lloyd150 A great premise let's do a show on the final years of the Knights Templar. Not been done in mainstream tv yet. Good true story with plenty intrigue, plotting and murders. But wait why research an interesting historical story., when we can do drama by numbers. Let's even make it politically relevant for today, and forget the characters live with very different morals than today. Grand Master sworn to chastiy does not work as we need a love interest. French married Queen would be great. Also let's do a murder mystery in medieval times.Why, why , why? Go with the original idea and take a risk. Do not bother with this rubbish and read a book about it.

Kristofor The Vikings TV Show is probably one of my all time favourites. The History Channel did a great job with it. When I heard they were making a Knights Templar themed series, I eagerly anticipated its release. By the time I'd gotten up to date with Vikings and read some of the reviews about the Knightfall program, my expectations plummeted. Even still, I thought I'd check it out for myself. It couldn't be that bad could it?It could and worse.Surely, a series produced by the History Channel would seek to educate as well as entertain. I'm shocked that the History Channel would put their name on this show? It's so historically flawed it just needs a dragon or two... So okay, the History side out the window, that's fine, perhaps it's an engaging story, well produced, an entertaining adventure? It's not. At all. I've never struggled so hard to get through a series. The story, the acting, the music, the plot, the writing, the production, the characters - just awful. Every episode made me cringe. Strap yourself in for teenage angst, swooning romance, jaw busting love affairs, back-flipping ninja warrior heroics against all odds, inexplicable irrational behaviour, temper tantrums, cliché dramatic music, lots of roaring, the world's worst one liners, magic, predictable plot twists, politically correct alliances, dry gooey filler scenes in an already boring plot and emotional outbursts. It's going to rock your world. It watches like a low budget, rushed, hap-hazard, low effort train wreck of a show. I just cannot believe it's endorsed by the History Channel. The last two episodes were the most entertaining, but still ultimately ridiculous. I don't know what this show is trying to be or trying to do. Surely it can't continue beyond another season or so.

Lammasuswatch Like many other reviewers here, I was looking forward to this series after seeing the trailers. The story of the Templars and especially of their downfall through the greed and intrigue of French King Philip IV has long fascinated me. And I was at first intrigued at the suggestion that the Holy Grail was going to play a part. But even in the 1st episode warning bells were clanging for me, when we find out senior Templar Landry is having an affaire with the French Queen. The French Queen?! And of course, Landry just happens to be King Philip's best bud. Now knowing that in historical reality Phillipe Le Bel (Philip the Fair) was the French King who persecuted the Templars with a series of outrageous accusations, just so he could steal all their vast wealth for himself, I could already guess from that 1st episode that this cheap, unnecessary and historically ridiculous contrivance is going to be the main excuse for the King to turn on the Templars some time down the track. As if he needed this? Instead of the quite simple fact that Philip the Fair was anything but, and one of the most greedy and soulless Kings of France in a line of greedy and soulless Kings of France. Was this going to be the laziest of writing?But I've stayed with the series to see how it developed despite the ever stranger plot developments, often embarrassingly cornball dialogue, and the increasingly comic depiction of major bad guy Councillor de Nogaret. Now the historical Nogaret was an exceedingly unprincipled schemer and villain, but in this he's like a medieval Bond villain, at the centre of every intrigue. I'm half expecting him to turn up with a top hat, twirling his moustache and saying, "Nyah-ha-ha".And with writing like this there are few real surprises. I don't think any plot point has happened that wasn't telegraphed beforehand (with some so obvious it was almost insulting).And the writers have almost no characters behave in ways real people would behave - with the Queen and Landry especially unconvincing. By Episode 5, when Landry has just found out the Queen is pregnant with his child, and that she has dealt with the situation so her pregnancy will not fall under suspicion, this by now Master of the Paris Temple acts like a sullen teenager who watches too many American sitcoms and pleads with her that they could "leave Paris and go somewhere". Groan!It was Episode 5 where I thought, I really can't see myself wasting too much more time on this. One more episode perhaps, but if it's as hokey as it has been, I can't see myself lasting out the ten episodes. Much less waiting for the stake burnings and so on down the track.I did in fact persist to the last episode of Series 1. Some of the episodes from 6 through to 8 were an improvement, where you could actually believe some of what was happening, with some developments quite intriguing. But penultimate Episode 9 took a turn for the worse.And the last episode of the series.... Well, here's this guy Landry who's been made the Master of the Paris Temple, because he's so respected by his brother Templars. And yet, for most of the series and especially in the last 3 episodes or so, every decision he makes is tactically so ludicrous - or simply so selfish - that any loyalty any of his brother Templars could have shown him, or at least kept showing him, is so unbelievable as to be laughable.And while we're on the topic of tactics, what sort of an idiot would put all his soldiers in the middle of a clearing surrounded by woods when you know an army's about to attack you? And all packed tightly together in a circle? Apparently no-one writing or directing this series has heard of archers and bows and arrows or crossbows, all of which would have been devastating when presented with such an invitingly exposed target.And then when Grand Master Jacques de Molay decides to ride to the rescue after all, and stages a cavalry charge with his armoured knights, which initially cuts swathes through the enemy, what does he do next? That's right! They all dismount and give up their huge tactical advantage to fight on foot! And at the end, they've only lost about 30 Templars? Amazing!If there is a Series 2, I certainly won't be watching.I reckon you'd get a lot more out of reading the comic.

tiger86-2 This show is pretty much what you expect when two writers with no previous experience in the genre try their luck. One of the creators of "Knightfall", Richard Rayner, has only one writing credit to his name - a romantic comedy that came out nearly 20 years ago. Don Handfield, the other one, has a career consisting of mediocre garbage, the highlight being 'Touchback' - a movie about American football. None of them has, as far as I'm aware, any previous experience in writing historical dramas - and, sadly, it shows. The story is badly plotted and the dialogue is just awful - and it sounds way too contemporary for my taste. The acting is serviceable, although limited by the writing. The production values are great and the fight choreography is excellent, which is why I was willing to give the show a chance. Alas, although my expectations were low, it didn't live up to them. I'm not going to write a detailed review, I'll just say it like this - "Knightfall" is about as historical as BBC's "The Musketeers", but without the humor. While "The Musketeers" is just funny, "Knightfall" is trying to be serious. While "The Musketeers" is not even pretending it is historically accurate, "Knightfall" tries to look authentic - and succeeds, but the writing fails it, because, as I said, the plot is awful and the dialogue sounds as if it was written by the writers behind a romantic comedy and an American football themed fantasy. Sorry.