AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Griff Lees Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Yash Wade Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

johannes2000-1 I thought this was a fine and entertaining movie and I enjoyed it a lot. So what, if the story (about Merlin oversleeping 50 years and finding Arthur dead and Camelot deteriorated, while the protecting grail has vanished) is far-fetched? Merlin and Arthur belong to the world of legends, so why fret about the script twisting the supposed historical facts? In my opinion every writer has a right to make a go for creating new legends. Sure, I agree the script was like a cauldron over-filled with Arthurian, medieval and fairy-tale cliché's, but the resulting soup tasted fairly good and was served out in a very appealing way. To begin with, the series was shot in beautiful surroundings (Canada, in fact!), the costumes were fine and the movie had a good pace with seldom a dull moment. The CGI-effects were not too bad, and other than some critics on this site, I found the battle scenes (modest as the were) surprisingly convincing. Unfortunately the acting was a bit uneven. Sam Neill seems to be forever Merlin, and he does his professional job as always, but I couldn't help feeling that he more or less just went through the motions, inwardly sighing: "here we go again", probably gratefully accepting his untimely surmise at the end of part I. John Reardon on the other hand radiates with enthusiasm, he's the vibrant center of the movie and especially after the death of his mentor Reardon succeeds in carrying the whole projects on his shoulders. Reardon has charm and buoyancy and he's truly an attractive and talented actor. The supporting roles were less convincing, I especially was disappointed in Miranda Richardson as the Lady of the Lake, who turned out as a rather bloodless creature; on the other hand she wasn't helped by the script that hardly gave her anything worthwhile to do or say. Other supporting roles (the young Lady Yvonne, her guardians, sir Thomas, the young blacksmith, to name a few of the rather crowded list of characters) were played a bit wooden. The Rauskaug character, the leader of a pack of ominous Norman-like warriors, acted almost preposterously over the top, he looked as if he was up for a gig in Wrestle-mania or in some heavy-metal band, continuously distorting his face and grunting and shouting as a wild bore in heat. And then there was Meghan Ory, the love-interest for the young sorcerer's apprentice, she had the misfortune to be confined by the script to a boy's disguise (why do writers keep coming up with that lame concept?! It never ever works, here we could see through it from the very first second he/she appeared on the screen, but in spite of that we are meant to believe that every-one around him/her is apparently blind as a bat!), and they gave her an unattractively short-cutted hair-do to boot, so her natural good looks are totally wasted here and the whole premise makes her character look and sound rather silly, to put it mildly.In conclusion, I liked the series especially because of Reardon and because of the whole Arthurian fantasy-world, that never fails to enchant me, all the more when it's helped by such a fine and convincing setting as here. The bad script and the (apart from Neill and Reardon) mediocre acting are in comparison minor flaws on the whole of the project, and couldn't prevent me from thoroughly enjoying this movie. I rank it 7 out of 10.

Daisy Brambletoes Once upon a time, there was a stirring and delightful movie named "Merlin", which gave us yet another perspective of the Arthurian legends, from the viewpoint of the wizard Merlin. It was great fun.Then there was a so-called sequel, called "Merlin's Apprentice". This film, in fact, has a lot more to do with Lloyd Alexander's stories of the "Prydain Chronicles" than it has to do with either Merlin or Arthur. And as a sequel, it is appalling. A proper sequel would tie directly into a previous movie, and this one simply doesn't. "Merlin" has its own story and as such the sequel should have stayed true to it. I could have believed it a lot more easily if, in the last scenes of the movie, I had seen a white-haired, bearded old wizard in the background telling tales to the kiddies. Fans of the original know what I am talking about.It was not what I'd call a bad film, because it was interesting and at times amusing, but it still felt all wrong. And the star of the film often seemed to be the Pig. I liked the Pig.

willow_barby After the first Merlin mini-series (which got showered with nominations and what not) I thought that Merlin II was going to be great as well.I was wrong.Not only are we left with a lot of questions, things could also have been explained more (the Forest scene with Brianna, Jack, Graham and Yvonne for example and the Lady of the Lake... she puzzled me, compared to the first Merlin mini-series), and some should have been completely left out (the kissing scene between Graham and Yvonne and Jack and Brianna... it was... odd and it really didn't fit in the time period.) The special effects were so/so.The acting was terrible, even by veteran actor Sam Neill, who didn't seem to have fun with this movie, like he had with the first Merlin one.And even though John Reardon (Jack) is a pretty boy, he had some strong points in this movie, but he was a total let down otherwise.

treasuretrove_vip Bad is the keyword for this film, and it can be applied to almost every facet of it. Bad storyline, bad dialog, bad acting, bad adherence to the Arthur legend and worst of all bad follow-on to the original. In fact there are so many contradictions to the first Merlin that this cannot be considered to be a sequel. Sam Neil (whom I like very much) just mailed this one in. I suspect he demanded his own death scene halfway through as a desperate way to get out of the film. The writers should have their paychecks seized and donated to a worthwhile charity.