IMDb > Black Knight (2001) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Black Knight
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Black Knight More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 17:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 163 reviews in total 

68 out of 118 people found the following review useful:

That's why you shouldn't drink your own urine.

1/10
Author: Andy (film-critic) from Bookseller of the Blue Ridge
7 January 2005

I cannot stress the fact that this film has been overplayed and recycled through Hollywood more times that I can count. While I have read some reviews that claim that this is one of Lawrence's more creative roles yet, I can only laugh and gag simultaneously at these words. Lawrence was a major contributor to the downfall of this film. He provided no character analysis, no development, and definitely no humor to the entire story. It was as if we were watching a dress rehearsal in progress before the final script arrived with all of Lawrence's funny bits. From the quick introduction at the beginning of the film (a mere 7 minutes of character introduction), until the incoherent ending that was trying to monopolize on the popularity of Gladiator, we never see Lawrence's character of "Jamal" or "Skywalker" (depending on the care of the actors) emerge from the film. This was merely Martin Lawrence cashing in on his already overplayed self, stretching no further than his comfortable limits and never exerting anything "fresh". He has fallen into the cracks of the Hollywood recycling bin and Black Knight reinforces that idea.

Sadly, Lawrence isn't backed up with any better acting or story. Tom Wilkinson has done some amazing films during his career, but apparently was looking to buy a new car with this film. It required no "real" acting from him, just sloppy drunkenness with clichéd moments near the end that could have been pulled from any other film like this one. I think that was my major problem with this film (beside the lackluster Lawrence) was the story. There wasn't any. It felt like we were forced from the beginning to all of our different places and events just to fill time. There wasn't any redeeming value from the story. In fact, I would go so far as to say that whomever wrote this screenplay may have…gasp…plagiarized from nearly every other film like this one out there. The structure was nothing new, the formula literally had dust on it, and nobody seemed to care. Lawrence obviously didn't from the performance that he gave, but I expected more from Mr. Wilkinson who has impressed me in the past. This was not the best showcase for his talent, or for anyone's talent to say the least. We must always remember that it begins with a story, and if it doesn't sound good on paper than it isn't going to translate well onto the screen. This is a rule to live by for everyone involved with the Black Knight debacle.

Finally, I normally don't mention this in my reviews, but with this film it just stood out more than any other that I have seen, but the production of this film was horrible. The costumes, the sets, and even the way the shots were framed seemed "cheap" in so many ways. The costumes are the first that come to mind because Lawrence always seemed like he was wearing something that was made with haste. How could he have quickly made this garment in the time that he was in this land? Who knows, but it was "cheap" and only lowered this film further into the muck pit. If the story is going to be bad, and the actors are not going to give their full potential by actually doing what they are paid … to be creative … than at least give us something to look at Production Team! Unfortunately, there was nothing ravishing to even glance at. The entire Medieval World that Lawrence works at from the beginning is "cheap" and obviously a set. I want a film to take me away from Hollywood and give me my dollar's worth, not rob me blind. The cinematography was done by a two-year old. Nothing spectacular, nothing worth writing about.

Overall, this was a very poor film. Would it have hurt anyone working on this project to use a little something I like to call "imagination"? Creativity was not being used or welcomed in this film. You could tell that the director wanted to make the film, edit out what didn't work, finish, and relax at home while thinking of all the different ways that he could spend his Hollywood money! I blame two major players in this film for the overall poor quality. The first is Mr. Lawrence. If he does not expand his acting potential and bring something new to the screen, I don't think his Hollywood stay will be very long. The second player that I blame for this befuddling mess is the writer. Again, creativity and imagination went backseat to the infamous Hollywood recycling bin. This was a truly disappointing picture.

Grade: * out of *****

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

Black Page

1/10
Author: thullman from Netherlands
22 April 2002

All I can say is that after 30 minutes I fell asleep out of complete boredom while watching this movie. It isn't funny, it has got no plot, and the concept has been used many times before, and better. The only positive thing about it is that one appreciates a good film even more after watching this one.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Disappointing performance by Martin Lawrence

4/10
Author: Andrew from Houston
25 February 2003



Finally got around to seeing this one on D-TV.

I believe most know the plot: man from South-Central LA is teleported to the days of Knights and becomes involved in a rebellion to oust the evil King and restore the good Queen.

In general, it was disappointing because the screenplay did not allow Martin Lawrence to be as funny as he normally is. It seemed forced and weighted down. Unlike other Lawrence films (i.e. Bad Boys, Blue Streak, Big Mama's House) we were not able to see the Martin that we all know and love (or hate). Instead of the impulsive, quick-witted Martin we expect, what we actually saw was Martin that struggled with a poor, predictable script that runs out of fuel in the first twenty minutes and leaves Martin to try to make something out of the remaining hour. As funny as he can be, he is no miracle worker.

All in all I give it a mediocre to low rating. The worst thing is that when I see that Martin Lawrence is going to be in a film I expect certain level of funniness from him. I was disappointed. I feel gypped out of one hour-twenty-minutes of my Saturday.

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

I believe a tenth level of hell is needed for bad actors...(mild spoilers)

2/10
Author: Kefka_8203 from Sweden
9 September 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Alright, first of all I should confess that I like Martin Lawrence about as much as having my fingernails torn out. I found Bad Boys 1+2 to be terrible, despite the reputation of both movies. Then me and my girlfriend decided to rent a few movies from the local videostore...ANd for some reason she picked this one. Story in short: Modern guy travels back to medieval times. Lots of unfunny situations follows. Hero gets it on with "Nubian Princess" while evil Knight-guy goes around being cliché evil. Only fun scene was when ML pulls up his lighter and goes "Behold! I can create fire!" or something similar, and the reaction he gets from the local populace is ; "Yeah? So what? We've seen fire before." And while ML wasn't as horrible in this movie as in BB 1 and 2 he's still painfully bad. To sum it all up I have to say: Stay away from this piece of crap.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 56 people found the following review useful:

It was terrible and far-fetched

2/10
Author: Annie from Miskolc, Hungary
2 February 2005

This movie was bad. Not of the "so-bad-it's-good" types, it was just bad. This "going back to the Middle Ages" stuff has been done a million times before. Okay, it tried to be a politically correct movie so no one was surprised when a black guy appeared in Medieval Europe, but political correctness soon chickened out and rather than letting Lawrence have a white girlfriend, they came up with a far-fetched explanation of how can a medieval king have a black lady-in-waiting. Also, in American movies time travel is always combined with a travel to Europe, usually without explaining how did it happen. (the same thing messed up the Americanised version of Jean Reno's "Les Visiteurs", even though the original movie was so good that even the American ripoff couldn't be bad.) I've seen only about the first half of the movie 'cause I've realised that I've got many better things to do than watching this, so it's possible that after the first half the movie suddenly became interesting, but I seriously doubt it.

Was the above review useful to you?

46 out of 78 people found the following review useful:

Don't be fooled, this is a terrible movie...but funny at parts.

6/10
Author: LebowskiT1000 from Escondido, California, USA
28 June 2002

To be completely honest I am not a fan of Martin Lawrence, although I LOVED "Bad Boys" and thought he did an awesome job in that film...but this review isn't about THAT film ("Blue Streak" was pretty good too). Anyhow, I have to say that I had EXTREMELY low expectations for "Black Knight", the previews were barely funny, the story looked god-awful, and just over-all nothing even remotely great. ...BUT...I watched the movie anyway. I thought the movie was just HORRIBLE, but there were a few things that I thought were pretty funny.

I really can't believe that a movie like this would get green-lit. I can't believe that someone would read this story and say "Yeah, let's make this into a movie!" You gotta be kidding me?!?!

I really don't have much else to say about the film. If you are a fan of Martin Lawrence, then there's a possibility that you may like the film. If you've got some free time, and have an opportunity to see it for free (or really cheap) go ahead and check it out. Otherwise, spend your money on a different movie.

Thanks for reading,

-Chris

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

the black knight is defeating

4/10
Author: Jessie Robertson (MrBoBomb@aol.com) from United States
18 July 2002

This was a more toned down version of Martin Lawrence, which to me isn't as funny as his usual raunchy self. His TV show was very good and his comedy specials are funny, but I haven't enjoyed any of his movies except Bad Boys. This was tolerable at best but his best jokes were racial ones. You can't have a movie solely depend on that. Not to mention the weak plot.

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

I have seen worse

Author: bjjchris from Long Branch, NJ
14 May 2002

This movie was tolerable at best. Not bad considering the circumstances behind Martin Lawrence traveling back in time. That was a little unimaginative. This one makes A Knight's Tale seem like a medieval masterpiece.

(3 out of 10)

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Hollywood, please stop making this kind of garbage...

Author: Kingkitsch (Kingkitsch@aol.com) from Las Vegas, Nevada
11 November 2002

How did this get made? I sat through about 30 minutes of this stinker on cable TV and decided that I'd wasted enough of my life.

Martin Lawrence is as about as unfunny as they come, robbed of his foul-mouthed "street-smart" vulgarities in this so called "comedy". He resorts to mugging that would shame even Jerry Lewis from the brief time I spent watching this auto accident of a movie. Can we make a movie that doesn't present a hipster being thrown into the past and immediately "funking" up the locals? The scene where Martin gets his groove on, teaching a medieval orchestra to play Sly and the Family Stone was like having my fingernails pulled out. Somehow this movie seems subtly racist to me, since I cannot imagine a reverse scenario being made. This kind of mindless junk gets made because people will pay to see it...making lousy actors like Martin Lawrence rich and ensuring the inevitable worse sequel. If you support this kind of thing, you get what you deserve. NO stars. Deserves worse, if that's possible.

Was the above review useful to you?

24 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Nothing that you want, and everything you expect... almost

2/10
Author: TIDQ from Austin, TX
8 September 2004

The star of one of the most successful African American sitcoms of the 90s returns for yet another uninspired comedy charged with more racial jokes than you can shake a stick at.

Medieval feudalism meets hip-hop. Another typical "culture clash" comedy, with all the tools to look exactly the same as its predecessors ("Rush Hour," "Bringing Down the House"), but doesn't come across quite as funny.

The one thing I can say for this movie is that it definitely doesn't take itself seriously. The reactions and mannerisms of the medieval people are stretched at best, and Lawrence's reactions aren't quite how you'd expect a normal person to act, were he thrown back in time. All of the jokes are clearly set up, but the ridiculousness of the movie might just grow on you after a while if you treat it like a bad movie.

The front half of the movie is completely abysmal. It's just about clichés of black culture and nothing more. The second half mellows a lot on the racial humor and becomes more charming. It doesn't become "good," but it had charm. Without giving anything away, there's a contrived dance scene that arises well into the movie. As silly and ridiculous as it is, it's an entertaining and well-done scene.

I still gave this movie a two, because even though I enjoyed some scenes near the end, I wouldn't be much of a movie critic if I gave this movie TOO much due. It really is just a bad movie. The fairly original concept was enough to hold my interest, although the comedy was cliché most of the time and overall poorly executed.

Worth watching if you're in the mood for seeing something stupid but not boring. If you want a laugh-out-loud masterpiece, look elsewhere.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 17:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history