
lets them appear. The men
Morgana opposes have made her
their enemy by being flawed with
greed and lust, by abusing her
family and fighting endless
wars, but we’re not meant
to be sympathetic to her.
She’s far too lethal and
hungry.<\/p>\n
As well as the performances,
this movie is one of my
favourites because of the
amazing visuals, the number of
people who turn up in early
roles (Liam Neeson<\/strong>,
Gabriel Byrne<\/strong>,
Ciar\u00e1n
Hinds<\/strong>,
Patrick
Stewart<\/strong>), the
fact it has loads of mud
and blood in it (unlike
many sanitised
retellings) and for the
sheer bonkers joy of
filming a load of
knights in armour
charging around to the
sound of Wagner.<\/p>\n
But Helen Mirren and
Nicol
Williamson<\/strong>
(Merlin) really do
stand out. What
could have been an
epic about how
‘men defeat
other men to decide
which man gets to be
top man while a man
does some
magic’ is
instead largely
taken over by the
brilliant interplay
between Merlin and
Morgana – the
electric,
snake-hissing,
mountain-deep
emnity, the sense of
power and caution
whenever they invoke
their power.
They’re much
more exciting than
Arthur or
Guinevere.<\/p>\n
Of course, there
is a story behind
that.<\/p>\n
As the director
says in his
autobiography
‘Adventures of a
Suburban
Boy<\/a>‘,
Williamson knew
Mirren from some
years before, when
they had a huge
falling-out during
a production of
Macbeth<\/strong>.
Boorman told the
would-be Merlin
that Mirren was
likely to be
playing Morgana,
and the actor
immediately
changed his
reply. (I
can’t
remember the
exact words from
his book, but
the general idea
was as follows):
<\/p>\n
“Oh,
then I
couldn’t
possibly do
it.”
“Why
not?”
“Well,
if you must
know, she
wanted to
sleep with
me and I
turned her
down.”<\/em><\/p>\n
This
confused
John
Boorman.
Neither of
the pair
were known
for being
shy in
that
regard.
(Helen
Mirren
ended up
dating
Liam
Neeson
during
filming…)
<\/p>\n
Boorman
asked
Mirren if
she wanted
to play
Morgana,
and she
was very
excited.
Then he
said Nicol
would be
Merlin.
<\/p>\n
“Oh,
then no
way.”
“Why
not?”
“It’s
been
awkward
ever
since he
wanted
to sleep
with me
and I
said
no.”<\/em><\/p>\n
Not
knowing
if
either
of
them
was
telling
the
truth,
Boorman
decided
to
cast
them
anyway,
figuring
the
tension
would
be
good
for
the
chemistry
onscreen.
And he
was
right.<\/p>\n
I love
the
overblown
fanfare
of
this
movie
(and
not
just
in the
soundtrack).
It has
the
best
ever
“hand
holding
a
sword
out of
a
lake”
scene,
epic
battles,
amazing
Irish
locations,
and
moments
where
everything
is
just
focused
on
Merlin
or
Morgana
saying
a few
words
which
change
the
world.
Also,
Helen
Goddamn
Mirren<\/em>
being
awesome.<\/p>\n
The
really
bad
news
is…
they’re
remaking
it.
In
the
last
two
years
both
Bryan
Singer
<\/strong>and
Guy
Ritchie<\/strong>
(!)
have
been
linked
to
King
Arthur
movies
with
the
words
“remake
of
Excalibur”
from
Warner
Brothers
specifically
mentioned.<\/a>
Don’t
do
it,
WB!
This
version
may
be
knee-deep
in
Eighties
Cheese
but
it
will
never
be
beaten,
certainly
not
by
today’s
Hollywood.
Huge
amounts
of
Eighties
Cheese
never
stopped
Robin
of
Sherwood<\/strong><\/a>
from
being
amazing
(and
in
fact
still<\/em>
the
best
version
of
Robin
Hood,
despite
constant
remake
attempts)
and
the
two
have
much
in
common.
<\/p>\n
Overall,
Excalibur<\/strong>
is
a
bit
of
a
guilty
viewing
pleasure
in
feminist
terms,
but
that’s
not
the
case
at
all
with
my
next
pick.
That
one
stands
up
as
a
triumph
of
film-making
AND
feminism…<\/p>\n