A word on pronunciation, since it's coming up in the comments pretty frequently :) If you're curious why I say Gawain the way I say it... To my knowledge, the correct pronunciation of Gawain is "Guh-wayne" (in an English context). However, to my ears, it is not pronounced this way in the film. I hear most characters say "Gah-win" (or in Arthur's case, "Gar-win"). Since I'm talking primarily about the film, as opposed to the original poem, I deferred to the film's preferred pronunciation and attempted to say "Gah-win". That may simply be due to the characters' / actors' various accents and dialects but, there you go! Feel free to debate below!
Vryn Thron you and OneTake both have interesting and at least someone educated views on the subject at hand. Interestingly enough I agree with Vryn that humans are part of nature. That said we are also the most advanced part of nature here on Earth (at least as far as we know in general without going to religious, spiritual, or aliens from outer space type understandings). That puts humans in a position of being both part of nature and the most powerful compared to the rest. Our choices then are if we choose to act as good stewards or not. Humans are causing current Global Warming and even without it were are causing damage in a number of ways. So how much are we willing to limit the amount of damage or even healing we do? At some point in the future the sun will expand and cook the Earth. By that point whatever of nature remains may need humans (or our descendants) to survive by becoming life from Earth when humans take it with us to somewhere else. That far off day where humans are needed to save the rest of nature is likely to come at some point. But to reach it humans need to be good enough stewards that the rest of nature survives so there is something to save. The biggest and most immediate of the human caused and thus possibly human correctable problems is Global Warming. It is caused by our economy's pollution so changing the economy should fix that. (Note I said change rather than get rid of as some who oppose and lie about the needed changes tend to claim as they put lies in other people's mouths in an attempt to not only stick their own heads in the sand but try to convince others to as well.) Sorry if my reply sounds a bit out there. But there are elements in truth in what both of you say. Humans are part of nature. But we need to be better stewards for the sake of the future of the rest of nature and ourselves as well. How many adults would want to pollute as much as possible to benefit themselves now if that would ruin or even threaten to end the lives of their children and grandchildren?
Great breakdown! I'm surprised you didn't mention how Gawain's initial act of cutting off the Green Knights head was a truly Dishonourable one also. Due to the fact that he purposefully struck down the Green Knight who had willingly disarmed himself moments prior. It was clear that Gawain thought that if the Knight was killed the Game would be over regardless, thus he sought to cheat his way out of any requirement to fulfil the terms of the Game from the very beginning.
DARGO Thank you for that thought. I didn't realize this it was a way Gawain may have tried to cheat his way out of a consequence but thank you. I just took it as bad form when the King flat out told him that it was a game and he went for a lethal blow.
Thinking about the Green Knight's final line, "off with your head" could also be taken as "reject your ego," which seems to be Gawain's root fault throughout the story.
This is very Western European, with it's contemplation of sacrifice, redemption, human frailty, and forgiveness. Samurai would have watched this movie with the alternate ending (Gawain's beheading), and approved, thinking it a happy conclusion for a character who could not have redeemed himself in any other way.
@@marclacey2263 no you dont history proves that even now. They approved of the honorable executions because they including the executed thought it honorable.
Mr. Grenier, you flourish the katana of cultural relativity comprehension with the hair parsing precision of a green man in a lacquered hat. Nice point.
I don’t think the green knight decapitated gawen, but much like the poem, left him scarred and changed instead. I believe that “off with your head” comment means he can no longer return to his old way of thinking now that he understands how meaningless his life would be in shameful pursuits of immediate gratification. It lines up with the seemingly conflicting message of the mother who simultaneously wants her son to be safe but also knows that his selfish ways of thinking need to be destroyed in order for him to grow. I doubt Gawen was perfectly honorable after that, but his foundational character was forever changed. That’s my thoughts at least.
Indeed. Gawain up to that point, was not at all honorable, but if he can at least learn and understand the importance of living honorably, day by day, to achieve that honor, instead of only attaining it by some quest, at the very least, he can learn to make amends. He can start being more responsible, respectful, understanding, and compassionate to others. All of them, virtues worthy for a knight. That is true courage.
Also, if he was killed by the green knight it makes previous plot developments/character actions kind of empty. His mothers actions only line up if him coming to the knight honorably would result in mercy, and meeting the knight cheaply would result in Gawains death at least from my interpretation. She cements the sash as a magical ward which would be dishonorable to wear, tests Gawains honor immediately prior to his meeting with the knight at the end of his journey, sees that he's not yet achieved honor and pleads with him to come home, as her mission to turn her son into a an honorable man has failed and points out that if he meets the green knight, he will not be met with mercy. I think the writer made it fairly apparent that if Gawain went in with the sash, he would've really died, and if he didn't, he'd be spared. If that Isn't true his mothers actions make very little sense.
I don't think Gawain dies in the film. I think that gawain willingly removing the belt represents Gawain's recognition of his sins in his past life and his willingness to accept the consequences of his actions, which is exactly what his mother wanted. That Gawain is a changed man who will be honorable and take responsibility.
You are essentially right, and if you read the poem that's exactly what happened. And it's implied by the playful smile on the Green Knights face at the end. Remember, it's just a game.
You have to watch it carefully cause a lot of what you see is flash backs or what would of happen. The long story is if he wasn't honorable. Than you get the short actual what happens.
I agree with the "responsibility" / "consequences" notion. It seems like the core of the message to me. Before you act, be fully aware of the consequences. Take them to heart. Act when you can fully accept them. Bear full responsibility. At the same time, as was said in the video, for the message it doesn't matter whether Gawain dies or not. The primary reason why he should live (on a meta level of the story), is that otherwise no one else will have learned anything from the ordeal. It would have given Gawain personal growth without any chance to ever use it. He'd have become wise for no purpose at all, other than to accept his immediate death.
Nah...the notion that doing the right thing allows an escape from consequence is unrealistic, and also betrays the point of the movie. The poem, where he does live, kinda removes that consequence, in part, to show that whether you do the right thing or do the wrong thing, you're going to eventually meet your end anyway. So better to live as virtuous as you can. And when you fall short, don't be too hard on yourself; none of us are perfect, and we've all made many of the same vain missteps.
What I thought at first was not that his mother summoned the Green Knight for her son but for Arthur in the hopes her son could take his place upon dying to the Green Knight, but then Gawain jumps at the opportunity and isn't wise enough to show restraint, this is why later his mother comes to him to ask him to turn back and lie and merely say he completed his quest.
No there is a scene where King Arthur looks to Merlin, as if to check is this serious or a real threat, Merlin performs a spell and looks back to Arthur and shakes his head no. Do you remember that scene? watch it again and see what im saying. The mother sent the green knight for her son and Arthur and Merlin knew it.
@@alexandercummins Oh okay interesting, I must have missed it before, I'll look for it next time. Overall was a very neat movie, I loved the look of everything and the feel in general.
Also, Arthur is obviously on his last leg anyway, he's a dying man basically. Seems like a lot of work to accelerate what would happen anyway a year or two later.
The turn of the seasons is also important, it's less visible in the film, as a short year passes, but other versions of the tale have Gawain on a quest for a year, representing all of his life. He finds the Green Chapel as Spring begins and Winter ends. The first meeting with the Green Knight happens at the similar time in the year. 'When you see green, there I will be' is the advice the Green Knight gives in how Gawain is to find him.
The mom and Arthur are in on it. That’s why Arthur emphasizes it’s just a game and looks disappointed that he overdid it. Everyone keeps telling Gawain that he will come back before he leaves.
"Memento mori" The ancient philosophers (esp. stoics) believed that you couldn't truly live a life of virtue until you accepted the fact that you're going to die. They recommended meditating on death and reminding yourself of your mortality so that you could get past your self-gratifying ego and concentrate on what was truly important. The Green Knight "is life" but is also death. Gawain finds virtue only when he accepts his death and kneels in humility before it and accepts his fate. I think the laughing at the end of the original poem might echo a similar idea to "eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die." (Which was orginally wasn't a call to hedonism but more of a christian philosophy of enjoying the life you've got rather than just complaining about how much it sucks)
I agree with everything you said, the Japanese concepts of bushido and shugendo are very similar, understanding suffering and death's constant as a way to fulfill and enjoy life more sincerely. I find your comment about the Green Knight being life and death is great too, life and death go hand in hand. The Lady of the castle says the same about the greenery of the natural world, it keeps going and consumes all that was us, whereas honor (true honor like the story and true knightly belief) lives on forever beside it as an ideal which we hopefully were part of. As we return to the earth in death, as opposed to wearing symbolic greenery in a mockery of nature's more pure take. In the flash-forward of his kingship, everything is green, but a dull decaying green, a facade of abuse and hollow imagery. Even his belt was green, a symbolic shade as the belt itself allowed him to appear to keep his covenant with the knight (as we keep our covenant with nature, to live with it and pass into it instead of abusing and raping it for immediate gain?) while only he and his mother knew he betrayed the truth of honor itself. As a Christian myself, I've seen many religious interpretations of the scripture you mention as being indeed a reproach against hedonism as well as others which say as you do, that it was an exhortation to enjoy life to the fullest. There's more to life than its simple pleasures, and without God perhaps that is all it boils down to... but as a Christian (which I've heard some folk say "Christians are never happy unless they're feeling guilty about something" lol) we're implored to enjoy life and give glory to God in it, but not to revel in it for its own sake. Again, the theme of intent and honor when no one is looking is brought up. Really great comment, it's a pleasure to meet you Chad :) Be well
I don't know anything about philosophy but I personally think the opposite. If I thought hard about death and really, truly accepted the fact that I was going to die (instead of just never thinking about it like I assume most of us do) I think I would live an extremely hedonistic life. I am disciplined and, relatively, virtuous because I live for tomorrow as much as, or perhaps more than today. I build things, both physical (wealth etc.) and abstract (relationships with people and how I conduct myself), today because they ultimately make for a better life in the future and accepting that I could go tomorrow, or in 10 years or at 70, well I don't think I would live as well as I do. Just my own opinion though.
@@makokx7063 you seem to live the life of the trapped hamster... spinning someone else’s wheel. You contemplate eternity while building castles in the sand.
@@wren7195 it is just as true to day that once Christianized, the ability to think freely is dead. Why? A forced false understanding of nature. You all think you are going to be saved... have found a god that will save you from nature. In case you missed it, it was Christians that smeared this ancient tale. Any reading of nature where we all end up in the same place is something the Christian can not accept. They called it hedonism because it was a way of freeing the meek which didn’t go through their evil god. I do not think you will be able to accept what I said as fact, but it sure is just that.
Amazing take on the movie! I found it interesting that at the beginning of the film we are reminded of the five qualities of a knight and Gawain only fulfills one of them at the end (when he takes off the belt), while in the poem he actually only fails to fulfill one...the whole thing feels like an subversion of the poem...
I loved the hell out of this movie. Not only is it cast and acted amazingly, the film itself is just gorgeous. The last movie I saw here each frame looked like a piece of art was Beasts of No Nation.
@Cú Chulainn Like Thomas says; all culture is appropriation. The only issue arises when we set double-standards for different groups. Personally, as someone with a genetic profile from just about every continent at this point, I don't see the point of caring about the race of an actor, I care about their performance. Certain themed exceptions make sense- it'd be weird for a movie that tries to take a hyper-realistic or historically accurate approach to want to cast accordingly... but mythology? Not important. Fine if you do it, but not a necessity and I'd say talent should precede that. It would be annoying if Dev Patel was cast purely because of his race/ethnicity to meet some nonsensical quota, but I don't see any evidence of that.
@Cú Chulainn I'm a actually a huge nationalist, but not a fan of ethnic filtering. The spirit of a culture and a nation transcends ethnicity, and should supersede it.
The first half was a masterpiece, but the second half doesn't seem to fulfill the promise of the first, which is that Gawain will find be part of his own tales, and find his courage. In the beginning, he tells Arthur "I have no tales" and that he isn't a knight, but Guinevere tells him he will find his courage. I was expecting to see him actually learn a few lessons in the tales that followed -- the Highwayman, the Saint, etc -- but instead he appears to wander without agency, ultimately stumbling upon the Green Knight in a manner that feels like less a culmination of experiences but more a random realization that he won't amount to anything if he goes home. It had a lot of potential and a lot of beauty, but it feels flawed. I'd have preferred that Gawain learned something without quite so much of a hamfisted "do this or live in shame" ending. But this review does a decent job arguing in its defence.
One side of the old story nobody seems to mention is that the green knight walks off after being beheaded. This is a probably reference to trees surviving if you only cut off the branches rather than felling the entire tree. In this context, the circular idea of what you do to nature coming back to hit you next year shows a deep understanding of ecosystems from old English culture, and is a lesson that politicians and the executives of ecocidal corporations in the current era obviously haven't learned.
@@davidjones8043 I disagree, cutting off the limbs of a tree (its branches) and preserving its trunk to grow more limbs hardly fits with the humorous simile you made. Unless you sat on the branches while cutting them off, in which case it would. Maybe discussions on the origin of the green knight legend are where the expression comes from, or am I digging too deep?
The Green Knight has little to do with trees and the original stories just portray him as a giant. The beheading is likely linked to some ancient Celtic belief about the head. Bran the Blessed, King of Britain, is mortally wounded in a war and tells his men to remove his head which they do. The head remains alive for decades afterwards and his men continue to talk to Bran and Bran even entertains them, presumably with songs and poetry. Eventually the head is buried in London facing France to ward off invasion.
Excellent, excellent breakdown. You understood and retold the main themes of the movie perfectly. And yes his mother wants him to grow but also wants to protect him. His turning his back on the fox is the first step to taking off his green belt. The theme of the movie feels universal. Live according to values or your life will be fake and bad, followed by inevitable death anyway. When he makes the choice to rather die in honour, even after a dishonorable life, rather than go on living that way, all is told and the movie makes its point. Powerful lesson for a powerful movie.
You've given me a far deeper appreciation of this film and, perhaps somewhat double-edged, a chance to examine my own shameful failings through its lens. I'll watch again and think on it more. Great work.
I've been long a fan of this story, it's interesting that the producer inverts so much of the original story for this version. I don't think it's bad to do so for story-telling purposes but it's interesting. I'd like to actually see a more accurate (to the legends) version of the story brought to screen again, I think it's been many decades since an attempt was made (I believe Sean Connery plays the Green Knight in the version I remember.) I've even written my own versions of the story a few times; trying to bring my own perceptions of the story into the telling. I have several different versions of the story in books in my collection; including an interpretation by Tolkien of the original poem. In most of the earlier versions of the story the Green Knight only lightly cuts Gawain's neck because the Green Knight and the Knight-Lord he spends the last few days with are the same person and Gawain keeps his bargain with the Knight-Lord honorably until his wife offers Gawain the green belt to protect him as a final test. The Green Knight explains to Gawain that the belt had no power, that it was merely part of the challenge to see whether Gawain had the courage to give up self-defense in the name of honor and that his keeping the belt was his one failing. And thus the one thing that allowed the Green Knight to cut him at all because the belt showed that his honor wasn't entirely pure. In a way it serves as a warning to Gawain that the path of honor doesn't come without risk, it requires courage when you have no reason to have any.
@@likeorasgod Yes most legends had alternate tellings. I'm pointing specifically though at the oldest versions I've read; essentially Tolkien's translation of the poem. I don't think I've ever seen the original poem. Like I said at first; I don't think it's wrong to tell the story in a different way; I'd just like to see one closer to my understanding of it.
i didnt know about the original story untill i finished this movie. then after reading up the actual story i felt that made more sense than this movie plot. felt like lead of the movie came of unlikable char to sympathize with. in other words he was a weak guy who failed at every test only to be given cheatcode in the final test to see the future and then all of sudden he changed who he is.. just like that. felt like he didnt earn and there was no arc where he was learning anything in this movie. its just failure after failure and he never even knew why he was failing. original story is well structured and its message is "u cant give in into ur weakness not even once as a knight". which had way more impact and u kinda feel sad for our main lead as he passed every test except the last one.
@@MrVad3r From what I've read in the original BRITISH myths of King Arthur Gawain was the best knight. He had more courage and honor than any other. But the stories only became popular because of French bards telling the tales, and they figured that the French would want a French hero at the center of the story so they invented Lancelot and made him the Great Knight and Gawain's role was reduced. This might be one of the few surviving stories that explained who Gawain really was in the myths.
@@WickedPrince3D could be.. i was just talking about story structure and how the movie flipped it which made little sense if you really think about the lead's story arc.
No mention of the ending-credit scene! Someone suggested that this final scene confirmed that Gawain didn't die by the axe of the Green Knight. Instead, the audience now learned that Gawain achieved to live a life that was filled with virtue and honor.
I think Gawain only died figuratively, he gave up his selfishness driven motivations (or tried to live that kind of life, at least), and was reborn in doing so.
I think the blindfold is normally a symbol of no judgment. Mothers don't really judge their sons. Great video. I really struggled parsing out this story.
The blindfold is a symbol of impartial judgement. All are equal before the law, it doesn't mean no judgement unless you meant non-judgemental/unbiased.
I believe his mother wanted him to realize who he truly is. whatever that is, and maybe humble himself in the process if he is not who he wishes to be.
He doesn't Die... the whole point was for him to find Courage, and Honor... and be something, be anything. The Queen says it in the very beginning of the movie when Gawain is about to strike the Green Knight, the Mother and the Sister "The Queen" wanted to see if he can be something better (His mother Summoned the Green night and started all this).
Yes and she controls the green knight too. Funny how the lord seems to look like him too. And the old lady (who represents Morgan la Fey) was living with the lord too. So yeah.....
Exactly lol even without any prior knowlege about the myth, in the end "Off with your head" is said in such manner that could only mean "go back/leave with your head on your shoulders". that's how i interpreted that line
@@randomdude2004 Same. I don't think the Green Knight said that sardonically before literally killing him. I think he absolved Gawain for submitting to judgment and attempting to accept consequence and repent. It's like the scene we would have seen if Sauron hadn't been so insecure/driven by his fear of Illuvatar reaction and decided that because God might not forgive him, he might as well go all-in Dark Lord style.. :P
The Green Knight is literally Gawain's Father. The opening title sequence of the burning snowy town prove this. Making that final line an epic Dad-joke.
The glaring plothole for me was the green sash. It supposedly represents a betrayal of the terms of the agreement, but no such parameters were established. The agreement was only a blow for a blow. Indeed, it was some form of magic that allowed the Green Knight to ride away after having his head cut off.
Great point! Nice to meet you Christopher :) Well, to me, I see it as part of the theme of intent. The Green Knight was immune to the damage he may've received during the challenge, but the others didn't know that. So when Gawain straight up beheaded him, he did so thinking he'd gotten around the "blow later" by removing the blow-giver. In that way, the magic of the Knight wasn't cheating because he was presenting a moral lesson to the others; in another way it was exactly as you said, his magic spared him so Gawain's belt wasn't outside the rules either... but his intentional reason for wearing it was. Since his intent was to use the belt to magically survive and somehow miraculously survived the challenge and/or defeated the Knight afterwards and acquired renown and honor... his intent was less than noble usage of that magic. It was dirty and underhanded, a way to escape his agreement rather than a way to survive the blow. If he'd used it in a way that allowed him to survive but his intent accepted the blow as fulfilling his bargain, I think the Knight would've honored that. I believe the entire story was a message about intent, and the Knight saw fully the intent of Gawain. I may be failing to explain my view on it, so I apologize for that. If his mother truly was responsible for the Knight's arrival AND Gawain's belt, then the entire scenario can be taken those two ways: Gawain faced a powerful foe and outwitted his cheating bargain with his own magic, or Gawain faced the foe and recklessly accepted a death sentence, then learned true honor along the way while having a get out of jail free card in his pocket to fall back on selfishly if his cowardice overruled his desire for true honor. Man I'm babbling, need to go to bed. Take care Sir Christopher, my apologies for rambling. Best wishes to you, great insight my friend :) Be well
In the original poem, the sash is a betrayal because The Lord of the Castle is the Green Knight, and in their agreement anything he received in the castle, like the sash, had to be given to the lord. Gawain keeps the sash to survive his encounter with the green knight, thus breaking the agreement as an act of fear.
Thank you for a thoughtful analysis of this scintillating film. I *love* "Sir Gawain & the Green Knight" *&* I love this film, despite their differences. The film's Gawain is self-indulgent & naïve, but he has flashes of decency. Gawain retrieves St. Agatha's head, which in medieval days would be considered valiant. He also realizes that he can't live a lie, so he ultimately submits to the Green Knight. The film clearly depicts the Green Knight as a Green Man -- i.e., a symbol of pagan verdure & creativity well known to a medieval audience. Pagan & Christian emblems are intertwined throughout the film, as they are in the poem. Again, thank you for unpacking this film so well.
Pagan is such an indeterminate term; it really signifies only a root Christian perspective. Non-Christian religion beliefs are equally perhaps even more rich and worthy of equal specification.
The kid/bandit at the beginning doesn't necessarily give him the wrong advice -- the chapel is by a stream running north. Most if not everything Gawain goes through after leaving the castle seems fabricated especially for him. He's tested, fails most of the time, and is punished as a result. A few times he does the right thing and is rewarded. With the boy he fails the test of generosity and is punished by having his comfort and ease of travel removed. The way I saw it, unlike in the book when the Green Knight is the Lord of the Manor, he's also representing Arthur in the movie. When it's made clear that Gawain will be Arthur's heir, he regrets that he doesn't know Gawain or what kind of man he is (or ruler he will be). At the manor, the Lord questions Gawain much the same way Arthur did at the table. When Gawain says the quest will make him honourable and change him, the Lord says he wishes he could see the man he'll become. And when he takes off the sash, the knight touches him affectionately as Arthur did, and addresses him as "my knight". I think that the elements of nature vs civilization (and paganism vs christianity) were stronger in the original story, and are kind of reduced to the sub-theme in the movie because it's also trying to introduce a completely new main plot. Gawain being decapitated in the end would have felt more like a plot hole because it contradicts the way they changed the start of his quest.
@15:44 is a beautiful and to me meaningful little moment as the etymology of both those words are so closely connected. And thinking about these stories about stories, the literal repeating of salient points throughout history, this one being hundreds of years old, and still deep and hard hitting... our moms really just don't want us to die/struggle. And to be a mom is to struggle with that till you die.
I especially loved your ending opinion with the break down and contrast of these two pieces of art, the original poem and this most recent movie. How one is saying - live with your faults, perfection is an absurd expectation. Meanwhile this recent movie is saying - not only are we imperfect, but as a society we are also our own undoing by exploiting everything around us.
"By exploiting everything around us" Which technically we evolved to do(and every other form of life). I think this take is a very western-centric one. For instance, in the face of climate change we are now giving nature this allure of "purity" when in reality it's just chaos and through our destruction of that nature we are now swinging the pendulum far in the other direction(giving human qualities to what we deem is "nature"). That "greenery" is not always in balance, in fact it looks like an arms race when you actually study it. Even if Humans' did their worst to this planet(nuclear war) it would only take a few million cycles around the sun to erase the damage(a blink of an eye in galactic scales). I almost think us looking at nature this way is just another form of hubris. As Carlin said "The earth will shake us off like a bad case of fleas". Personally, I think in the coming centuries, humanities outlook on nature will change as we realize our cities and civilizations were actually not "separate" from nature but just another, larger(different?), part of it. Especially if we are then able look at ourselves on a galactic or universal scale... Where there might be billions of other consciousness beings who also went through the same struggles and follow the same path. It's fascinating to look at it this way.
it WAS as great breakdown...but he shot himself in the foot at the end. his breakdown of the movie doesn't support the interpretation that "we're not good enough." it's more about our CHOICES. gawain could have been honorable throughout, but he CHOOSES to be otherwise. we should accept ourselves for the fallible people we are -- but that doesn't mean just "chill[ing]." we have to balance that acceptance with earnest efforts to be better.
@@d.d.138 Thanks for sharing this perspective! Just to respond though-- so, my interpretation that "we're not good enough" comes from two things: One, I agree it's about our choices but my read is that there are certain choices you don't come back from. Gawain could have chosen to be honorable throughout his life and he didn't. Then, he made a specific choice: decapitate the Green Knight. At that point, choosing to be honorable (as he did in the end) means choosing to die. Two, and this is where I think it become more subjective... to me, the Lady's speech signals that Gawain's conflict with the Green Knight is somewhat representative of civilization's current conflict with nature. So, I think Lowery is saying that as a society, we have gone too far in taking from nature (e.g., pollution, global warming - and btw, not saying I agree with this philosophy necessarily but its the meaning I took from this film). So, yes-- it's about our choice BUT we "missed our chances". We made the wrong choices and like Gawain, we can't undo them. Put another way, it's too late for "earnest efforts to be better." In the interview, Lowery said he sees us at war with nature these days. And it comforts him that the Green Knight has the higher ground in the end. I believe in taking a film on it's own terms but I admit, hearing him say that has definitely colored my view of the film in the end (and I can't unread what I read haha). Definitely think there's room for disagreement and different interpretations! But, I do think the statement "we"re not good enough" jives with the rest of my interpretation.
There is one more thing about Gwain and the green night that you haven't called on to. The story you read about in the poem is not the story of a night recognizing his own shame. Then returning home to his Uncle.That night later takes on a new name Mordred. The poem is about Mordred recognizing his father's kingdom for what it is and his own shame and place within it. His father's/Uncle's kingdom is littered with battlefields while he talks about peace and how he brought it to the land. The young Knights naivete and trust in humanity is challenged and shattered. His virtue is weighed and he has found wanting. His convictions and courage are tested and he is found wanting. He returns home and in his despair reveals what happened. For this he is mocked. This is the story of the fall of the man who will later destroy Camelot.
One alternate interpretation of the "What if" montage. The last moments of the life Gawain sees aren't literal; his bride, mother, and child pulling away and vanishing, and soldiers rushing to bar the door as a force batters at it are symbolic of what the steady march into the future will do to him. Eventually, Gawain will be alone with his shame, and he will inevitably end up in the same place as he would if the Green Knight's axe should kiss his neck - dead.
Similarly, I felt like Gawain's journey itself was a metaphor of sorts. So focused on his destination, but making compromises on how to get there. I felt a real suggestion was that the journey was what was important.
Did you miss part of the last line? "we are not good enough and maybe it's too late for us to be any better" In the end Gawain choses to become better by removing his insurance and it's enough to save his "head" or ego/psyche. I think if this video's end had added, "we are not good enough" but it's never too late for us to change even during times of our last breath (Or something along those lines.) This breakdown was covered really well and I learned a lot more than I had understood from watching the movie.
Thanks for the kind words! And I think your read on the ending is totally valid but just depends on your POV. My philosophy probably clashes a bit with Lowery's and that slipped through a bit in how I characterized the ending. I.e., to me, if "being better" means essentially killing yourself, I would say that's a cynical view which boils down to "it's too late to be better." I think you could tell a story which sends the message that you can come to terms with yourself and "be better" in your dying breaths... but that's not what I took from this story (though again, I definitely wouldn't call someone wrong for interpreting it that way! I think the film is intentionally ambiguous).
This movie's plot and the original story of Sir Gawain and the green knight are _considerably_ different canonically, and somewhat different thematically. I'm not saying it's a bad movie in any way, just that Gawain's _actual_ origin story sees him as the quintessential Arthurian knight, already a paragon of honour and virtue who is tortured by his own ridiculously high standards. This is obviously the opposite of the Gawain we see here. Again, it's a really beautiful and poignant movie just don't treat it as canon :p
@@graysaltine6035 Exactly. I think the modern rendition of Gawain here though is an extremely well-adapted moral lesson for modernity and the idea of how, as society becomes more condensed and less communal by and large, we ought to reevaluate what we expect compared to what we have given and how we treat with others, not follow empty standards.
Something I find curious in the contrast of the original poem and the modern interpretation. The sort of moral at the end is that even the *most* honorable is but a man, and no matter how honorable the world will stain him (green being the symbol of the world, and thus worldliness as opposed to the glory and intangibility of the divine honorable ideal). It says (or at least I take it as such) that we all know honor is the ideal we strive for and may never totally attain, so that even the bravest of us, the heroes, should wear our shame with pride. For in a circuitous way by doing so we show that we are striving to be better (or it would not shame us at all) and it is the striving which makes us honorable. The film, on the other hand says that it's too late. We are shamed, and the heroes are husks who live in darkness, and that they wear their honor like a badge regardless of their actual merit. It says the most honorable thing we can do is let go of our illusion that we were good, or can somehow be redeemed, and instead submit to the entropy of our own end. More than that in fact, we should hasten it by submitting to nature's judgement and remove the sophistry we believe protects us. We should be better, but we can't be, so instead we should just let nature have its way. Gotta say, I find the level of hubris and condemnation in one version of this story surprising, moreso because it's the one from a modern society instead of a feudal one.
The lady ALSO offers a protective belt BECAUSE all women offer a sense of protection to men. The mother, the girlfriend, the wife... but the honest truth is that man must find peace within, not in others.
Thanks for the breakdown, I understood a lot of what was happening in the tests, but I honestly never gave the mother much thought after her first appearance, yet you pointing out all the times she "appears" explains a lot. Like his stuff is stolen and he gets them all back from other means and on the return we see the boy again. One thing though, many find the ending vague, but I thought it was pretty obvious, especially with the Green Knight pointing his finger and smiling at Gawain.
I agree with most of this breakdown, but came to a different conclusion myself. For me the themes of the story come back to Arthur's words at the start of the film, when Gawyn first accepts the Green Knight's challenge. Before he strikes, Arthur tells him something along the lines of, "remember, it's just a game." The grand quest, the notion of honor, the very idea of chivalry, I took that as an overiding theme for every subsequent event of the story as Gawyn fails to realize that yes, honor is just a game to these people. The lesson Gawyn takes in the end then, which is that he should die to keep his honor, is a larger tragedy, because it means he failed to realize that that honor was meaningless to begin with and he died for nothing. A happy ending of this would be, in my opinion, him putting aside the notion of honor entirely and living true to himself, something he never managed to do either with his relationships at home or in his adventure across the movie.
I don't think he was killed in the end. I think the living through a cowardly future life was "The Blow" rather than a literal axe beheading. G. Knight's, "Lose your head" I took to mean in the "Go Ask Alice" sense of stop thinking so much and follow your heart/instincts. I'm not sure why you are so certain death was his fate. It's purposefully left ambiguous, at least.
You've managed to pick up one of the main themes of the original poem. In the original Gawain returns from his quest with his eyes opened to shallowness of Arthur's court.
That was a great explanation, you made me realise that I did not get this movie at all lol, only the part where of the mother wanting to make her son grow up. But all the other details were amazingly explained in your video! love it.
Seems to me from the ending sequence that if he had really fled the Green Knight and gone back to the Kingdom he would have become king himself and ruined the country, his family, and himself by his cowardice. It was better that he die at the hands of the Green Knight than go through such a long and tortured life only to die at the end anyway. So his real courage was to let the Green Knight kill him.
not only that, but I think that whole vision of a cowardly life was "the blow" in exchange for the blow with an axe. That's why he didn't need to receive a literal ax chop (although they leave some room at the end for that possibility).
@@squirlmy That's an interesting notion. Did the Green Knight, figuratively, effectively remove Gawain's "head" (the driving motivation and selfish perspective)? I think Gawain's "death" is also a rebirth. The ambiguity is important though, because it goes along with the idea of doing what you ought to even we you are not guaranteed the outcome you are seeking, because the alternative is a slow, shameful, and miserable self-destruction and dismantling of the things/relationships that actual provide meaning and grounding.
Great video. I don't think Essel was saying "you aren't good". She was saying he IS good and that should be enough. She didn't understand why he was so caught up in being a *Great* "larger than life" figure. He made the mistake of beheading the Green Knight. No one wanted him to do that. Arthur told him it was just a game so don't take it so seriously. He interpreted that wrong and went to 11, then had to follow through on the consequences. The fox was being genuine at the end and his mother would have protected him if he came back, but he realized if he didn't follow through on the standard he set with GK he wouldn't be able to live up to King any would eventually get beheaded regardless, so he took off the belt and accepted his fate.
One of the best analyses of the movie, there is so much to say. What is not in the film is sometimes more revealing that what is in the film. Revenge is not in the film. Everyone thought that Gawain will go after the robbers, but he just continues his quest. It is not about revenge but it is a lot about the pardon. Gawain had to pardon himself for not being honest. Lying by being silent, lying to his mother and to his king but above all lying to himself.
Wow, 10/10, I had so many questions after watching this movie and caught some of the meaning but you really knocked it outta the park with this! Thank you!
Good video. I thought about this movie a lot after watching it. My interpretation is similar to yours, and I especially like how the Green Knight is conflated with the traditional motif of the Green Man. As a writer, I like that Lowery uses a less-known, less-used quest structure, in which the hero meets a series of trials, and succeeds in practical terms but fails morally, moving deeper into himself as he progresses through the quest, until everything is stripped away except for a single moral choice that stands for all his choices. On the other hand, I appreciate how the 14th century writer (the Pearl Poet), seeing how life is full of ordeals and pitfalls, cuts his protagonist a little more slack. Beautiful movie.
Great video. I think it was a mistake to release this movie in the middle of summer, the dire themes and ambiguous ending is a bit much for mainstream audiences. I liked this movie well enough although it wasn't what I was expecting, and my roommates hated it. I should have known, I love movies like Midsommar but the roommies have more mainstream tastes. I guess we weren't expecting The Green Knight to be quite so heady and grim.
surprisingly It's one of few films this year that has actually managed to break even. it hasn't really turned a profit, but if you look at most A24 films they've generally made a profit off of digital/dvd home video sales. That's what happened with The Lighthouse(2019). I would expect that The Green Knight will do much the same.
How is the belt betraying the deal with the green knight? Green knight had magic that protected him from death so even after having his head decapitated, he survived. The main character also received some magic that should prevent his death. What is unfair about it?
Initially, I had similar thoughts on that. But when looking a little closer at the characters, it's not that simple. If we agree that the green knight represents nature, he didn't need any magic to stay alive. It's in his "nature" to survive decapitation. I'd say it's also a part of the movie's message. Gawain did not fully understand the nature of his challenge and thus acted without fully understanding/accepting the consequence of his action. Cheating his way around the consequence was an irresponsible approach to the task. It's dishonorable. The opposite of what he sought to attain on that quest. Let's not forget, even if the green knight had used dishonorable means in that scenario, that would not mean Gawain would also be allowed to act dishonorably. As a knight at the round table, and even more so as a ruling king, he would be bound to act with honor at all times. At the very least according to the rules of King Arthur's round table.
@@Kijinn Sorry. A non lethal blow for a non lethal blow, is fair in any book. it's the nature of living things to do it's best to stay alive. That's respecting life. Choosing death is choosing cowardly escape.
@@gohlincoln2570 Honor has only little to do with fairness. Mostly, honor is defined by specific and strict codes, within a culture, order, or similar. Fairness can be a part of a code of honor, but isn't ingrained. It has always been the specific crux of any honor system, that you need to uphold it, even when it isn't fair. That's one of the prime reasons why it's difficult to be honorable. Death as a "cowardly escape", is commonly ascribed to suicide. Death for the sake of honor has only rarely been called "cowardly". There have been (and there still are) plenty of cultures that view death as preferable to dishonor. Japan is a prominent example. People have been challenging each other to duels to the death, in defense of honor.
Well it's still not a particularly kind thing to do to touch someone you not only just met, but slept in their bed. I imagine if I was a spirit, I'd not be too fond of people trying to stick their fingers in my face either
@@okaywhatsgoingon3774 Yeah, may be, but it is clearly not meant to showcase his dishonor, but just make sure that the women was not just a dream or illusion. After all, right before he attempted to touch her, she floated towards him. I mean, i would try to verify if a floating woman was real too
On the contrary; it's the goes to the crux of chivalry's tradition; It's declared a game, the rules are quite clear; the expectations are quite clear. It's a test, a challenge accepted and a fulfilled.
okay so, two things about the video_ 1) he did not abandon the child just the woman, his son died on the war. 2) there are after credits, there is a little girl playing around with the crown, then she puts it in her head, i think it's his daughter, i don't think he dies. let me know if anybody else saw that too.
As with many Arthurian tales, this one is a clear allegory about defining your own character. As in reality, some challenges are black/white in their resolution, some are grey. This is why moral life-rules and behaviours are key to survival and personal accomplishment. Mothers have a tormented and unenviable task of ensuring their children become functional and 'ideal' in the wild, real world, whilst fearing all calamities likely to harm their 'babies'. The father-figure is noticeably weak and absent in this tale and probably is a reflection on the attention and influence he has previously paid to his son. I feel that, despite the fundamental value of a woman's role in bringing-up a boy, mature males (not necessarily fathers) are best equipped to represent positive male ideals and to teach them.
Thanks for this! I actually enjoyed the movie, contrary to what my friends thought of it. Initially, I couldn't quite articulate why I liked it, obviously it was the captivating cinematography. But now I see that it's the character development of Gawain that truly resonated with me.
SUCH a Fantastic Movie!! So many themes visited upon. It is truly a great movie. The Obvious Religious themes... Arthur Representing Christianity... even looking like Jesus, the Green Knight seemingly Representing Paganism... nature spirits, especially when he goes on his journey... with the pantheon of different Pagan icons testing him... Seeing if he is truly honorable or merely Vain and egotistical. And that is truly what it is about..Being an Honorable and Noble person is to Live as an Honorable and Noble person. They keep trying to convince him to let go of his Protection his mother gave him... As it would be an act of dishonor. He would return and live the rest of his life in shame, as he is living a lie. He would not be keeping his word. This is A FANTASTIC film!!
Love these breakdown. Very deep and nuanced. Was wondering if you could do something similar for Devs, True Detective s1, Blade Runner 2049, 2001 A Space Odyssey.
Thank you Umair! I'll add these to the list of potential videos; those are all movies or shows that I loved and I think would lend themselves to this sort of analysis. Specifically, your mentioning 2001: A Space Odyssey re-triggered my Kubrick obsession so I think that's closer to the top of the list than the others! Might tackle THE SHINING first though, in the spirit of the Halloween season :)
You made a wee mistake by claiming that Gawain leaves his woman and his newborn in the flash forward. He actually pays her and takes the child with him. You see the kid at his arranged wedding in the next scene. Then he watches that same son die on a battlefield.
Terrific analysis here, it has helped me understand more about the film and the important themes it raises. Rather than see the film as an indictment against civilization, I see it as a more personal statement about how one chooses to live, whether with virtue or not. Meaning cannot be had with an un-virtuous life, and without meaning we are lost, empty vessels, damned to a soulless existence. One of my favorite lines in the film is when Gawain asks "is this all there is?" and the Green Knight replies "Should there be anything else?" -- it's a realization that, at essence, all we have is life and death, and there is no guarantee or natural right that we should live it in any particular way or for any length of time. Therefore, to live with virtue, or not, is a choice *we* make and one that Nature doesn't care about. Nature, or "Green", just *is*, it lives, it dies, it lives again. But *we* must choose to live with virtue if we are to avoid the tortuous fate of a life without meaning, the life seen by Gawain as he knelt before the Green Knight and contemplated his escape. I don't see a war between Nature and civilization here because, as Lady Bertilak eloquently describes, Nature will always retake its domain. Human ambition is nothing in the face of the long, slow, indomitably persistent powers of Nature. Green will always triumph, therefore has no need to war with anything. It's us humans who are silly to think our ambitions get us anywhere and to think we could ever possibly dominate over Nature.
this film was so different from any film I ever watched... I enjoyed it.... I feel like as he knelt in front of the Green Knight he saw himself as a future and once he was allowed to leave he lived that life...
Well, a lot of people thinks that Gawain does not die in the end... ☠ What if we consider that this open ending allows us - as the hero himself - to shut down our expectations, desires and the voice of our ego, and accept peacefully these both ways, the life - as well as the dead - of the hero ? Also, great analysis ! It made me understand a few things about this movie, and I love it even more by now. I would like to add that it is mostly about memento mori. The protagonist only changes when he is faced close to death, when the death consciousness put him in the most extreme state of crisis.
When the green knight says "now off with your head" I understood this like "go off where ever your ideas may take you, now that you have no fear to die", in consequence have no fear to fail.
Spoiler for the move: Gawain didn't abandon his son. The child was purchased and raised as royalty, and you can see the baby being handed off to Merlin in the scene. That's the child that later dies in combat in the flash forward. Also, I think you are over simplifying the motivations of Gawain's mother, who seems to be a mix of the Morgan la Fey and Morgause characters. The tone of all of the mother's scenes is either unsettling or dark, which to me indicates a malevolent motivation. Taking into context the original source material, I always interpreted the mother's intentions as to undermine the rule of Camelot with a weak, self indulgent king that would ultimately result in the destruction of Arthur's legacy. Gawain refusing to use the green garter is a refutation of his mother's designs, and acts as a final redemption of a very flawed man. Maybe I was also looking too much into the movie, but it seemed like when the lord was introduced his silhouette and voice had the appearance of the Green Knight, which I think might have been a nod to the original ending of the poem.
they made up the mother part of the story on the fly at set. u are over thinking this mother plot as director just swapped char on the day of shoot. he said it in an interview.
@@carlchallinor4933 true.. i like how director even said the whole mother aspect of the plot of impulsive - on the spot decision and still people are trying to find some hidden meaning and plot behind it. except for great cinematography .. story telling and plot aspect of this movie is mediocre at best. main character's story arc is complete disappointment and so unrelatable or leven likable with no redemption. usually when a char fails in a story he needs to know why hes failing.. and as movie/plot progress he learns . in this movie he learned nothing along the way.. he didnt even know why he was failing. just some cheat code in the end to see his future and then he changes.. just like that. good redemption arc even in a slow paced setting done right is bladerunner 2049. unlikable char in the start and u grow to sympathize with him in the end.
I do believe its presented pretty clearly in most previous versions of this tale. That the reason why the knights of the round table begin to wear green sashes after. Is in honor of the acknoledgement that nobody is perfect, not even the legendary knights of the round table. Everyone, even they and other admired heros can struggle with fear in the face of death or when their values and honor are tested. But to hopefully, we learn from falure and come out a better person after, is what makes the greats great, humility with bettering imperfection. Im pretty sure thats kinda what the point of the tale supposed to be. I kinda wish that was mentioned at the end. Great vid tho!
Great movie and breakdown by OneTake I agree Morgana's goal was to teach Gawain Honor Honor isn't slaying monsters, saving the princesses, or embarking on quests Gawain achieves honor when he removes the belt but even if he had abandoned the quest and returned home in shame, he would still understand what honor is and that maybe he has none A valuable lesson in itself My only difference in opinion is that i believe the original poem does have the same meaning the alternate life Gawain envisions for himself mirrors the original in that even though he returns and lives a successful life, he himself knows he is without honor having worn the belt in fear
I love when movies make you look at yourself and how you live your life. I think alot of us men want to be thought of as honorable, good men but alot of us misunderstand how to have true honor. "How can you be great if, you haven't reached common decency yet." "To be honorable, you must live honorably."
Great breakdown. I personally think the green girdle is cowardice. As long as he wears it, Gawain will flee dangerous outcomes and no harm will come to him. This is why wearing the green girdle does not make him more confident, why he's able to enter the ghost pond after losing the girdle to the robbers, and why he's only able to welcome his death after removing it.
Gawain doesn't try to touch winnifred because of lust, he tries to touch her because he saw her float across the floor and wondered if she was real. the whole part with winnifred was the worst part of the film for me, she was really annoying.
Don't agree with the whole interpretation, but I do very much appreciate the effort and care that went into making and supporting the argument. In the end it's subjective, but you made it compelling and interesting. Well done.
I personally felt that when the Green Knight said "off with your head" he meant it to mean "off" as in "off with you" i.e. go along and take your head with you, if that makes sense to anyone...
I was thinking the same thing and wanted to post this if you did not! LOL He pointed to the exit and did seem to be letting him go. Most assume it’s the Red Queen’s version of “off with his head” but this is the Green Knight after all, and that’s a whole different color. 😂
*Jordan Peterson would love this film* Although the setting of the film is ancient and medieval, its message is directly aimed at the modern world, and at the modern man. The message is that virtue and honor must be earned, that self-improvement is a long and arduous task, and that shortcuts to it are false and meaningless. I find a strange parallel between Gawain's quest and today's scourge of 'virtue signaling'. The majority of modern people do not care about virtue they just want to give off the appearance of virtue.
Green brings with it a sense of hope, health, adventure, and renewal, as well as self-control, compassion, and harmony - the Knight was Green and Gawain cut off his head. In the original poem Gawain is an honorable man who makes a mistake and learns that facing the consequences is not shameful. The new version tells a different story, a man-child who's words don't match his actions who has failed every test of honor presented to him, in the end he accepts his punishment even if it kills him.
My friend disliked one part of this movie and i kind of agree; The Green knight TELLS everyone that whatever blow he lands he will receive back. Therefore no one, even a eager young yippee filled with adrenaline would strike his head off. Of course he wouldn't think the Green Knight was immortal, but come on. The dude is made of bark, there is clearly something magical about his ass. So my friend said that was unbelievable. I hate watching movies with him around tbh.
I kind of agree, it’s one of those moments that works better in a poem haha. But, when you translate it to the screen, especially in the grounded way Lowery approached the film, it comes off as so foolish it’s almost (or maybe is) a little too much.
I wouldn't have said that during the movie, but that's a fair point I noticed too. It's like, "Did this talking tree man with an axe that grows plants on solid stone just say however he gets struck, he'll strike back?" I would've invited him to dine with us and expect dinner next year with a hearty, friendly slap on his back of friendship. I don't want noooo smoke with the mystical world.
I think in the original story the green knight is just called the green night and they never really give him anything else, I think he was originally human.
@@tylerthejetsuarez8902 he was basically described as looking human but entirely green. Though I think it was meant to be interpreted that the knights knew that he was “otherworldly” (because of his green appearance).
Never seen this movie but hearing this story makes me think of the D&D dragonlance novel, The Oath and the Measure, a prelude to the original Dragonlance trilogy, featuring the character Sturm Brightblade.
Norm Macdonald hated ambiguous endings too. He said he didn't want to have to think about it himself. He said it's like saying he wants to get a new car, and then goes to Detroit to help with the welding.
the old woman with blindfold maybe taken as 'virtue' or conscience possibly. this is mentioned by the lady at her talk. the blindfold suggests something like conscience to me. she also wears white. when the lady gives him the new sash or he tries to take it from her out of fear for his life, in the end the blindfolded woman is immediately noticed, and Gawain's response is shame, shock and guilt. The blindfold has another aspect that gawain and the two others does not seem to see her, or notice her at first, even though she's sitting right there at the table - just as maybe some aspect of the situation itself is either not seen, or should be seen, or should not be looked at, or difficult to see. I thought the fox may be sent by her mother. but there is also a interpretation that the fox may be a part of Gawain himself. First seen at the battlefield, and then also after he retrieves the skull from the pool. The fox comes to him at the cave, helps with the giant, and shows way to the castle. He in the end warns him to turn back and accept his shame, and discard the sash. The paintings at the castle also show first a fox being hunted, then its Gawain himself in that place running in opposite direction. I don't know exactly what, but maybe his ego, his sense of survival, his honour, his cunning, his courage, a reflection of himself. I don't know exactly. Since the green knight gives a more gentle smile after saying well done, after stopping the axe blow, I'm inclined to feel the knight let him go here in this version also. That's the proper way to end it, for me. Guess its directors choice to leave it that ambiguous. But that choice still makes sense in this version as much as in the poem, technically even more than it does in the poem, considering Gawain does the right thing here, while he does not in the poem.
Trying to be something you want to be when you know you're not that thing, be yourself, don't impress other's, impress yourself, your people will find you.
Another reading is that 'free your head' could also allude to the greenknight freeing him/us of the shame and guilt of living a less honerable life by showing him/us how to redeem himself and then letting him have that option - since we do not see the final blow.
At the end when the G.Knight says off with your head. I interpreted it as the G. Knight allowing Gawain to leave with his head on. In other words, off you know with with your head.
Gawain failed the challenge from the beginning, as the Green Knight explicitly stated his opponent could strike any form of blow they choose - to kill or slightly maim. Gawain accepts as an opportunity to display ultimate victory even though it was unnecessary. The honorable thing to do under the circumstances would be to mock strike the knight in a show of restraint and respect and leave him unscathed. The knight posed no threat to Gawain or anyone and so deserved no harm upon him.
A word on pronunciation, since it's coming up in the comments pretty frequently :) If you're curious why I say Gawain the way I say it...
To my knowledge, the correct pronunciation of Gawain is "Guh-wayne" (in an English context). However, to my ears, it is not pronounced this way in the film. I hear most characters say "Gah-win" (or in Arthur's case, "Gar-win"). Since I'm talking primarily about the film, as opposed to the original poem, I deferred to the film's preferred pronunciation and attempted to say "Gah-win". That may simply be due to the characters' / actors' various accents and dialects but, there you go! Feel free to debate below!
Vryn Thron you and OneTake both have interesting and at least someone educated views on the subject at hand. Interestingly enough I agree with Vryn that humans are part of nature. That said we are also the most advanced part of nature here on Earth (at least as far as we know in general without going to religious, spiritual, or aliens from outer space type understandings). That puts humans in a position of being both part of nature and the most powerful compared to the rest. Our choices then are if we choose to act as good stewards or not.
Humans are causing current Global Warming and even without it were are causing damage in a number of ways. So how much are we willing to limit the amount of damage or even healing we do?
At some point in the future the sun will expand and cook the Earth. By that point whatever of nature remains may need humans (or our descendants) to survive by becoming life from Earth when humans take it with us to somewhere else. That far off day where humans are needed to save the rest of nature is likely to come at some point. But to reach it humans need to be good enough stewards that the rest of nature survives so there is something to save.
The biggest and most immediate of the human caused and thus possibly human correctable problems is Global Warming. It is caused by our economy's pollution so changing the economy should fix that. (Note I said change rather than get rid of as some who oppose and lie about the needed changes tend to claim as they put lies in other people's mouths in an attempt to not only stick their own heads in the sand but try to convince others to as well.)
Sorry if my reply sounds a bit out there. But there are elements in truth in what both of you say. Humans are part of nature. But we need to be better stewards for the sake of the future of the rest of nature and ourselves as well. How many adults would want to pollute as much as possible to benefit themselves now if that would ruin or even threaten to end the lives of their children and grandchildren?
I believe you can be great without first being good
Great breakdown! I'm surprised you didn't mention how Gawain's initial act of cutting off the Green Knights head was a truly Dishonourable one also. Due to the fact that he purposefully struck down the Green Knight who had willingly disarmed himself moments prior. It was clear that Gawain thought that if the Knight was killed the Game would be over regardless, thus he sought to cheat his way out of any requirement to fulfil the terms of the Game from the very beginning.
DARGO Thank you for that thought. I didn't realize this it was a way Gawain may have tried to cheat his way out of a consequence but thank you. I just took it as bad form when the King flat out told him that it was a game and he went for a lethal blow.
As a historian I was like “dude” but this explanation is well reasoned and I’m ok with it now haha. Good summary!
Thinking about the Green Knight's final line, "off with your head" could also be taken as "reject your ego," which seems to be Gawain's root fault throughout the story.
Off with your head reminds me of the Red Queen you know Alice fell down the rabbit hole
"Off (you go) with your head."
In reality, if you are more honorable than your superior they will take you down, not a fairy tale.
@@ruhap9311 Don't show the wicked your honor. Be discrete.
That’s how I took it.
This is very Western European, with it's contemplation of sacrifice, redemption, human frailty, and forgiveness. Samurai would have watched this movie with the alternate ending (Gawain's beheading), and approved, thinking it a happy conclusion for a character who could not have redeemed himself in any other way.
Because us Western Europeans tend to value the life of a human, rather than their death. One of our idiosyncrasies you might say.
it is corrupted from the original
@@marclacey2263 Ended slave trade around the world to with extreme loss of life literally around the globe.
@@marclacey2263 no you dont history proves that even now. They approved of the honorable executions because they including the executed thought it honorable.
Mr. Grenier, you flourish the katana of cultural relativity comprehension with the hair parsing precision of a green man in a lacquered hat. Nice point.
I don’t think the green knight decapitated gawen, but much like the poem, left him scarred and changed instead. I believe that “off with your head” comment means he can no longer return to his old way of thinking now that he understands how meaningless his life would be in shameful pursuits of immediate gratification. It lines up with the seemingly conflicting message of the mother who simultaneously wants her son to be safe but also knows that his selfish ways of thinking need to be destroyed in order for him to grow. I doubt Gawen was perfectly honorable after that, but his foundational character was forever changed. That’s my thoughts at least.
Indeed. Gawain up to that point, was not at all honorable, but if he can at least learn and understand the importance of living honorably, day by day, to achieve that honor, instead of only attaining it by some quest, at the very least, he can learn to make amends. He can start being more responsible, respectful, understanding, and compassionate to others. All of them, virtues worthy for a knight. That is true courage.
Gawen may not be perfectly honorable then but honorable enough.
Also, if he was killed by the green knight it makes previous plot developments/character actions kind of empty. His mothers actions only line up if him coming to the knight honorably would result in mercy, and meeting the knight cheaply would result in Gawains death at least from my interpretation. She cements the sash as a magical ward which would be dishonorable to wear, tests Gawains honor immediately prior to his meeting with the knight at the end of his journey, sees that he's not yet achieved honor and pleads with him to come home, as her mission to turn her son into a an honorable man has failed and points out that if he meets the green knight, he will not be met with mercy. I think the writer made it fairly apparent that if Gawain went in with the sash, he would've really died, and if he didn't, he'd be spared. If that Isn't true his mothers actions make very little sense.
@@christiansargent6053 🤔
The Green Knight's final line, 'off with your head' could be a play on words meaning 'you can leave now with head intact' - lesson learnt!
I don't think Gawain dies in the film. I think that gawain willingly removing the belt represents Gawain's recognition of his sins in his past life and his willingness to accept the consequences of his actions, which is exactly what his mother wanted. That Gawain is a changed man who will be honorable and take responsibility.
You are essentially right, and if you read the poem that's exactly what happened. And it's implied by the playful smile on the Green Knights face at the end. Remember, it's just a game.
I concur. There is a post-credit scene and if I am correct, I believe it helps solidify the idea that he lives. Either way, great film.
You have to watch it carefully cause a lot of what you see is flash backs or what would of happen. The long story is if he wasn't honorable. Than you get the short actual what happens.
I agree with the "responsibility" / "consequences" notion.
It seems like the core of the message to me. Before you act, be fully aware of the consequences. Take them to heart. Act when you can fully accept them. Bear full responsibility.
At the same time, as was said in the video, for the message it doesn't matter whether Gawain dies or not.
The primary reason why he should live (on a meta level of the story), is that otherwise no one else will have learned anything from the ordeal. It would have given Gawain personal growth without any chance to ever use it. He'd have become wise for no purpose at all, other than to accept his immediate death.
Nah...the notion that doing the right thing allows an escape from consequence is unrealistic, and also betrays the point of the movie. The poem, where he does live, kinda removes that consequence, in part, to show that whether you do the right thing or do the wrong thing, you're going to eventually meet your end anyway. So better to live as virtuous as you can. And when you fall short, don't be too hard on yourself; none of us are perfect, and we've all made many of the same vain missteps.
What I thought at first was not that his mother summoned the Green Knight for her son but for Arthur in the hopes her son could take his place upon dying to the Green Knight, but then Gawain jumps at the opportunity and isn't wise enough to show restraint, this is why later his mother comes to him to ask him to turn back and lie and merely say he completed his quest.
No there is a scene where King Arthur looks to Merlin, as if to check is this serious or a real threat, Merlin performs a spell and looks back to Arthur and shakes his head no. Do you remember that scene? watch it again and see what im saying. The mother sent the green knight for her son and Arthur and Merlin knew it.
@@alexandercummins Oh okay interesting, I must have missed it before, I'll look for it next time. Overall was a very neat movie, I loved the look of everything and the feel in general.
Also, Arthur is obviously on his last leg anyway, he's a dying man basically. Seems like a lot of work to accelerate what would happen anyway a year or two later.
The turn of the seasons is also important, it's less visible in the film, as a short year passes, but other versions of the tale have Gawain on a quest for a year, representing all of his life.
He finds the Green Chapel as Spring begins and Winter ends. The first meeting with the Green Knight happens at the similar time in the year.
'When you see green, there I will be' is the advice the Green Knight gives in how Gawain is to find him.
The mom and Arthur are in on it. That’s why Arthur emphasizes it’s just a game and looks disappointed that he overdid it. Everyone keeps telling Gawain that he will come back before he leaves.
"Memento mori"
The ancient philosophers (esp. stoics) believed that you couldn't truly live a life of virtue until you accepted the fact that you're going to die. They recommended meditating on death and reminding yourself of your mortality so that you could get past your self-gratifying ego and concentrate on what was truly important.
The Green Knight "is life" but is also death. Gawain finds virtue only when he accepts his death and kneels in humility before it and accepts his fate.
I think the laughing at the end of the original poem might echo a similar idea to "eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die." (Which was orginally wasn't a call to hedonism but more of a christian philosophy of enjoying the life you've got rather than just complaining about how much it sucks)
I agree with everything you said, the Japanese concepts of bushido and shugendo are very similar, understanding suffering and death's constant as a way to fulfill and enjoy life more sincerely. I find your comment about the Green Knight being life and death is great too, life and death go hand in hand. The Lady of the castle says the same about the greenery of the natural world, it keeps going and consumes all that was us, whereas honor (true honor like the story and true knightly belief) lives on forever beside it as an ideal which we hopefully were part of.
As we return to the earth in death, as opposed to wearing symbolic greenery in a mockery of nature's more pure take. In the flash-forward of his kingship, everything is green, but a dull decaying green, a facade of abuse and hollow imagery. Even his belt was green, a symbolic shade as the belt itself allowed him to appear to keep his covenant with the knight (as we keep our covenant with nature, to live with it and pass into it instead of abusing and raping it for immediate gain?) while only he and his mother knew he betrayed the truth of honor itself.
As a Christian myself, I've seen many religious interpretations of the scripture you mention as being indeed a reproach against hedonism as well as others which say as you do, that it was an exhortation to enjoy life to the fullest. There's more to life than its simple pleasures, and without God perhaps that is all it boils down to... but as a Christian (which I've heard some folk say "Christians are never happy unless they're feeling guilty about something" lol) we're implored to enjoy life and give glory to God in it, but not to revel in it for its own sake. Again, the theme of intent and honor when no one is looking is brought up.
Really great comment, it's a pleasure to meet you Chad :) Be well
I don't know anything about philosophy but I personally think the opposite. If I thought hard about death and really, truly accepted the fact that I was going to die (instead of just never thinking about it like I assume most of us do) I think I would live an extremely hedonistic life. I am disciplined and, relatively, virtuous because I live for tomorrow as much as, or perhaps more than today. I build things, both physical (wealth etc.) and abstract (relationships with people and how I conduct myself), today because they ultimately make for a better life in the future and accepting that I could go tomorrow, or in 10 years or at 70, well I don't think I would live as well as I do. Just my own opinion though.
Not Christian. It’s the warriors ethos. That of the brigand and mercenary.
Death comes on swift wings, but not yet.
@@makokx7063 you seem to live the life of the trapped hamster... spinning someone else’s wheel.
You contemplate eternity while building castles in the sand.
@@wren7195 it is just as true to day that once Christianized, the ability to think freely is dead.
Why? A forced false understanding of nature.
You all think you are going to be saved... have found a god that will save you from nature.
In case you missed it, it was Christians that smeared this ancient tale.
Any reading of nature where we all end up in the same place is something the Christian can not accept.
They called it hedonism because it was a way of freeing the meek which didn’t go through their evil god.
I do not think you will be able to accept what I said as fact, but it sure is just that.
Amazing take on the movie! I found it interesting that at the beginning of the film we are reminded of the five qualities of a knight and Gawain only fulfills one of them at the end (when he takes off the belt), while in the poem he actually only fails to fulfill one...the whole thing feels like an subversion of the poem...
I loved the hell out of this movie. Not only is it cast and acted amazingly, the film itself is just gorgeous. The last movie I saw here each frame looked like a piece of art was Beasts of No Nation.
Finally, a recommendation that isn't something everyone has seen! I'm gonna look into it right now! Thank you!
@Cú Chulainn culture is appropriation. chill
@cuchulainn3474 I don't care but good luck to you.
@Cú Chulainn Like Thomas says; all culture is appropriation. The only issue arises when we set double-standards for different groups. Personally, as someone with a genetic profile from just about every continent at this point, I don't see the point of caring about the race of an actor, I care about their performance. Certain themed exceptions make sense- it'd be weird for a movie that tries to take a hyper-realistic or historically accurate approach to want to cast accordingly... but mythology? Not important. Fine if you do it, but not a necessity and I'd say talent should precede that.
It would be annoying if Dev Patel was cast purely because of his race/ethnicity to meet some nonsensical quota, but I don't see any evidence of that.
@Cú Chulainn I'm a actually a huge nationalist, but not a fan of ethnic filtering. The spirit of a culture and a nation transcends ethnicity, and should supersede it.
The first half was a masterpiece, but the second half doesn't seem to fulfill the promise of the first, which is that Gawain will find be part of his own tales, and find his courage. In the beginning, he tells Arthur "I have no tales" and that he isn't a knight, but Guinevere tells him he will find his courage. I was expecting to see him actually learn a few lessons in the tales that followed -- the Highwayman, the Saint, etc -- but instead he appears to wander without agency, ultimately stumbling upon the Green Knight in a manner that feels like less a culmination of experiences but more a random realization that he won't amount to anything if he goes home. It had a lot of potential and a lot of beauty, but it feels flawed. I'd have preferred that Gawain learned something without quite so much of a hamfisted "do this or live in shame" ending. But this review does a decent job arguing in its defence.
One side of the old story nobody seems to mention is that the green knight walks off after being beheaded. This is a probably reference to trees surviving if you only cut off the branches rather than felling the entire tree. In this context, the circular idea of what you do to nature coming back to hit you next year shows a deep understanding of ecosystems from old English culture, and is a lesson that politicians and the executives of ecocidal corporations in the current era obviously haven't learned.
Sounds deep but you're reaching too far... Going too far out on a limb?
@@davidjones8043 I disagree, cutting off the limbs of a tree (its branches) and preserving its trunk to grow more limbs hardly fits with the humorous simile you made. Unless you sat on the branches while cutting them off, in which case it would. Maybe discussions on the origin of the green knight legend are where the expression comes from, or am I digging too deep?
The Green Knight has little to do with trees and the original stories just portray him as a giant. The beheading is likely linked to some ancient Celtic belief about the head. Bran the Blessed, King of Britain, is mortally wounded in a war and tells his men to remove his head which they do. The head remains alive for decades afterwards and his men continue to talk to Bran and Bran even entertains them, presumably with songs and poetry. Eventually the head is buried in London facing France to ward off invasion.
Excellent, excellent breakdown. You understood and retold the main themes of the movie perfectly. And yes his mother wants him to grow but also wants to protect him. His turning his back on the fox is the first step to taking off his green belt. The theme of the movie feels universal. Live according to values or your life will be fake and bad, followed by inevitable death anyway. When he makes the choice to rather die in honour, even after a dishonorable life, rather than go on living that way, all is told and the movie makes its point. Powerful lesson for a powerful movie.
You've given me a far deeper appreciation of this film and, perhaps somewhat double-edged, a chance to examine my own shameful failings through its lens.
I'll watch again and think on it more.
Great work.
I've been long a fan of this story, it's interesting that the producer inverts so much of the original story for this version. I don't think it's bad to do so for story-telling purposes but it's interesting. I'd like to actually see a more accurate (to the legends) version of the story brought to screen again, I think it's been many decades since an attempt was made (I believe Sean Connery plays the Green Knight in the version I remember.) I've even written my own versions of the story a few times; trying to bring my own perceptions of the story into the telling. I have several different versions of the story in books in my collection; including an interpretation by Tolkien of the original poem. In most of the earlier versions of the story the Green Knight only lightly cuts Gawain's neck because the Green Knight and the Knight-Lord he spends the last few days with are the same person and Gawain keeps his bargain with the Knight-Lord honorably until his wife offers Gawain the green belt to protect him as a final test. The Green Knight explains to Gawain that the belt had no power, that it was merely part of the challenge to see whether Gawain had the courage to give up self-defense in the name of honor and that his keeping the belt was his one failing. And thus the one thing that allowed the Green Knight to cut him at all because the belt showed that his honor wasn't entirely pure. In a way it serves as a warning to Gawain that the path of honor doesn't come without risk, it requires courage when you have no reason to have any.
There are actually multi version of the story and I could see a little of them in the story so it was a mix of stories put together to make on.
@@likeorasgod Yes most legends had alternate tellings. I'm pointing specifically though at the oldest versions I've read; essentially Tolkien's translation of the poem. I don't think I've ever seen the original poem. Like I said at first; I don't think it's wrong to tell the story in a different way; I'd just like to see one closer to my understanding of it.
i didnt know about the original story untill i finished this movie. then after reading up the actual story i felt that made more sense than this movie plot. felt like lead of the movie came of unlikable char to sympathize with. in other words he was a weak guy who failed at every test only to be given cheatcode in the final test to see the future and then all of sudden he changed who he is.. just like that. felt like he didnt earn and there was no arc where he was learning anything in this movie. its just failure after failure and he never even knew why he was failing.
original story is well structured and its message is "u cant give in into ur weakness not even once as a knight". which had way more impact and u kinda feel sad for our main lead as he passed every test except the last one.
@@MrVad3r From what I've read in the original BRITISH myths of King Arthur Gawain was the best knight. He had more courage and honor than any other. But the stories only became popular because of French bards telling the tales, and they figured that the French would want a French hero at the center of the story so they invented Lancelot and made him the Great Knight and Gawain's role was reduced. This might be one of the few surviving stories that explained who Gawain really was in the myths.
@@WickedPrince3D could be.. i was just talking about story structure and how the movie flipped it which made little sense if you really think about the lead's story arc.
No mention of the ending-credit scene! Someone suggested that this final scene confirmed that Gawain didn't die by the axe of the Green Knight. Instead, the audience now learned that Gawain achieved to live a life that was filled with virtue and honor.
That's correct. You've got it.
I think Gawain only died figuratively, he gave up his selfishness driven motivations (or tried to live that kind of life, at least), and was reborn in doing so.
I think the blindfold is normally a symbol of no judgment. Mothers don't really judge their sons. Great video. I really struggled parsing out this story.
The blindfold is a symbol of impartial judgement. All are equal before the law, it doesn't mean no judgement unless you meant non-judgemental/unbiased.
@damionkeeling3103 In our culture, not so in others. It could be here, it is a movie, not a dream.
Lesson: If Groot's Dad shows up at your party...
leave him the F#&K alone.
Hahahaha very good advice
👏
A blow for a blow. Blow him a kiss.
@@johnklaus9111 Thanks for the applause Mr. Klaus...(my bad if you pronounce it "Klowss")
Underrated
Also, I think the actor who plays the Lord was also Gawain in King Arthur with Clive Owen
Good catch. You're right. Joel Edgerton played Gawain 2004 King Arthur 👍
so that's why he looked familiar to me. you know that 'I've seen him somewhere moment but you can't just remember'
I believe his mother wanted him to realize who he truly is. whatever that is, and maybe humble himself in the process if he is not who he wishes to be.
He doesn't Die... the whole point was for him to find Courage, and Honor... and be something, be anything. The Queen says it in the very beginning of the movie when Gawain is about to strike the Green Knight, the Mother and the Sister "The Queen" wanted to see if he can be something better (His mother Summoned the Green night and started all this).
Yes and she controls the green knight too. Funny how the lord seems to look like him too. And the old lady (who represents Morgan la Fey) was living with the lord too. So yeah.....
Exactly lol even without any prior knowlege about the myth, in the end "Off with your head" is said in such manner that could only mean "go back/leave with your head on your shoulders".
that's how i interpreted that line
@@randomdude2004 yes! Exactly!
@@randomdude2004 Same. I don't think the Green Knight said that sardonically before literally killing him. I think he absolved Gawain for submitting to judgment and attempting to accept consequence and repent.
It's like the scene we would have seen if Sauron hadn't been so insecure/driven by his fear of Illuvatar reaction and decided that because God might not forgive him, he might as well go all-in Dark Lord style.. :P
The Green Knight is literally Gawain's Father. The opening title sequence of the burning snowy town prove this. Making that final line an epic Dad-joke.
The glaring plothole for me was the green sash. It supposedly represents a betrayal of the terms of the agreement, but no such parameters were established. The agreement was only a blow for a blow. Indeed, it was some form of magic that allowed the Green Knight to ride away after having his head cut off.
Great point! Nice to meet you Christopher :) Well, to me, I see it as part of the theme of intent. The Green Knight was immune to the damage he may've received during the challenge, but the others didn't know that. So when Gawain straight up beheaded him, he did so thinking he'd gotten around the "blow later" by removing the blow-giver. In that way, the magic of the Knight wasn't cheating because he was presenting a moral lesson to the others; in another way it was exactly as you said, his magic spared him so Gawain's belt wasn't outside the rules either... but his intentional reason for wearing it was.
Since his intent was to use the belt to magically survive and somehow miraculously survived the challenge and/or defeated the Knight afterwards and acquired renown and honor... his intent was less than noble usage of that magic. It was dirty and underhanded, a way to escape his agreement rather than a way to survive the blow. If he'd used it in a way that allowed him to survive but his intent accepted the blow as fulfilling his bargain, I think the Knight would've honored that. I believe the entire story was a message about intent, and the Knight saw fully the intent of Gawain. I may be failing to explain my view on it, so I apologize for that. If his mother truly was responsible for the Knight's arrival AND Gawain's belt, then the entire scenario can be taken those two ways: Gawain faced a powerful foe and outwitted his cheating bargain with his own magic, or Gawain faced the foe and recklessly accepted a death sentence, then learned true honor along the way while having a get out of jail free card in his pocket to fall back on selfishly if his cowardice overruled his desire for true honor.
Man I'm babbling, need to go to bed. Take care Sir Christopher, my apologies for rambling. Best wishes to you, great insight my friend :) Be well
Anyone who has read the book will immediately note this point, this flaw in both the film & this analysis.
In the original poem, the sash is a betrayal because The Lord of the Castle is the Green Knight, and in their agreement anything he received in the castle, like the sash, had to be given to the lord. Gawain keeps the sash to survive his encounter with the green knight, thus breaking the agreement as an act of fear.
but he lost the sash and then got it again by committing adultery. So, the sash was “soiled” (literally and figuratively)
I agree.As if the giant,headless,green tree man didn't use magic of some sort himself.
In the film, Aurthur's parting advice to Gawain was "Remember, its only a game"
Great breakdown and clarifications about the movie’s deeper meanings.
Thank you Steve!
Thank you for a thoughtful analysis of this scintillating film. I *love* "Sir Gawain & the Green Knight" *&* I love this film, despite their differences. The film's Gawain is self-indulgent & naïve, but he has flashes of decency. Gawain retrieves St. Agatha's head, which in medieval days would be considered valiant. He also realizes that he can't live a lie, so he ultimately submits to the Green Knight. The film clearly depicts the Green Knight as a Green Man -- i.e., a symbol of pagan verdure & creativity well known to a medieval audience. Pagan & Christian emblems are intertwined throughout the film, as they are in the poem. Again, thank you for unpacking this film so well.
isn't swimming down through a dark fetid swamp to retrieve a skull, valiant in any time?
Pagan is such an indeterminate term; it really signifies only a root Christian perspective. Non-Christian religion beliefs are equally perhaps even more rich and worthy of equal specification.
The kid/bandit at the beginning doesn't necessarily give him the wrong advice -- the chapel is by a stream running north. Most if not everything Gawain goes through after leaving the castle seems fabricated especially for him. He's tested, fails most of the time, and is punished as a result. A few times he does the right thing and is rewarded.
With the boy he fails the test of generosity and is punished by having his comfort and ease of travel removed.
The way I saw it, unlike in the book when the Green Knight is the Lord of the Manor, he's also representing Arthur in the movie. When it's made clear that Gawain will be Arthur's heir, he regrets that he doesn't know Gawain or what kind of man he is (or ruler he will be). At the manor, the Lord questions Gawain much the same way Arthur did at the table. When Gawain says the quest will make him honourable and change him, the Lord says he wishes he could see the man he'll become. And when he takes off the sash, the knight touches him affectionately as Arthur did, and addresses him as "my knight".
I think that the elements of nature vs civilization (and paganism vs christianity) were stronger in the original story, and are kind of reduced to the sub-theme in the movie because it's also trying to introduce a completely new main plot. Gawain being decapitated in the end would have felt more like a plot hole because it contradicts the way they changed the start of his quest.
@15:44 is a beautiful and to me meaningful little moment as the etymology of both those words are so closely connected. And thinking about these stories about stories, the literal repeating of salient points throughout history, this one being hundreds of years old, and still deep and hard hitting... our moms really just don't want us to die/struggle. And to be a mom is to struggle with that till you die.
I especially loved your ending opinion with the break down and contrast of these two pieces of art, the original poem and this most recent movie. How one is saying - live with your faults, perfection is an absurd expectation. Meanwhile this recent movie is saying - not only are we imperfect, but as a society we are also our own undoing by exploiting everything around us.
"By exploiting everything around us"
Which technically we evolved to do(and every other form of life). I think this take is a very western-centric one.
For instance, in the face of climate change we are now giving nature this allure of "purity" when in reality it's just chaos and through our destruction of that nature we are now swinging the pendulum far in the other direction(giving human qualities to what we deem is "nature"). That "greenery" is not always in balance, in fact it looks like an arms race when you actually study it. Even if Humans' did their worst to this planet(nuclear war) it would only take a few million cycles around the sun to erase the damage(a blink of an eye in galactic scales). I almost think us looking at nature this way is just another form of hubris. As Carlin said "The earth will shake us off like a bad case of fleas".
Personally, I think in the coming centuries, humanities outlook on nature will change as we realize our cities and civilizations were actually not "separate" from nature but just another, larger(different?), part of it. Especially if we are then able look at ourselves on a galactic or universal scale... Where there might be billions of other consciousness beings who also went through the same struggles and follow the same path.
It's fascinating to look at it this way.
Excellent breakdown, man.
Thank you Michael!
it WAS as great breakdown...but he shot himself in the foot at the end. his breakdown of the movie doesn't support the interpretation that "we're not good enough." it's more about our CHOICES. gawain could have been honorable throughout, but he CHOOSES to be otherwise. we should accept ourselves for the fallible people we are -- but that doesn't mean just "chill[ing]." we have to balance that acceptance with earnest efforts to be better.
@@d.d.138 Thanks for sharing this perspective! Just to respond though-- so, my interpretation that "we're not good enough" comes from two things:
One, I agree it's about our choices but my read is that there are certain choices you don't come back from. Gawain could have chosen to be honorable throughout his life and he didn't. Then, he made a specific choice: decapitate the Green Knight. At that point, choosing to be honorable (as he did in the end) means choosing to die.
Two, and this is where I think it become more subjective... to me, the Lady's speech signals that Gawain's conflict with the Green Knight is somewhat representative of civilization's current conflict with nature. So, I think Lowery is saying that as a society, we have gone too far in taking from nature (e.g., pollution, global warming - and btw, not saying I agree with this philosophy necessarily but its the meaning I took from this film). So, yes-- it's about our choice BUT we "missed our chances". We made the wrong choices and like Gawain, we can't undo them. Put another way, it's too late for "earnest efforts to be better."
In the interview, Lowery said he sees us at war with nature these days. And it comforts him that the Green Knight has the higher ground in the end. I believe in taking a film on it's own terms but I admit, hearing him say that has definitely colored my view of the film in the end (and I can't unread what I read haha).
Definitely think there's room for disagreement and different interpretations! But, I do think the statement "we"re not good enough" jives with the rest of my interpretation.
There is one more thing about Gwain and the green night that you haven't called on to. The story you read about in the poem is not the story of a night recognizing his own shame. Then returning home to his Uncle.That night later takes on a new name Mordred. The poem is about Mordred recognizing his father's kingdom for what it is and his own shame and place within it. His father's/Uncle's kingdom is littered with battlefields while he talks about peace and how he brought it to the land. The young Knights naivete and trust in humanity is challenged and shattered. His virtue is weighed and he has found wanting. His convictions and courage are tested and he is found wanting. He returns home and in his despair reveals what happened. For this he is mocked.
This is the story of the fall of the man who will later destroy Camelot.
which poem are you referring to? There are older versions, you know.
Great breakdown, I think you absolutely nailed the themes at play throughout the film.
Thank you Josh!!
One alternate interpretation of the "What if" montage. The last moments of the life Gawain sees aren't literal; his bride, mother, and child pulling away and vanishing, and soldiers rushing to bar the door as a force batters at it are symbolic of what the steady march into the future will do to him. Eventually, Gawain will be alone with his shame, and he will inevitably end up in the same place as he would if the Green Knight's axe should kiss his neck - dead.
Similarly, I felt like Gawain's journey itself was a metaphor of sorts. So focused on his destination, but making compromises on how to get there. I felt a real suggestion was that the journey was what was important.
Did you miss part of the last line? "we are not good enough and maybe it's too late for us to be any better"
In the end Gawain choses to become better by removing his insurance and it's enough to save his "head" or ego/psyche. I think if this video's end had added, "we are not good enough" but it's never too late for us to change even during times of our last breath (Or something along those lines.)
This breakdown was covered really well and I learned a lot more than I had understood from watching the movie.
Thanks for the kind words! And I think your read on the ending is totally valid but just depends on your POV. My philosophy probably clashes a bit with Lowery's and that slipped through a bit in how I characterized the ending. I.e., to me, if "being better" means essentially killing yourself, I would say that's a cynical view which boils down to "it's too late to be better." I think you could tell a story which sends the message that you can come to terms with yourself and "be better" in your dying breaths... but that's not what I took from this story (though again, I definitely wouldn't call someone wrong for interpreting it that way! I think the film is intentionally ambiguous).
As someone who grew up reading Arthurian Legends, this is the perfect Sir Gawain's origin story movie that I didnt know I wanted my entire life.
This movie's plot and the original story of Sir Gawain and the green knight are _considerably_ different canonically, and somewhat different thematically. I'm not saying it's a bad movie in any way, just that Gawain's _actual_ origin story sees him as the quintessential Arthurian knight, already a paragon of honour and virtue who is tortured by his own ridiculously high standards. This is obviously the opposite of the Gawain we see here. Again, it's a really beautiful and poignant movie just don't treat it as canon :p
@@graysaltine6035 Exactly. I think the modern rendition of Gawain here though is an extremely well-adapted moral lesson for modernity and the idea of how, as society becomes more condensed and less communal by and large, we ought to reevaluate what we expect compared to what we have given and how we treat with others, not follow empty standards.
Something I find curious in the contrast of the original poem and the modern interpretation.
The sort of moral at the end is that even the *most* honorable is but a man, and no matter how honorable the world will stain him (green being the symbol of the world, and thus worldliness as opposed to the glory and intangibility of the divine honorable ideal). It says (or at least I take it as such) that we all know honor is the ideal we strive for and may never totally attain, so that even the bravest of us, the heroes, should wear our shame with pride. For in a circuitous way by doing so we show that we are striving to be better (or it would not shame us at all) and it is the striving which makes us honorable.
The film, on the other hand says that it's too late. We are shamed, and the heroes are husks who live in darkness, and that they wear their honor like a badge regardless of their actual merit. It says the most honorable thing we can do is let go of our illusion that we were good, or can somehow be redeemed, and instead submit to the entropy of our own end. More than that in fact, we should hasten it by submitting to nature's judgement and remove the sophistry we believe protects us. We should be better, but we can't be, so instead we should just let nature have its way.
Gotta say, I find the level of hubris and condemnation in one version of this story surprising, moreso because it's the one from a modern society instead of a feudal one.
The lady ALSO offers a protective belt BECAUSE all women offer a sense of protection to men. The mother, the girlfriend, the wife... but the honest truth is that man must find peace within, not in others.
I feel like a little bird being fed pre-chewed worms it's great
LOL
Thanks for the breakdown, I understood a lot of what was happening in the tests, but I honestly never gave the mother much thought after her first appearance, yet you pointing out all the times she "appears" explains a lot. Like his stuff is stolen and he gets them all back from other means and on the return we see the boy again.
One thing though, many find the ending vague, but I thought it was pretty obvious, especially with the Green Knight pointing his finger and smiling at Gawain.
I agree with most of this breakdown, but came to a different conclusion myself. For me the themes of the story come back to Arthur's words at the start of the film, when Gawyn first accepts the Green Knight's challenge. Before he strikes, Arthur tells him something along the lines of, "remember, it's just a game." The grand quest, the notion of honor, the very idea of chivalry, I took that as an overiding theme for every subsequent event of the story as Gawyn fails to realize that yes, honor is just a game to these people. The lesson Gawyn takes in the end then, which is that he should die to keep his honor, is a larger tragedy, because it means he failed to realize that that honor was meaningless to begin with and he died for nothing. A happy ending of this would be, in my opinion, him putting aside the notion of honor entirely and living true to himself, something he never managed to do either with his relationships at home or in his adventure across the movie.
I don't think he was killed in the end. I think the living through a cowardly future life was "The Blow" rather than a literal axe beheading. G. Knight's, "Lose your head" I took to mean in the "Go Ask Alice" sense of stop thinking so much and follow your heart/instincts. I'm not sure why you are so certain death was his fate. It's purposefully left ambiguous, at least.
You've managed to pick up one of the main themes of the original poem. In the original Gawain returns from his quest with his eyes opened to shallowness of Arthur's court.
That was a great explanation, you made me realise that I did not get this movie at all lol, only the part where of the mother wanting to make her son grow up. But all the other details were amazingly explained in your video! love it.
Seems to me from the ending sequence that if he had really fled the Green Knight and gone back to the Kingdom he would have become king himself and ruined the country, his family, and himself by his cowardice. It was better that he die at the hands of the Green Knight than go through such a long and tortured life only to die at the end anyway. So his real courage was to let the Green Knight kill him.
Im beating myself up now because I missed the opportunity to watch this on the big screen!
not only that, but I think that whole vision of a cowardly life was "the blow" in exchange for the blow with an axe. That's why he didn't need to receive a literal ax chop (although they leave some room at the end for that possibility).
@@squirlmy That's an interesting notion. Did the Green Knight, figuratively, effectively remove Gawain's "head" (the driving motivation and selfish perspective)? I think Gawain's "death" is also a rebirth. The ambiguity is important though, because it goes along with the idea of doing what you ought to even we you are not guaranteed the outcome you are seeking, because the alternative is a slow, shameful, and miserable self-destruction and dismantling of the things/relationships that actual provide meaning and grounding.
Great video.
I don't think Essel was saying "you aren't good". She was saying he IS good and that should be enough. She didn't understand why he was so caught up in being a *Great* "larger than life" figure.
He made the mistake of beheading the Green Knight. No one wanted him to do that. Arthur told him it was just a game so don't take it so seriously. He interpreted that wrong and went to 11, then had to follow through on the consequences.
The fox was being genuine at the end and his mother would have protected him if he came back, but he realized if he didn't follow through on the standard he set with GK he wouldn't be able to live up to King any would eventually get beheaded regardless, so he took off the belt and accepted his fate.
One of the best analyses of the movie, there is so much to say. What is not in the film is sometimes more revealing that what is in the film. Revenge is not in the film. Everyone thought that Gawain will go after the robbers, but he just continues his quest. It is not about revenge but it is a lot about the pardon. Gawain had to pardon himself for not being honest. Lying by being silent, lying to his mother and to his king but above all lying to himself.
Wow, 10/10, I had so many questions after watching this movie and caught some of the meaning but you really knocked it outta the park with this! Thank you!
Good video. I thought about this movie a lot after watching it. My interpretation is similar to yours, and I especially like how the Green Knight is conflated with the traditional motif of the Green Man. As a writer, I like that Lowery uses a less-known, less-used quest structure, in which the hero meets a series of trials, and succeeds in practical terms but fails morally, moving deeper into himself as he progresses through the quest, until everything is stripped away except for a single moral choice that stands for all his choices. On the other hand, I appreciate how the 14th century writer (the Pearl Poet), seeing how life is full of ordeals and pitfalls, cuts his protagonist a little more slack. Beautiful movie.
Great video. I think it was a mistake to release this movie in the middle of summer, the dire themes and ambiguous ending is a bit much for mainstream audiences. I liked this movie well enough although it wasn't what I was expecting, and my roommates hated it. I should have known, I love movies like Midsommar but the roommies have more mainstream tastes. I guess we weren't expecting The Green Knight to be quite so heady and grim.
surprisingly It's one of few films this year that has actually managed to break even. it hasn't really turned a profit, but if you look at most A24 films they've generally made a profit off of digital/dvd home video sales. That's what happened with The Lighthouse(2019). I would expect that The Green Knight will do much the same.
isnt midsommar mainstream hit though? lot of people liked that movie.
You did a tremendous job examining the story .
Gawain is what happens if "I aint shit" was a person.
How is the belt betraying the deal with the green knight? Green knight had magic that protected him from death so even after having his head decapitated, he survived. The main character also received some magic that should prevent his death. What is unfair about it?
Initially, I had similar thoughts on that. But when looking a little closer at the characters, it's not that simple.
If we agree that the green knight represents nature, he didn't need any magic to stay alive. It's in his "nature" to survive decapitation.
I'd say it's also a part of the movie's message. Gawain did not fully understand the nature of his challenge and thus acted without fully understanding/accepting the consequence of his action. Cheating his way around the consequence was an irresponsible approach to the task. It's dishonorable. The opposite of what he sought to attain on that quest.
Let's not forget, even if the green knight had used dishonorable means in that scenario, that would not mean Gawain would also be allowed to act dishonorably. As a knight at the round table, and even more so as a ruling king, he would be bound to act with honor at all times. At the very least according to the rules of King Arthur's round table.
@@Kijinn Sorry. A non lethal blow for a non lethal blow, is fair in any book. it's the nature of living things to do it's best to stay alive. That's respecting life. Choosing death is choosing cowardly escape.
@@Kijinn Dosent need magic? A man walking away from a beheading is magic, anyway you cut it.
@@gohlincoln2570
Honor has only little to do with fairness. Mostly, honor is defined by specific and strict codes, within a culture, order, or similar. Fairness can be a part of a code of honor, but isn't ingrained.
It has always been the specific crux of any honor system, that you need to uphold it, even when it isn't fair. That's one of the prime reasons why it's difficult to be honorable.
Death as a "cowardly escape", is commonly ascribed to suicide. Death for the sake of honor has only rarely been called "cowardly". There have been (and there still are) plenty of cultures that view death as preferable to dishonor. Japan is a prominent example.
People have been challenging each other to duels to the death, in defense of honor.
His attempt to touch her was not lack of honor, but a way to see if she was real.
Well it's still not a particularly kind thing to do to touch someone you not only just met, but slept in their bed. I imagine if I was a spirit, I'd not be too fond of people trying to stick their fingers in my face either
@@okaywhatsgoingon3774 Yeah, may be, but it is clearly not meant to showcase his dishonor, but just make sure that the women was not just a dream or illusion. After all, right before he attempted to touch her, she floated towards him. I mean, i would try to verify if a floating woman was real too
I dont know how this channel doesn't have more subscribers. Analysis is on point
The fact that the most unknightly deed he done is to behead a defenseless foe really sealed what tkind of a character he is from the begining.
On the contrary; it's the goes to the crux of chivalry's tradition; It's declared a game, the rules are quite clear; the expectations are quite clear. It's a test, a challenge accepted and a fulfilled.
okay so, two things about the video_
1) he did not abandon the child just the woman, his son died on the war.
2) there are after credits, there is a little girl playing around with the crown, then she puts it in her head, i think it's his daughter, i don't think he dies. let me know if anybody else saw that too.
As with many Arthurian tales, this one is a clear allegory about defining your own character. As in reality, some challenges are black/white in their resolution, some are grey. This is why moral life-rules and behaviours are key to survival and personal accomplishment. Mothers have a tormented and unenviable task of ensuring their children become functional and 'ideal' in the wild, real world, whilst fearing all calamities likely to harm their 'babies'. The father-figure is noticeably weak and absent in this tale and probably is a reflection on the attention and influence he has previously paid to his son. I feel that, despite the fundamental value of a woman's role in bringing-up a boy, mature males (not necessarily fathers) are best equipped to represent positive male ideals and to teach them.
Great analysis. There were so many important points I missed when I first watched the film.
Thanks Mark! Also, good to see you here, feel like it's been a while!
@@OneTakeVids Missed the channel. Looking forward to more awesome content. Can't wait to see some of the films and Series you review/analyze next
What a great take. I missed so many details. And you enlightened me.
Thanks for this! I actually enjoyed the movie, contrary to what my friends thought of it. Initially, I couldn't quite articulate why I liked it, obviously it was the captivating cinematography. But now I see that it's the character development of Gawain that truly resonated with me.
SUCH a Fantastic Movie!! So many themes visited upon. It is truly a great movie. The Obvious Religious themes... Arthur Representing Christianity... even looking like Jesus, the Green Knight seemingly Representing Paganism... nature spirits, especially when he goes on his journey... with the pantheon of different Pagan icons testing him... Seeing if he is truly honorable or merely Vain and egotistical. And that is truly what it is about..Being an Honorable and Noble person is to Live as an Honorable and Noble person.
They keep trying to convince him to let go of his Protection his mother gave him... As it would be an act of dishonor. He would return and live the rest of his life in shame, as he is living a lie. He would not be keeping his word.
This is A FANTASTIC film!!
I didn't notice the green knight face changes until you pointed it out.
Love these breakdown. Very deep and nuanced. Was wondering if you could do something similar for Devs, True Detective s1, Blade Runner 2049, 2001 A Space Odyssey.
Thank you Umair! I'll add these to the list of potential videos; those are all movies or shows that I loved and I think would lend themselves to this sort of analysis. Specifically, your mentioning 2001: A Space Odyssey re-triggered my Kubrick obsession so I think that's closer to the top of the list than the others! Might tackle THE SHINING first though, in the spirit of the Halloween season :)
@@OneTakeVids i support it bro
You made a wee mistake by claiming that Gawain leaves his woman and his newborn in the flash forward. He actually pays her and takes the child with him. You see the kid at his arranged wedding in the next scene. Then he watches that same son die on a battlefield.
Grrrr I need to hire an editor to catch these errors before I record 🤦♂️ haha. Thanks for the correction!
@@OneTakeVids No problem, my dude. Great breakdown beyond that!
Terrific analysis here, it has helped me understand more about the film and the important themes it raises.
Rather than see the film as an indictment against civilization, I see it as a more personal statement about how one chooses to live, whether with virtue or not. Meaning cannot be had with an un-virtuous life, and without meaning we are lost, empty vessels, damned to a soulless existence. One of my favorite lines in the film is when Gawain asks "is this all there is?" and the Green Knight replies "Should there be anything else?" -- it's a realization that, at essence, all we have is life and death, and there is no guarantee or natural right that we should live it in any particular way or for any length of time. Therefore, to live with virtue, or not, is a choice *we* make and one that Nature doesn't care about. Nature, or "Green", just *is*, it lives, it dies, it lives again. But *we* must choose to live with virtue if we are to avoid the tortuous fate of a life without meaning, the life seen by Gawain as he knelt before the Green Knight and contemplated his escape.
I don't see a war between Nature and civilization here because, as Lady Bertilak eloquently describes, Nature will always retake its domain. Human ambition is nothing in the face of the long, slow, indomitably persistent powers of Nature. Green will always triumph, therefore has no need to war with anything. It's us humans who are silly to think our ambitions get us anywhere and to think we could ever possibly dominate over Nature.
this film was so different from any film I ever watched... I enjoyed it.... I feel like as he knelt in front of the Green Knight he saw himself as a future and once he was allowed to leave he lived that life...
Well, a lot of people thinks that Gawain does not die in the end... ☠
What if we consider that this open ending allows us - as the hero himself - to shut down our expectations, desires and the voice of our ego, and accept peacefully these both ways, the life - as well as the dead - of the hero ?
Also, great analysis ! It made me understand a few things about this movie, and I love it even more by now. I would like to add that it is mostly about memento mori. The protagonist only changes when he is faced close to death, when the death consciousness put him in the most extreme state of crisis.
When the green knight says "now off with your head" I understood this like "go off where ever your ideas may take you, now that you have no fear to die", in consequence have no fear to fail.
Best analysis of this film I’ve seen.
Thank you 🙏
Spoiler for the move: Gawain didn't abandon his son. The child was purchased and raised as royalty, and you can see the baby being handed off to Merlin in the scene. That's the child that later dies in combat in the flash forward. Also, I think you are over simplifying the motivations of Gawain's mother, who seems to be a mix of the Morgan la Fey and Morgause characters. The tone of all of the mother's scenes is either unsettling or dark, which to me indicates a malevolent motivation. Taking into context the original source material, I always interpreted the mother's intentions as to undermine the rule of Camelot with a weak, self indulgent king that would ultimately result in the destruction of Arthur's legacy. Gawain refusing to use the green garter is a refutation of his mother's designs, and acts as a final redemption of a very flawed man.
Maybe I was also looking too much into the movie, but it seemed like when the lord was introduced his silhouette and voice had the appearance of the Green Knight, which I think might have been a nod to the original ending of the poem.
they made up the mother part of the story on the fly at set. u are over thinking this mother plot as director just swapped char on the day of shoot. he said it in an interview.
The dude decided to make gawains mum morgana le fey becaue it might get complicated. sorry. this film was over at green jizz rag.
@@carlchallinor4933 true.. i like how director even said the whole mother aspect of the plot of impulsive - on the spot decision and still people are trying to find some hidden meaning and plot behind it. except for great cinematography .. story telling and plot aspect of this movie is mediocre at best. main character's story arc is complete disappointment and so unrelatable or leven likable with no redemption. usually when a char fails in a story he needs to know why hes failing.. and as movie/plot progress he learns . in this movie he learned nothing along the way.. he didnt even know why he was failing. just some cheat code in the end to see his future and then he changes.. just like that. good redemption arc even in a slow paced setting done right is bladerunner 2049. unlikable char in the start and u grow to sympathize with him in the end.
@@MrVad3r @Carl Challinor wow both of your interpretations are so garbage it's actually impressive lmao. shit taste
no man, his mom was cool
I do believe its presented pretty clearly in most previous versions of this tale.
That the reason why the knights of the round table begin to wear green sashes after.
Is in honor of the acknoledgement that nobody is perfect, not even the legendary knights of the round table.
Everyone, even they and other admired heros can struggle with fear in the face of death or when their values and honor are tested.
But to hopefully, we learn from falure and come out a better person after, is what makes the greats great, humility with bettering imperfection.
Im pretty sure thats kinda what the point of the tale supposed to be. I kinda wish that was mentioned at the end. Great vid tho!
Great movie and breakdown by OneTake
I agree Morgana's goal was to teach Gawain Honor
Honor isn't slaying monsters, saving the princesses, or embarking on quests
Gawain achieves honor when he removes the belt but even if he had abandoned the quest and returned home in shame, he would still understand what honor is and that maybe he has none
A valuable lesson in itself
My only difference in opinion is that i believe the original poem does have the same meaning
the alternate life Gawain envisions for himself mirrors the original in that even though he returns and lives a successful life, he himself knows he is without honor having worn the belt in fear
Such a beautiful breakdown, really enjoyed it
I love when movies make you look at yourself and how you live your life. I think alot of us men want to be thought of as honorable, good men but alot of us misunderstand how to have true honor. "How can you be great if, you haven't reached common decency yet." "To be honorable, you must live honorably."
Great breakdown. I personally think the green girdle is cowardice. As long as he wears it, Gawain will flee dangerous outcomes and no harm will come to him.
This is why wearing the green girdle does not make him more confident, why he's able to enter the ghost pond after losing the girdle to the robbers, and why he's only able to welcome his death after removing it.
Many interesting observations and a few that met my own interpretations. You've a fine mind. I look forward to more encounters.
Gawain doesn't try to touch winnifred because of lust, he tries to touch her because he saw her float across the floor and wondered if she was real.
the whole part with winnifred was the worst part of the film for me, she was really annoying.
Pride don't lead any way love is the only way!
Nice.. Iike the analysis and evaluation.. Great job mate!
Thanks Cherry!
Don't agree with the whole interpretation, but I do very much appreciate the effort and care that went into making and supporting the argument. In the end it's subjective, but you made it compelling and interesting. Well done.
Love that you pronounce his name correctly.
I personally felt that when the Green Knight said "off with your head" he meant it to mean "off" as in "off with you" i.e. go along and take your head with you, if that makes sense to anyone...
LOL
@@ronrendon And that's an apt interpretation that would follow closely to the source material.
I was thinking the same thing and wanted to post this if you did not! LOL
He pointed to the exit and did seem to be letting him go.
Most assume it’s the Red Queen’s version of “off with his head” but this is the Green Knight after all, and that’s a whole different color. 😂
Great analysis of a great movie. Thank you for making this :)
*Jordan Peterson would love this film*
Although the setting of the film is ancient and medieval, its message is directly aimed at the modern world, and at the modern man. The message is that virtue and honor must be earned, that self-improvement is a long and arduous task, and that shortcuts to it are false and meaningless. I find a strange parallel between Gawain's quest and today's scourge of 'virtue signaling'. The majority of modern people do not care about virtue they just want to give off the appearance of virtue.
Bro this is so good ,thanx
Thanks man!
An absolute dull MESS of a film when you don't notice what this guy is talking about. Should be an accompanying watch. Great video!
Green brings with it a sense of hope, health, adventure, and renewal, as well as self-control, compassion, and harmony - the Knight was Green and Gawain cut off his head.
In the original poem Gawain is an honorable man who makes a mistake and learns that facing the consequences is not shameful. The new version tells a different story, a man-child who's words don't match his actions who has failed every test of honor presented to him, in the end he accepts his punishment even if it kills him.
Foxes are spiritual guides, not only in western legend, but Eastern as well, if you've played Ghost of Tsushima.
My friend disliked one part of this movie and i kind of agree; The Green knight TELLS everyone that whatever blow he lands he will receive back. Therefore no one, even a eager young yippee filled with adrenaline would strike his head off. Of course he wouldn't think the Green Knight was immortal, but come on. The dude is made of bark, there is clearly something magical about his ass. So my friend said that was unbelievable. I hate watching movies with him around tbh.
I kind of agree, it’s one of those moments that works better in a poem haha. But, when you translate it to the screen, especially in the grounded way Lowery approached the film, it comes off as so foolish it’s almost (or maybe is) a little too much.
@@OneTakeVids Other than that, amazing movie.
I wouldn't have said that during the movie, but that's a fair point I noticed too. It's like, "Did this talking tree man with an axe that grows plants on solid stone just say however he gets struck, he'll strike back?" I would've invited him to dine with us and expect dinner next year with a hearty, friendly slap on his back of friendship. I don't want noooo smoke with the mystical world.
I think in the original story the green knight is just called the green night and they never really give him anything else, I think he was originally human.
@@tylerthejetsuarez8902 he was basically described as looking human but entirely green. Though I think it was meant to be interpreted that the knights knew that he was “otherworldly” (because of his green appearance).
Never seen this movie but hearing this story makes me think of the D&D dragonlance novel, The Oath and the Measure, a prelude to the original Dragonlance trilogy, featuring the character Sturm Brightblade.
Yep, just looked it up. Both stories are based on the same story from folklore.
it's about the laws of reaction
only do on to others what you would be done on to you, thats what i got from the story.
Even on a purely visual level, this film was NEXT LEVEL. Plenty of lawyers to this Onion. EDIT: OGRE ARE LIKE ONIONS, THEY ALL HAVE LAYWERS!
Lawyers... lol, that is such a glorious, hilarious typo! XD
@@SatyaVenugopal GRAMMER LAWYER!!!!
Layers you meant lol
Awesome analysis! Loved this movie and even more now ❤
Norm Macdonald hated ambiguous endings too. He said he didn't want to have to think about it himself. He said it's like saying he wants to get a new car, and then goes to Detroit to help with the welding.
the old woman with blindfold maybe taken as 'virtue' or conscience possibly. this is mentioned by the lady at her talk. the blindfold suggests something like conscience to me. she also wears white. when the lady gives him the new sash or he tries to take it from her out of fear for his life, in the end the blindfolded woman is immediately noticed, and Gawain's response is shame, shock and guilt. The blindfold has another aspect that gawain and the two others does not seem to see her, or notice her at first, even though she's sitting right there at the table - just as maybe some aspect of the situation itself is either not seen, or should be seen, or should not be looked at, or difficult to see.
I thought the fox may be sent by her mother. but there is also a interpretation that the fox may be a part of Gawain himself. First seen at the battlefield, and then also after he retrieves the skull from the pool. The fox comes to him at the cave, helps with the giant, and shows way to the castle. He in the end warns him to turn back and accept his shame, and discard the sash. The paintings at the castle also show first a fox being hunted, then its Gawain himself in that place running in opposite direction. I don't know exactly what, but maybe his ego, his sense of survival, his honour, his cunning, his courage, a reflection of himself. I don't know exactly.
Since the green knight gives a more gentle smile after saying well done, after stopping the axe blow, I'm inclined to feel the knight let him go here in this version also. That's the proper way to end it, for me. Guess its directors choice to leave it that ambiguous. But that choice still makes sense in this version as much as in the poem, technically even more than it does in the poem, considering Gawain does the right thing here, while he does not in the poem.
Great analysis of the movie. Thank you!
Literally riding on the shoulders of giants seems a little on-the-nose for this kind of story telling. Really enjoyed the breakdown!
Trying to be something you want to be when you know you're not that thing, be yourself, don't impress other's, impress yourself, your people will find you.
Another reading is that 'free your head' could also allude to the greenknight freeing him/us of the shame and guilt of living a less honerable life by showing him/us how to redeem himself and then letting him have that option - since we do not see the final blow.
wow, great review! well done! I personally look at this move in a much more positive light after watching this.
This movie was the low T version of Sword of the Valiant.
At the end when the G.Knight says off with your head. I interpreted it as the G. Knight allowing Gawain to leave with his head on. In other words, off you know with with your head.
Gawain failed the challenge from the beginning, as the Green Knight explicitly stated his opponent could strike any form of blow they choose - to kill or slightly maim. Gawain accepts as an opportunity to display ultimate victory even though it was unnecessary. The honorable thing to do under the circumstances would be to mock strike the knight in a show of restraint and respect and leave him unscathed. The knight posed no threat to Gawain or anyone and so deserved no harm upon him.