I don't understand this movie

Legal definitions of the word 'understand' aside;

I really don't understand this movie's plot.

The beginning is weird, unexplained, but relatively clear. What I'd like to know is:

1) Who and/or what is the 'Green Knight', and why can he look and act like human, but still be unharmed by a beheading? Or more like .. 'harmed, but in a way that can be easily fixed'.

2) Why does he want to play that "game" (how can it be a game, when all it consists of is a beheading that doesn't hurt player 1 (so he cheats?), which means that then player 1 can behead player 2, who will probably die from it? What kind of a game is THAT?

Anyone heard of chess or some nice card games? Or heck, an honest tournament of some kind? But no, it's some nonsensical 'beheading game' that doesn't seem to bring anything to the victor (why would anyone play, even the cheating player 1 - surely losing all that blood must have been a loss, and painful?)

3) Why wouldn't any of the macho knights want to accept the challenge?

4) Why doesn't anyone SAY anything? (The typical, unrealistic 'silence' in movies, that would never happen in real life - ther would be constant murmur in the crowd at least!)

5) So a mere beardless boy is unworthy to be decapitated, because he has not 'touched the cheek of a woman' (groan), but in _ONE_YEAR_ he is a beardful MAN? It takes exactly one year for any 'boy' to grow into 'man' (the movie's feminazi definition of a 'man' of course)? How does that work, exactly? Can you take any childish teen an expect them to be some kind of honorable, bearded man after a year?

6) So this guy gives not only the year, but also an escape; if he can solve the "riddle" (which doesn't seem to even have a question in it, it's just some weird statements that again, make no sense - even Batman (1966)'s riddles are better!), he can escape "his destiny", although Connery's character makes a big point of not escaping one's destiny? What? What's the point of the whole thing?

But after the beginning, things start get messy fast. So, they see an unicorn, and the only thing they think of is "dinner"? How is murdering an innocent magical creature 'noble'? Was stealing really part of the knight's code of honor?

The unicorn escapes, and a strange tent appears. And suddenly, they are inside the tent without ever actually going in.

Some food magically appears without explanation, the knight and squire eat while making jokes.

Then some witch appears and vomits the typical female garbage in their faces instead of logically and rationally answering their questions (not that they ask many), with such annoying voice that the viewer just wants so strangle her after a few seconds just to shut her up.

The witch doesn't really explain her price for the food is, and just seems to send the guys to some kind of a wild goose chase, and they don't suspect her at all, and blow some horn-looking thing that sounds like an actual trumpet or musical horn (I guess all horns are the same thing - and here I thought animal horns wouldn't actually be good musical instrument-type horns), that makes a useless rainbow appear. It's so useless that they actually want it to appear again, and so they blow multiple times, just like this movie.

This finally causes some weird-looking, hostile 'black knight' to come and fight the knight and the completely useless squire that doesn't help his master during a fight, and doesn't get reprimanded for this at all. The point of fighting the black knight is not explained, it's just somehow supposed to happen. Why even waste time there? Why challenge him to a duel? Why not just try to gather information or something? What is this?

An exhausting, really clumsy-looking fight (on the same level as typical cop shows of the seventies, but longer and more tedious) ensues, that resolves.. nothing. They take the 'black knight' (who turns out to be white anyway under the armor) back to the castle that's supposed to be dangerous, and he orders everyone to kill them.

Then the 'romance' with the hags start (not sure if I can call it 'injected' in this kind of a movie, where it's probably expected - but I was kinda watching in the hopes that it wouldn't - perhaps this would be an ORIGINAL knight+magic-type movie.. but of course not, originality isn't popular in hollyweird), and consequently, where my fingers guided the mouse cursor to skip forward, until no hags were seen all that much. That took some skipping, and then I saw more useless fights and whatnot, that looked so ridiculous that I didn't want any part of it, so I skipped to the end..

.. to finally see, what the answer to the riddle would be, and how things would be resolved. Perhaps there would be some wisdom and interesting solution at the end.

No such luck. What did I expect?

All I saw was Connery inviting the 'knight' to his castle for the beheading. I noticed that the 'knight' still didn't really have a beard, but oh well. At least we will get to know what the riddle is supposed to mean.

Nope, the riddle isn't even mentioned.

The 'knight' just willingly accepts the beheading, instead of at least trying to fight it out, like a rational 'knight' would do at that situation - I mean, if you have will to live in an incarnation, would you just meekly and in a sheeplike manner accept someone trying to murder you?

(Btw, why did the axes have holes in them? Were they considered TOO HEAVY otherwise? I mean, come on - it's an AXE! It's SUPPOSED to be heavy!)

Then he flinches, and Connery mocks him. Yeah, like flinching isn't a normal reaction at that situation! What the heck? You are about to die, and you are not even ALLOWED TO FLINCH? It's like not being allowed to panic in a hotel fire - fúck that, if I am in such a situation, I am going to rather follow Seinfeld's advice and PANIC THE HECK OUT! At least I would have finally a good excuse to do so.

In any case, then Connery finally, without spouting any wisdom or giving any answers to the riddle or anything else, just swings the axe. Something seems to happen as a result (not sure, what), but the head stays on his shoulders. What the heck?

Granted, I didn't watch most of the movie, so it may have been explained elsewhere, but I didn't really get what made his neck invulnerable or immaterial or .. did Connery do it on purpose, or ..? What, why? How?

Then he draws a sword and says something idiotic, and Connery replies with something even more moronic.. they both still consider it a 'game', though I don't really see how that could really be considered a game. I think even Russian Roulette is more of a 'game'.

Then the 'knight' just slices Connery's stomach, and Connery starts wishing that the 'knight' would stop and put his sword away, because otherwise he might be dangerous - though he's swiftly dying anyway, in a really weird manner, that also leaves the question; WHAT or WHO was he supposed to be? Some kind of a nature spirit? A sprite? A fairy? A tree spirit? What?

So, if the 'knight' DOESN'T stop or put his sword away, he will die even MORE? What difference does it make what the 'knight' does at this point, when he's swiftly dying ANYWAY? Why would he ask that he stop? Wouldn't he actually want him to continue to speed up the dying process?

NOTHING makes any sense! What's the point of a riddle that's not answered? What's the point of the whole 'beheading game'? Why was the 'knight' invulnerable to the beheading?

Aargh!

I realize this is based on a nonsensical poem of the time, where these things just inexplicably happen (nothing is explained in the poem, either, as far as I know), but at least the writers COULD have given this a bit of a more meaning and explain these things. It's just so much more fun when you know what's happening, who's what, and why everything is happening.

As it is now, the only 'meaning' one could get from this is that if you do a lot of stuff during a year to 'experience life' (whatever that is supposed to mean), somehow you are more 'man', and .. then.. what?

Yeah. What a piece of shít, honestly. A movie couldn't be much worse than this, unless it's some kind of 'feminist documentary about leg hair'.

Valiant.. more like 'Valium'.

And what's with the music? Can it really be called 'music'? The only good thing about it is that some of the synths sound a bit like some scenes in 'Robin of Sherwood' - another 'swords+magic'-story (in a TV show form instead of a movie), but one that makes a heckuva lot more sense than this one, and has actually charismatic lead, great musics and wonderful, summery atmosphere of the eighties. I enjoyed it as a kid, and I enjoyed it decades later even more.

Watch that instead of this crap, if you want to be entertained, or if you want to enjoy the magic of the eighties, compelling plots, completely wonderful villains in all possible ways (even when he bumbles, Gisburne seems realistic and deliciously angry and obsessive - and the more said about the constantly and believably angry sheriff, the better), and meaningful storylines with great music and even believable, scary 'magic' scenes that resemble what actual occult practicers might do.

What was Connery thinking, when he chose his scripts? Did he choose the scripts by throwing a dart at a pile of them or what?

Zardoz was bad enough, but THIS.. wow. This really takes.. sorry, requisitions the cake.