It would have been magnificent to have Robert Goulet reprise his role as Lancelot. His tremendous version of "If Ever I Would Leave You" has never been surpassed.
Maybe Nero got the part because of his superior acting ability or his box office clout.
[deleted]
Turning this movie into a cocktail lounge would have improved it.
Too bad they couldn't dub Nero's acting. Or Logan's direction.
[deleted]
Franco Nero is adequate in the role of Lancelot.By this time,almost a decade after the Broadway show,Goulet would have looked too old,especially blown up on the big screen.He also wouldn't have appeared athletic enough.Nero came off with the good athletic presence and looks that the role requires.And whether intentional or not often has this dopey look on his face that captures the singleminded fervor of the idealistic knight.
share[deleted]
Ugh. Never liked him; probably the Brylcream hair.
shareI believe he was sleeping with Vanessa at the time.
Goulet was only 34 in '67. He would have been fine. He was at least a better actor than Nero.
Vanessa Redgrave was 30 playing Guenevere. The argument could be made that she was too old for that part.
I'm pretty sure no one here who is saying Franco Nero is a bad actor has seen him in anything other than this (where he does an okay job) as he is a great actor, especially in Italian films. And while we are on the subject try to act in a language that isn't your own; it is very difficult to project your emotions properly and that is why I think Mr. Nero did a fin job. In the 'If Ever I Would Leave You'scene and the scene in which he and Guenevere are caught by Mordred he is especially good lip-syncing to any songs aside.
shareI think Nero was mostly an unknown when this movie was made, and, as someone mentioned above, he was recommended by Richard Harris. At least Nero LOOKS the part.
I think a good choice for Lancelot would have been Stuart Damon. He appeared in the Rodgers and Hammersteins' 1965 TV musical of Cinderella with Lesley Ann Warren. He had the look and stature of Lancelot, was a decent actor, and had a great singing voice.
I agree that he looks the part. His features at the time were very youthful and almost beautiful without being feminine. Perfect for an idealistic young knight who despite his asceticism was still dashing enough to sweep Guinevere into a love affair.
But yes, the lip-synching is horrible. Even when it matches up, I don't see how anyone could believe that Lancelot's singing voice was his. The acting is a bit too much at times (though I feel that way about almost everyone in the cast, so I won't blame him for that).
This is a serious question? Obviously he was cast for his face. I'm straight, but even I wanted to pour blueberry syrup all over it and lick it off.
OK, I was straight. Until I saw Nero in Camelot.
Never cared for Nero; he had a smarmy look to me.
Nicholas Clay in Excalibur was the ideal Lancelot. I never saw the Broadway version, but just by his voice Robert Goulet must have been a great Lancelot. He also had a French surname.
For once thing, once they'd cast Harris and Redgrave, it wouldn't do to have a supporting player who could actually sing! For another, Goulet always had an unbearably smug, smarmy presence, and wasn't very good-looking. There's a reason he never became a movie star.
For another, Goulet was 34 in the days of "Never Trust Anyone Over 30", and Nero was young and hot. His age and good looks work both in terms of basic story, where he's supposed to be virginal and rather innocent when he comes into the story, and in terms of the zeitgeist that the director was trying to capture. It was the late sixties, the time of the "Youthquake" and the Mods and the Hippies and the Revolution, and Guenivere was re-imagined as a bit Hippie-ish, with a bit of a Generation Gap between Arthur and Gwen and Lance. Which wasn't a bad idea, although of course it didn't work any better than anything in this disastrous movie.