Originally Posted by VisionOn
That's the same approach the BBC are asking of almost every reimagining now. Making it hip, young and cool worked for Doctor Who so it must work for everything else right?
It was the writing, the acting and the production that really re-invented Doctor Who. Ecclestone and Tennant were both older Doctors than Davison (one of the later original Doctors)
Nope. It just looks and sounds lame. If you want something more faithful to the Merlin legend, watch the flawed Excalibur. Which is a mess but makes Merlin's story more interesting than this lightweight stuff.
I disagree. It isn't a traditional telling of the Arthurian legends - we've had those on British TV since the start. It's a modern take on characters based on them. However it isn't as modern as Robin Hood - and I really enjoyed it. Again it was because of the cast and the performance, and the production. It was entertaining TV. It may not have been true to Arthurian legends - but we've had those before.
Same reason I don't watch Robin Hood, or Robin Hoodie as it's accurately known. For Robin Hood I'll watch the decades old Robin of Sherwood or Maid Marian and her Merry Men. Which is intentionally funny for kids and adults and doesn't pretend to be cool.
I've not been a fan of the Robin Hood remake - I don't think it works on any level - and I don't think the cast is as strong, and the writing isn't. However Merlin did work for me, and got reasonable (though not Who-level) audiences.