Mists of Avalon
The perspective of a story, any story can completely change the story. This film for example in comparison to the same story in the film Excalibur, is quite a new tale. The perspective primarily being told by Morgaine is much more slanted towards a less evil Morgaine. In Excalibur, Morgaine bewitches Arthur in order to sleep with him to conceive Mordred. In Mists Morgaine is clearly not an evil woman, only doing what she thinks she must to survive and in the name of her goddess. There are many notable differences with Lancelot as well. In Mists he is the cousin of Arthur, the son of the High Priestess of Avalon. Yet in Excalibur Lancelot is a foreigner from some far off Lake who seeks a man to serve who can best him in battle. Arthur uses the power of Excalibur to best Lancelot who then enters his service.
"Sir Mordred" from King Arthur: The Tales of the R...
Illustration from page 306 of The Boy's King Arthu...
The Mists of AvalonIn comparison again to yet another film, King Arthur the differences are ever greater. In the film King Arthur Briton is not yet abandoned by the Romans but soon will be. The Saxons are massed on the northern border and the Romans are high tailing it out of Briton. Arthur is a knight in roman service. That film seems to have more of a historically accurate ring to it then the other two, however I feel less entertaining. All three films take stories from Mallory and Monmouth and add their own flavor to it. I personally enjoy Monmouth's stories quite a lot, no matter how historically incorrect they may be. Mist of Avalon places Avalon near the Monastery at Glastonbury, Archaeologists and historians today do much research in that area hoping to uncover some proof that Arthur and his lot actually existed. Mists of Avalon is one...