A Look at Queerness in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight 

You have read "Deor"?

Unicorn hunters

Ohh mann

Same lmao

Yeah, they have THE VIBES.

“Sir Gawain and the Green Unicorn”? 🤔🤭

They’re Pegasi hunters, for sure, and Gawain is their Pegasus. It is known.

LMAOOO I WAS JOKING ABOUT THIS WITH MY FRIENDS WHEN I SAW IT

I felt really uncomfy watching that whole sequence, because they seemed so predatory to me. Like Gawain was being hunted, not hosted.

Sir Gawain is quite obviously a poem of the second category. Unless the Gawain Poet had found a way to project his homosexual desires upon the world, which I find unlikely. Nevertheless, it is an acceptable interpretation, unless....you criticize it for removing the supposed representation, AND the the work is not a straight retelling, no pun intended, but an adaptation. In the original, Gawain passes all the knightly tests, including the possibly gay stuff, and flunks the exam. In the movie, Gawain flunks all the tests, including the possibly gay stuff, and passes the exam. It's a subversion. Also, I think if the movie had focussed on the 'gay stuff' more, it would have kept viewers wondering wtf they just saw, as this is not the 13th Century, and not focussed on the scenes at the Chapel, which is what David Lowery wants us to focus on, and the whole point of the film. If at the end, you are still wondering what the kisses were about, and why the Green Knight is actually the Lord in disguise, then the movie hasn't done its job. The movie, as it was told, was a much more effective retelling than it would have been had it kept all the gay stuff in it. IMO, of course.

Thinks of Supernatural creating the perfect Disaster-Bi Male Representation (Dean) by mistake. Lol.

There is NOTHING "queer" in the poem AT ALL. Only someone ignorant of the culture of the author at that time and place, and erroneously looking reading with their own modern eyes and bias could think so...making it a reflection of the reader instead of what the author intended.

@@eddesa5134 see item 2. my point isn't that this narrative is queer, it's that queer people are drawn to this narrative, and therefore it can be called representation. that's all. i didn't say anything about how it was intended or would have been read at the time. death of the author, ya know?

@@d.lan3y That's such a daft comment. It's like a person claiming that wheat farms are representative of alcoholics because some misguided alcohols "feel" that all the wheat is going to be brewed into beer! Even if the farmer tells you the fact all his wheat is being sold to be ground into flour used to make bread someone still argues no the farm its about alcoholics because some alcoholics "feel" its their representation. Can you see how daft that line of argumentation is, ya know? There is NOTHING in that poem written by a Catholic Monk or Lord to be read by Catholics to promote Catholic values of honesty, humility, virginity, purity, respect for marriage, courage, keeping ones word/promises that is homoerotic. The French, Spanish and Italians had better be careful not to greet any homosexuals who think this film is representative of them as they will be making MeToo style claims of sexual harassment with greetings in those countries are as ordinary as handshakes to Americans!

so quirky and funny ahahahaha lolololol

@@mor4439 wow you're so quirky

kissing hasn't been sexualised for all of history and in every part of the world as much as it clearly has been in your culture.

True 😭

@@helvete_ingres4717 true. In my province, tv hosts would often kiss their guests on the mouth when greeting them up until like the 70s. We have a show replaying old clips from back then and it’s super creepy to us, but being the third lady to kiss your fave on national tv before turning a lucky wheel for a big price was just a common occurence at the time.

Forget the shirt! I strive to live by this phrase!

Only if it's a suitably green T-shirt.

Does he.... y'know... sleep in?

No, they would be, 'why are you as an adult man sleeping in.' Those who had not reached majority had no need to live up to masculine ideals. This is why Gawain is allowed such leeway because it also reads as youth.

Fellas, is it gay to get enough sleep?

this is it! the funniest reply to this video 😂😭

@@margaretcummings4146 yes, because you like sleeping and the same gender also like sleep which means youre gay

I just said to myself how hot that armor looks right before that, lol

Me: "Damn, that confidence is hot too."

same

SAME LOL

Different kind of gay but SAME

I completely agree. And the way she shamed him afterwards too. 😬 I was very uncomfortable in the theater at that part.

I felt that way to in the theater I closed my eyes she kept grabbing him and I felt like he was uncomfortable and on the fence about it

I just watched the movie the other day and YES! That scene was so uncomfortable he was 100% coerced

Saw the movie yesterday. I don't know how anyone kind find that scene 'sexy'. The scene is specifically done in creepy way from the score to Sir Gawain begging her not to have sex with her. I think what people where laughing at was probably 'cum rag' bit at the end. Its usual to see the consequence of sex in film (probably because its quite ew) . So people where probably taken aback and unsure how to react and probably thought it was supposed to funny.

Yes definitely, it made me super uncomfortable

Love where your head's at. I haven't even seen this movie yet but now I want to.

@@throughthedin I haven’t seen the film either, I was talking solely about the original story

@@v.v365 was fae magic mentioned in the poem?? I don't remember that

@@Otra_Chica_de_Internet well the Green Knight is usually thought to be a folklore figure called the Green Man, he’s thought to be one of the fae

See I thought the blind woman was the mother and the wife may never had existed it was an implant by the mother to observe her son through these dolls while the lord was the green night and real.

wtf 😭 even tho that's like super wrong... I wouldn't mind that 😏

LOL I'd read that manga

That sounds less like a hetero/homosexual conflict and a more like a possession/incestual thing.

Can’t tell whether that’s a threat of sexual assault, or a warning not to commit abuse that accidentally sounds exactly like a threat of sexual assault

@@voidify3 It's generally a warning that they consider their daughter to be their property so any attempts to interact with her at all will be met with violence, #nohomo These dudes do not care about physical abuse except in the sense of "you touched MY property??? Only I'M allowed to beat my family!!!"

Yeah I don't really understand why everyone gets hung up on the kiss when he's running away from being sexually assaulted

He accepted the kiss as a representation of getting off with the lady, but he got uncomfortable by the lords attempt o eek out what else he was owed, specifically the sash.

I agree! I've seen other people point this out too but to me the movie in many ways is a subvesion of the original story while still honoring the original message. So in the story Gawain is basically perfect and acts honorably in every instance except the last one where he gives in to fear. In the film he instead basically fails every challenge set before him due, like you said, to traits associated with toxic masculinity, but learns from each of them and in the end then chooses to be brave and do the honorable thing in honoring their original deal by removing the green belt (the opposite of the original story in which not removing the green girdle is his only act of dishonor). The movie is in this way a mirror to the original story but the end message of Gawain learning that acting with honesty is the morally correct choice stayes the same. In this way because its disnhonest not kissing the Lord is framed as a moral failing on Gawains part in the film, like not acting gay enough is portrayed as a negative thing in this movie! That's not something I think I've ever seen in a mainstream movie before and I have a hard time seeing it as queer erasure, personally. Also I don't interpret the kiss as unrequited, I very much saw it as Gawain leaning into it but running away due to fear over accepting that part of himself. But that's just my interpretation.

Well I felt that because the man and woman are supposed to be so mirrored that the reaction was not equal. Especially considering "what she did for him" being close to some kind of sexual assault even if he longed for that kind of contact with her. So when he responded with such a different tone to the man I was suprised. Maybe it is just how gentle and playful this "game" is still met with this kind of rejection and anger when in the source materal it remains playful. It feels like some kind of fear or spite added in by a hetarosexual mindset. Not that there is anything wrong with a hetarosexual man making movies that reflext his hetarosexual feelings and confusions. Particularly the fears around submitting to other men in any way sexual or not (his rejection and confusion at his offerings and help) and also the fears around the results of hetarosexual sex and its social meanings. The rant about green and birth and the dream/future sequence where he has the child with his love but because of hetarosexualitys role in society abandons her for a princess of another kingdom. This retelling is very much about biopower and biological conection, as aurthor says at the start that he feels more conected to him beucase he was birthed by his sister. Sorry if you have to read a little around the errors, I am a little sick tonight and dyslexic enough already. I hope this does not come off as arugmentative but conversational. I may return to the comment to edit it a bit but these are just some of my thoughts.

@@k8g8s8 don't worry, I understand what you mean! I thought the vision he had of his future life was to show how hollow and loveless it would have been if he returned having bested the green knight, and he realized that he could only run so far from his true fate... which I also thought was fitting with a queer lens. But, when I think back on the original text, I don't know that to be the intention of the writers and directors of the film.

Yeah he is taken aback because The Lord takes what Gawain taken from the house, a kiss from the lady. It shows Lord knows what he did.

I agree. I thought the kiss itself didn’t look very forced, but what the kiss meant was what freaked Gawain out. That the lord knew what Gawain had done while in his home.

very late but i just saw the movie and i thought so too. i just saw it as him being spooked by the fact that the lord knew what he'd been up to, not disgusted by the kiss at all

I love this!

It's weird because I interpreted gawain's kiss with bertilak as the only time in the movie he was truly turned on (during a sensual scene with a partner, anyway. he was super turned on by that green knight), and the disgust he showed was towards himself. The kiss made him confused about his sexuality and what that meant to his masculinity, especially after being humiliated over and over again throughout the movie until that point. The sex he'd been having with the prostitute was a way for him to prove his masculinity to himself and others; a performance. He'd never felt anything when he was with a woman, so he was extremely confused at the surge of attraction he felt with that kiss, then dismayed and disgusted when he felt like he'd been humiliated again (by "being made the woman").

@@boobysr that's a fair interpretation! I personally felt like it was a negative scene given how he runs away and that Bertilak kisses him not the other way around. Also given what I've read of the director's intentions, Gawain is attracted to and distracted by women, hence why the lady and the prostitute are the same actress. But the director's intentions only matter so much. It still comes off as overall ugly and uncomfortable to me personally because it was the only scene with Gawain and a man like it and it wasn't Gawain's choice.

@@boobysr This was my same take away as well

haven't seen the film yet but that summary gives me huge "atheist but raised catholic because THE GUILT NEVER LEAVES YOU" vibes for the director/screenwriter this post was made by atheist but raised catholic because THE GUILT NEVER LEAVES YOU gang

Idk, I feel like the point of the movie was to make an unlikable and and by no means honorable character. He's always running from himself and from everyone, so I feel like is the same with his sexuality, he denies it or treats it poorly. It feels like it's meant to be a warning for everyone who denies him/herself. I gotta be honest, I'm not a huge fan of this movie, but I still think that the character doing pretty questionable was intentional, and at the very least I think is interesting and it would be unfair to not pointing it out

Did you actually watch the video or

I do not quite understand how this is meant as a reply to the video? the queer themes can exist and be important but still also contain this meaning. Especially with the medieval society as explained within the video. The kisses were also about chivalric virtues. He had to be honest about what he had taken, and he did not go further then the kiss. Thus his virtue was intact, staying true to his morals (or love at home) even if this couple was both beautiful and very giving to him. Him running away from the deal they made was perhaps foreshadowing for him running again from the green knight. Giving him a kiss and giving him the sash were both a part of the game that he had to honor because they are magical beings. When he was honest he would live.

Yes, but in making the movie solely about cowardice, the director leaves a great deal of dense and interesting context on the table. Warning: Spoilers ahead. Cowardice, in the context of Sir Gawain, is the counterpoint to his Virtue. His knighthood demands bravery, and yet his mortality demands caution. The point of the test is (from one reading at least) that he gets so caught up protecting his virtue by denying sexual advances that he leaves himself vulnerable to the dishonor of fearing for his own life over his chivalric duty. In the film, Gawain's fear for his own life is established pretty much from the moment he chops off the Green Knight's head. This was certainly an opportunity to explore Courage as a driving theme, and it could have worked, except that the total inversion of the ending (he gives up the girdle, and therefore dies) leaves this exploration unsatisfying - the ending moral seems to be "Tell the truth and suffer the consequences of your action" without much of an exploration of why that's important. We do get the hallucination of his future, but this serves more as a counter-point to Gawain's final act of courage. His vision is saying that he'll suffer the consequences anyway, just down the line a bit after his cowardly life has had a chance to hollow him out. It isn't an act of courage in the end, but the acceptance of the futility of cowardice. As with much of the story in the film, Gawain remains a passive subject of the events, even in his own act of courage. And this almost works. That's the part I find most frustrating about the movie - it's as if the filmmaker almost had a workable inversion of the text, but fumbles the execution and ends up contradicting his own themes (possibly because it was more about subverting the text than critiquing it). And unlike in the original tale, you can't say Gawain was conflicted or too focused on the sins of the flesh to avoid the sins of the heart. Movie Gawain's just a pretty worthless guy who desperately wants to be worthy, but ultimately can't be (seriously, his cowardice in meeting the Green Knight's ax stroke is so exaggerated that it started to get irritating - not because it was cowardice, but because he just kept flinching and asking the Knight to wait - it robs the scene of its dramatic tension). And so his act of honesty in the end seems to be saying that the wages of virtue is death? All in all a beautiful mess of a movie. Gorgeous, filled with visual and religious complexity, and utterly unsure of what its trying to be.

@@k8g8s8 I was just reacting to the part where Kaz says that the movie made it a story about courage while the poem was about honesty. In the poem Gawain did his best to keep his promise to Bertilak but broke it in the end, because he would have had to give up the girdle he thought could save his life. Because his courage faltered, so did his honesty. It's like the idea that the chivalric virtues are a whole and that if one of them fails, the others fail as well. None of which takes anything away from the queerness of the story of course.

@@k8g8s8 Thank you! The kisses were all about chivalric virtues and chivalric romance. When they decided to turn it into some weird non-con shit--they kinda threw it all away. Which is ironic considering one of the insanely hard to read headers said something about chivalric romance. I cant haha.

"Thank you, ma'am, but I'm not interested in hot stuff with you ... I'll take that kiss, though, to return it to your husband later..."

Yes

and that tapestry is insane

"It's only a model." "Shhh!" _MPatHG_ dialog aside, i also loved the puppet theatre

i loved seeing tom bombadil in camelot :D

Catch me sleeping like the gay virgin I am

It felt like it was a last minute decision. That we will have a cut with an alternative ending. Or that they filmed a much longer ending and the runtime was already going crazy, and rather trim earlier scenes (which omg they really could have used), they decided to go with a Nolan-type ending. Which isn't very Arthurian. They liked their celebratory feasts and gifts. I keep telling everyone (i'm in film school) there is a good movie in this movie--but it is hidden in the bloat.

I feel like it was open ended, obviously in the original poem, he doesn’t die but the movie strays pretty far from the poem. it’s almost like they let the audience decide whether or not he survives.

@@lolitabubbles26 I read in an interview that they did film a scene where Patel gets his head chopped off in the Green Chapel, but they wanted the ending to be more hopeful about his death, and felt people leaving the theatre seeing that would walk away with the wrong emotion. For what it's worth, when our theatre got to the end we burst into incredulous laughter so like... I guess it was an emotion

I felt like the "off with your head" at the end was almost facetious/open ended.

I disagree. It ending was very obvious and simple. If someone was confuse, it wasn't the movie's fault, but the audience. A great happy ending without being disgustingly whimsical and happy.

can someone make catholic merch of a creampie tag

I am totally cool with the retelling of Arthurian Tales especially. There are about 3-4 historical retellings of the story itself. I don't like the non-con kiss, though. That's where I draw a line. There is a good movie hidden within the bloat of the theatrical cut, though. And it was beautiful.

@@lolitabubbles26 I don't know, I read the kiss as being reciprocated even though he wasn't given explicit consent. The lady on the other hand, did get verbal concent, and yet definitely also sexuality assaulted him.

loose retellings are wonderful, but yet i feel like this one was a play at appeasing the crowds as well. we live in a society that often times, especially in the states, still rejects large portrayals of homosexuality. this movie’s title would possibly attract a demographic that doesn’t support the lgbtq+ community that in large haven’t read this story. they’re simply showing up because it looks like a cool medieval movie. in turn i feel as if the director completely flipped the homo-erotic undertones to avoid conflict with the crowds. personally i feel that this story is very deep rooted in queer culture and to ignore the blatantly obvious context of the story is like a slap in the face to queer audience members looking forward to that aspect.

But then bitch about cultural appropriation on Twitter.... Fuck off and respect tradition.

PLOT TWIST PEOPLE IN THE MIDDLE AGES DEPICTED SEX GRAPHICALLY. My favorite discovery about the Middle Ages (in Western Europe at least, I haven't studied many other places) is that they were really frank about sex, including many of our surviving female authors. Penises on trees, vaginas on pilgrim badges, a poem in ode to the vagina (by Gwerful Mechain, if you're curious)... My dude, if you want to read some wild Holy Spirit/Reader fanfic may I recommend the Bridal Mysticism movement because holy shit it's a trip. (Holy Spirit/Reader fanfic isn't a fully accurate description but mystics like Hildegard of Bingen, Mechtild of Magdeburg, and Hadewijch used eroticism to talk about God, and theology to talk about eroticism. Hildegard of Bingen for example depicted a vulva-shaped map of the universe. She also may have been the earliest recorded author to describe a female orgasm.) Obviously medieval sexuality and queerness is a complicated topic but I find that even cultures with very harshly-enforced rules about sexuality (i.e. the Victorian era) have lots of places people talk about and explore it, against the rules or not. What's funny to me about the Middle Ages is that respectable, pious _women_ (including literal nuns) could talk about sex with greater explicitness than we in the present day might feel comfortable with. (Bearing in mind I'm a mildly sex-repulsed ace so I might not have an average comfort level with sex, if that exists) Idk I just think it's really funny and absurd that we have all this respectable smut from the Middle Ages but it still gets remembered as couched in euphemism, which, it was in some ways, but definitely not all the time.

This comment is so underrated, I love it!

EXACTLY!!! this is just how i feel

This! I agree completely. I think this is meant to be a very modern story told via the framework of the original story. The themes of being a young adult and being aimless and at times cowardly along with the desire to have glory without fully earning it and wasting one's potential really spoke to me.

Totally agree, I got the same message from the film, and honestly really enjoyed it. I think this version is very clearly not actually a “retelling” but a deconstructed response to the original story. Like. Gawain kind of sucks in this. He is just 100% on the run from everything the entire time. Hell, he basically has to be forced to even go uphold his half of the Christmas Game by like... three people. And the whole vision sequence is just showing what an empty, unhappy, and fear-filled life he would have if he just continues to run from everything - responsibility, commitment, compassion, generosity. Everything he does in this version, he is forced to do, he has to be dragged kicking and screaming into doing the right thing: before he helps retrieve that ghost’s head, he asks what he’ll get out of it; he’s ready to ride away from the boy who gives him directions without any thanks or reward at all. This is why the sex scene and the kiss are they way they are in this version imo. The queer undertones of the original just ended up being rather unfortunate in the new context of the story the film was trying to tell. This isn’t a telling of “Sir Gawain and the Green Knight” so much as it is a deconstruction of the expectations and idealization of heroes, and the meaning of honor. It’s a lot more meta than I think most people were expecting from the marketing of the movie, and I think whether someone enjoys this version relies a lot upon their willingness to think about stories in that sort of way and their expectations coming into the theater.

@@amypatterson7395 Yes, yes, exactly! And that reading is further supported by the parallel portrait painting scenes, with the first portrait of Gawain being an idealization of a "perfect knight", while the second one being the Lady deconstructing that image and showing him how he really is, using camera obscura. There's a lot of meta-dialogue about stories in the movie, too. And in that context, the kiss looks like the Lord is showing Gawain a possibility of a better way ("See? You could have been honorable"). So I didn't see it at all as predatory; Gawain was surprised, true, but to me, it read more as "stunned" than "grossed out". And then, again, he run from the responsibility. So the choice that Lowery made - to have Gawain doing the first brave thing in his life and ACTUALLY losing his head over it - was very ironic imo, but I loved it in a twisted way. Incidentally, it was Tolkien himself who said in his lecture on Sir Gawain and The Green Knight that the story builds up to Gawain's death, and the 'deus ex machina' ending doesn't fit (he specifically said that the happy ending is a possible Christian influence, while in the old pagan version of the tale, Gawain would have died). I feel like the movie's retelling really leans into that interpretation.

Yeah, I agree. I think the sashes represent "motherly protection" that stops him from from growing up.

Exactly. I was excited about this movie (i mean, have you SEEN Dev Patel??) but the straightwashing ruined it for me.

If you can't see what's iconic about the changes made in the adaptation from the original than I think you failed to understand the original poem. Gawain in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight was constructed to be a representation of what not to be... Gawain was not chivilarous. He was not knightly. He was a mockery. From beginning to end. He wears the green sash and conforms into the Arthurian patriarchy. In the film, Gawain tosses it aside. He would rather have his head cut off than become what his mother and Arthur want him to be. He doesn't play their game. it's subtle but it's very beautiful.

@@GoatHouseCreative Or how about there are multiple possible interpretations of both the film and the extremely old original text and you can offer yours without being pretentious or condescending about it 🤗

Why, because he kissed bertilak a few times?

@@GoatHouseCreative no, he throws away the sash to become the man his mother and Arthur wished him to be. His mother summoned and organized the green knight game.

"And now, be off, with your head."

Same I didn’t know people thought he died til this video. I thought the knight was being cute and telling him he could go w/ his head

Yes if we all just subscribed to the school of sex kink reductionism and wishful thinking with no evidence things would be so much better.

You remember a King of Aragon. Because you were there. No one would deny homosexuality and eroticism have always existed. But in this poem? There is none.

Just cause you read LGBTQ crap into everything doesn't mean it's actually there...

That's a comment about his horsemanship not sexuality! Knights steer horses with their thighs and loins as they have to use their hands for shield and weapons.

​@@eddesa5134 ^

This might be true in other contexts, but consider that the kisses Gawain gives Lord Bertilak are not merely court ritual but a replication of the explicitly erotic kisses that Lady Bertilak gives Gawain.

For neophytes in medieval history/gesture who just haven't taken this into account, or who just don't know this .... I thought she made a good case for ''homoeroticism'' in this era. Which did not exclusively mean that the men were gay but she did mention this very fleetingly. So, i'm willing to explore the theme of queerness in this particular instance because of the matched intensity of the kisses Sire Gauvain was supposed to give 'The Lord., even though i'm not entirely convinced by her argumentation. But good job nonetheless.

For neophytes in medieval history/gesture who just haven't taken this into account, or who just don't know this .... I thought she made a good case for ''homoeroticism'' in this era. Which did not exclusively mean that the men were gay but she did mention this very fleetingly. So, i'm willing to explore the theme of queerness in this particular instance because of the matched intensity of the kisses Sire Gauvain was supposed to give 'The Lord., even though i'm not entirely convinced by her argumentation. But good job nonetheless.

@@drzennAvian not sure if by "She" you mean me, but as you and @Patrick Davies Jones stated I understand that, since the kissing was an explicit mimick of a kiss between a man and a woman, the theme of queerness can and should be taken into account. However I'd like to propose another interpretration, that doesn't necesserely esclude the One presented in the essay, and that Is that often in chivarly romances even the kisses between a man and a woman have a ritual undertone. Let's take for example the kiss between Lancelot and Guinevre in the Lancelot en Prose, where the kiss on the lips during the meeting with Galheout is explicitly considered the start of the "service d'amour", no different than Lancelot's first knighting. My point is: kisses on the lips where no big deal, ppl from the middleages made out all the time, and their culture was far more ""promiscous"" and fluid than what we Imagine (Just think about Merlin and their "sex changes" all through Artrurian myths).

I figured just as much, considering men kissing both sides of cheeks as greetings is a thing in Italy and France id assume such practices with variations across medieval Europe would bare some similarity to the on discussed in the green knight

Happy Birthday!

I wrote a very legnthy reply and my computer decided to delete it. but I still want to say something.

I am a little sick and dyslexic so please try to read around the errors haha. I agree that both scenes have sexual tension within them but I felt they did not mirror eachother well enough to give the gay kiss enough weight. The origional had the benifit of many kisses that this film did not show and a confusing lack of gift giving that could have started earlier in their interaction. (the book and portrait for instance) Over all what gave me a sick feeling was the way he did not seem as genuinly fearful of the woman when she had esencially sexually assaulted him. The reaction to the wife and husband was different. Furthur upsetting me was that the homoerotism and hetaroerotisim are not equal within the movie. There is plenty of time given to look at him and the women he is with but there is no sexual gaze at the men of the film even the ones the poem seems so fixated on. (who end up being the same man)

Right. I didn't get that he was having a gay panic moment, but that he has issues with commitment and intimacy. He has to give himself to the Green Knight completely. He wasn't able to give himself to his girlfriend, he couldn't give himself to Lord or Lady Bertilak, even in the flash forward he realized if he ran away he would never be able to give himself to anyone or any role. He had to be willing to give himself to the Green Knight fully to acknowledge and overcome his intimacy issues.

@@iamthewatergod I also did not get a gay panic vibe from the film. Though I do wish the queerness was more closely aligned to the source.

Jesus LGBTQ are ruining stories...

It came out a month ago and only recently became available through streaming :)

It is not the only movie about it. Back in the eighties, there was another one (produced for TV) with Sean Connery as the Green Knight.

Completely agree with you! No matter how many times I watch the kiss scene I just don't see any disgust from Gaiwan at all. While feeling a little predatory with the lord being above him on his horse it also felt like the most real and tender moment of attraction in this whole movie.

Also, I love that armor of yours too! :)

I feel like is she was meant to be early 20s like 24

:O *Drops water lilies*