Kaamelott: why was the series such a success?

What are the reasons for the success of the Kaamelott series since its original broadcast on M6 from 2005 to 2009?

The show seeks to update the myth of King Arthur and the Grail. This notably involves dialogues that speak to the spectators, but also to create more veracity according to A. Astier: "As we don't know how these people spoke, by default we give them extremely literary sentences, which for me is rather an anachronistic mistake to think that these people had no everyday language. So, I try to stage the everyday, so I give them the only everyday language that I know, that is to say mine. I would never say the term "pinball" for "to be afraid", which for me comes out of the lexicon of "pinball" and a very modern thing, I never put it. On the other hand, "you piss me off" , that's a metaphor, I'm sorry, it's always been there."

An argument that is hard to dispute. And this language participates in Kaamelott's updating of the myth of the Round Table. The series even allows itself parallels with current society. This is the case when Father Blaise shows the castle as a guide would do today in a fortified castle listed as a Historic Monument.

What is interesting is that if the series allows itself a more modern vocabulary, it only very rarely resorts to contextual or historical anachronism as did for example Quarter to Two Before Jesus Christ (1982) of Jean Yanne, where Coluche interpreted "Ben-Hur Marcel", a "garagiste for tanks". Conversely, Alexandre Astier tries to limit himself to verbal anachronism, adding slang or modern words in the mouths of his characters. Witness this line from Perceval, who uses the word "slibard", while the underpants only appeared in 1913:

The updating of the Arthurian myth is also ensured by Arthur himself, who represents modernity and often defends the values ​​of justice and humanism, sometimes coming up against the harshness of his time. Evidenced by his differences with Venec or Léodagan who respectively defend slavery and torture. Through his avant-garde political positions, Arthur resembles more a leader of our time than a medieval character with archaic principles. And once we admit that Kaamelott allows herself to evoke the quirks of today's world, she more easily reaches a contemporary audience, which may explain part of her success.

Alexandre Astier's trademark with Kaamelott is that he wrote his dialogues for very specific actors and adapted his writing to their way of acting. The main actors in the series were relatively unknown to the general public at the time: they were theater actors, and if we believe in Kaamelott's universe, it is also thanks to this use of new faces that the series has contributed to revealing and making people appreciate. These are people Astier knew from having seen them play or having played with them on the boards or in short films.

Of course, with the help of success, famous guests will participate in Kaamelott, sometimes for a single episode, sometimes with a slightly more recurring role, such as Caius Camillus played by Bruno Salomone or the Witch Hunter played by Elie Semoun.

The effectiveness of Kaamelott also results in the tempo with which the dialogues are launched. Nothing seems left to chance and each actor follows the rhythm imposed by the lines written by Astier. Trained as a musician, the creator of the series signs scores perfectly executed by his interpreters. It is no coincidence that the six seasons of the show are dedicated to Louis de Funès, because the actor had also started out as a musician and had a sense of comic timing that belonged only to him. A sense of timing found in Kaamelott. Alexandre Astier will be inspired in particular by the favorite character of De Funès, the boss dissatisfied with his employees, and his way of playing this anger until it becomes funny. This tribute to a well-loved French actor is also no stranger to the public's support for the series.

Kaamelott's gallery of secondary characters does a lot for its popularity. The list is long, with the gluttonous simpleton (Karadoc), the willful naive (Perceval), the belligerent stepfather (Léodagan), the horrible stepmother (Séli), the duo of incompetents (Yvain and Gauvain) in going through the valiant knight (Lancelot), the disappointing magician (Merlin), the unhappy queen (Guinevere) and the sensitive who rounds off the edges (Bohort). Among many others. These characters, archetypal on paper, actively participate in the success of Kaamelott by the way in which we find them unchanged from season to season.

All of them are excessive in their personality traits, and that's what makes them so endearing. Despite the attempt by some to do well, the result is still disappointing for Arthur and fails enough to amuse the viewer. And above all, the intrigues are still anchored in the Kaamelott universe in the sense that they often start from local politics: "should we add turrets on the coast to protect ourselves from enemy ships?" "Are the taxes too high?" "What should be recorded in the Grail quest journal?" These innocuous and daily questions for the people of the castle are derided by the inability of those concerned to answer them correctly. In the same way, a simple strawberry pie served with the meal can be revealing of the tensions in force at the castle and constitute the focus of an episode.

Kaamelott is populated by incompetents, malicious people or people who do not understand each other. Astier will therefore endeavor to show how all these people will immutably turn to Arthur for answers or advice, while he himself is more and more lost. And these responsibilities will weigh on him, giving rise to a turning point in the tone of the series.

Alexandre Astier gives Arthur more complexity than previous adaptations of the Grail legend had. Far from being a brilliant knight in shining armor convinced that the quest for the Grail goes without saying, Arthur de Kaamelott doubts. More and more as the series progresses. Because what does the Grail look like? Where to look for it? Will we find it one day? Am I sufficiently effectively supported for this mission? These are certain questions which are imposed on him and to which he does not find a satisfactory answer.

With these doubts, weariness and depression gradually come. Arthur changes and ends up questioning everything, without even seeing that a man is advancing in the shadows to steal his throne and his queen. These evolutions in Arthur's personality made him a character that audiences, who had learned to appreciate him when he was funny, accepted to follow even in his most dramatic moments. Alexandre Astier had succeeded in making him endearing by making him human and fallible. Like everyone else, Arthur is confused by the things he doesn't understand or is asked of him without explanation or support. And the fact that he is aware of his failure refers to a negative vision of the exercise of power: power can wear out. Alexandre Astier will also declare, speaking of Arthur and the awareness of his failure:

For the moment without a release date, Kaamelott - First part will explore Arthur's return to business in order to save Kaamelott from the grip of Lancelot who reigns there as a tyrant. A new chapter therefore opens for the character, who continues to evolve and should once again find his audience. The fans will find him a priori recovered from his doubts, ready for war and much more positive than in the last seasons of the series, the others will simply discover a king who has returned to recover what is due to him. In both cases, everyone should find their account. Let's conclude with a Latin quote from King Lot: "Victoriae mundis et mundis lacrima". Well, that means absolutely nothing, but we think it's quite in tune.

30 guests who have starred in the series: