Talk:Black Knight (film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comedy Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Stub	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing credit

Shouldn't a writing credit be given to Mark Twain--this film is obviously a blatant rip-off of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. It angers me that so many sites fail to give him credit for this hack of a movie.

It also seem to have many similarities to Army of Darkness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.52.226.90 (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the writers watched the 1954 Danny Kaye comedy "The Court Jester" too, because there are plot devices and elements borrowed from this movie, for example mistaking the bungling clown main character for an assassin. Its all be done before, seems plagiarism is the profitable crime that's never punished. Just because a movie/story is an old one doesn't give you the rights to steal it with out credit. Of course the reason credit is never given is because then you have to share the profit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.40.218 (talk) 15:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

important comments

It should be noted at some point in the article that this film is truly awful beyond anything you can possibly comprehend. It's so bad it hurt my face. I know Wikipedia is neutral, but saying "I'd rather be fired into the sun than watch this film again" is about as neutral as you can possibly get.--81.7.8.54 06:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! ...provided we can adhere to WP:NPOV and WP:V while we're at it. Our own opinions are moot, but if professional, well-known critics hated it, and we can verify that with sourcing, then it seems relevant to me. Luna Santin 06:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We NEED sources. This film was horrendus beyond all belief. --80.176.94.14 14:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This film was awesome. Maybe white folk didn't like it, but for black people its one of the best out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.110.167 (talk) 22:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This movie was so much fun. Y'all just hate being happy. That dumbshit critical response about him still being poor and living in the hood should be removed. 136.50.182.25 (talk) 10:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dream

Is there a category for films that turn out to be dreams? If not, there should be and this should be included. Tim Long 06:04, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leeroy Jenkins

Someone should add that a photoshopped version of the movie poster is one of the important parts of the Leeroy Jenkins internet meme No. 173.67.14.94 (talk) 01:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black Knight (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060616183931/http://movies.yahoo.com:80/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=1805535145 to http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1805535145&cf=info

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:58, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]