Alicia I love this movie so much

BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

marymorrissey and it doesn't help rohmer's case that a few years later Syberberg came along and made a staggeringly great piece of work on the same subject (with a little help from Wagner).maybe this movie didn't look so paltry when it came out, without the syberberg film to compare it to, which was probably shot on an even smaller sound stage with fewer resources. I actually can't recall at the moment whether there are horses in the syberberg film. all I know is, the German version is pure magic, while this one looks like some college production documented on film for archival purposes.the music... la musique... isn't even credited here on IMDb... but someone based it on 'airs from the 12th-14th centuries" or something... well it isn't a great help to the film. it comes off as inauthentic and cheesy, comme le frommage mon cher!!!rohmer is one of those french auteurs who likes his leading men generally quite unattractive, too, and that doesn't help matters. syberberg's Parsifal was adorable, and can be seen on German television today selling some kind of special bicycle he invented. .. .I shudder to think what watching the syberberg on video is like. I remember that the last time I saw the film in a theater, the print was so bad that the experience was a whopping 5 hour travesty. But even then it would have to surpass what this version has to offer, I'm afraid.points for earnestness, for chutzpah, but... this film simply needed beau-coup more bucks. it doesn't look like a medieval manuscript it looks CHEAPO! BON MARCHE!! oh and yeah, it just ends very arbitrarily with Parsifal going to church and this cheesy passion play being interjected... blah!

zetes I'm at a loss over what I could say about Eric Rohmer's Perceval. I was so deeply affected by it. I'm guessing that many will be annoyed at the French New Wave style, which I personally love. I'm definitely a French New Wave fan. I'm not really a Rohmer fan, though. This is only the second Rohmer film I've seen, after his 1997 film An Autumn Tale (I think that's what it's called). I was unimpressed with that. Perceval will probably lead me to see more of his films, although, from what I've heard, this film is stylistically different than anything else he has ever made. Heck, I haven't seen anything at all similar in style in the many, many films I've seen. It's as if it takes place within the world of the theater. Naturalism is thrown out the window. The landscape is reduced to a bare minimum. Trees are sculpted out of metal, and are more symbols of trees than trees themselves. Castles are small, like the skenes of ancient Greek theater. The palette is made up of mostly primary colors. White appears frequently, and there are a couple of scenes with some purple. Silver and gold are abundant. This goes for the sets and constumes. The acting is exaggerated, I think, to imitate a Medieval style. Best of all, a lot of the narrative is sung to gorgeous Medieval arrangements. This is perhaps the most hypnotizing aspect of the film.The only thing that has a tendency to disappoint is the narrative. It's choppy, things go unresolved and so forth. It didn't bother me too much. I've actually read some Medieval literature, and it doesn't generally obey Aristotle's rules. The main piece that feels unresolved is the story of Gawain. Only after about one hundred minutes does he become important, the story follows him for a while, and then it goes back to Perceval, never to return again. Still, this didn't bother me too much. There's not an individual scene in the film that lacks beauty. Several are amongst the most beautiful ever captured on film. Perceval even contains the second most powerful version of the Passion of Jesus Christ I've ever seen in a film, slightly behind the one in Andrei Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev. I know that I will come back to Perceval as soon as I can to study it closer and love it more. It's instantly one of my favorite films. 10/10.

Andrew I was quite skeptical during the first few minutes of viewing _Perceval_; I hadn't been aware ahead of time of its unique style. As I made the leap from thinking about this as a cinematic experience to viewing it as more of a theatrical production, I got into it more. I liked the minstrels -- I love that style of medieval music, and they provided both entertainment and a necessary Greek-chorus-like narrator role.I do not speak French; however, by listening to the dialogue (instead of just reading the English subtitles), I was able to appreciate the rhythm and rhyme.I found the level of Perceval's naivete hard to swallow at times. But the most disturbing thing was how the narrative became fragmented and then just petered out at the end -- mixing Gawain's and Perceval's tales, and not resolving either of them.Overall, a stylistic tour-de-force, but a narrative disappointment.

Wolfram-4 The first time I saw this film, I thought it was terrible; Plan 9 from Outer Space Terrible, but the more I thought about it, the more the film grew on me. Soon, I came to realize Rohmer's vision about this film...Perceval le Gallois is the film adaptation of the medieval epic poem "Perceval" by Chretien de Troyes, and it is the story of Grail seeking Arthurian knight Perceval(Parsifal to Wagner, and Parzival to Wolfram von Eschenbach, who is my favorite) I came to realize that Rohmer was making the film as though medieval Chretien had had access to a camera. The use of the decidedly un-realistic sets is designed to give the viewer an impression of medieval entertainment and style, and the fantastic, magical tone of the work. The use of the minstrels is a great way to let the viewer in on how a medieval audience would have experienced this story, without sets or actors, just the story teller and his accompaniment. This film is pure genius, and is a must see, even though it is extremely difficult to locate.