Jus say it yesterday. It is pretty cool however the first half hour goes on top of the head unless u know a bit of the story. In the tradition of Troy this is another sprawling historical myth with its story simplified and its production overblown. the movie is overall pretty good i guess.. although i would say troy is comparitively better.
the story is kinda like this…
It’s the 5th century, and Rome has just decided to abandon Great Britain to the advancing Saxon army. But Rome’s indentured warrior knights are given one last mission to rescue a Roman family in the remote north. Leader Arthur (Owen) begrudgingly accepts the assignment, taking his faithful sidekicks (Winstone, Gruffudd, Mikkelsen, Edgerton, Dancy) into battle with the indigenous Woads, led by Merlin (Dillane), while the Saxon leader (Skarsgard) and his warrior son (Schweiger) bear down on them from the north.
I've read a lot of medieval stories about King Arthur and the Round Table, Sir Gawain, Yvain, etc. etc. etc. If you like reading short stories about this era, pick up works by Chretien de Trois.
Anyway, the whole idea that Guinevere was a warrior princess is kinda dumb. It's getting really bad reviews too. I like Kiera Knightly though so I'll probably watch it, eventually.
I LOVE the Arthurian legends. I’ve been obsessed since I was 13. I remember how crushed I was when I saw “First Knight” (Sean Connery, Richard Gere, Julia Ormond). It was an awful awful interpretation of those stories.
That’s why I’m a little wary of watching King Arthur. Plus I can’t convince anyone to go see it with me .
AND John Stewart repeatedly called it “a big pile of ****”
All the movies I have seen so far are just disappointing. I have to stick to the classics.
Oooh, you know which movie was fantastic though? It was a mini series on t.v. "Merlin" ... my gosh, that movie was FANTASTIC!!! I think it was shown over a period of a week. Heck, I ended up ordering the DVD of it. Absolutely brilliant.
The movie was a disappointment. Maybe we've started expecting too much after the grandeur of movies like LOTR, troy/braveheart etc.
It was nothing special.
Romans didn't live north of Hadrian's wall, Saxons are Germans - so why go through Scotland to invade England? Why are there no Picts - who were the real antagonists from the north? and not to ruin the film but in reality the Saxons kinda eventually win (hence: Anglo-Saxon) so if Arthur is King then it ain't for long.
The actors/characters were poorly casted and units did not meld - For example, the bald headed, goateed son and his mangy headed, "kill everyone" dad did not go together at all - i found that most of my concentration was spent trying to see what was on the screen - for frames changed too fast for the action they were depicting - which just created a nice five minute blur of color with an aweful soundtrack to it.
Emotions were borderline too, for I couldn't tell if a character was crying or laughing - towards the end, most of the people in the theater, along with me, were sighing and saying "end already!" The ending dragged on.
if you feel you have to see it - wait until you can rent it on DVD. But if not, do not waste your money on this one - You will only come away with a $10 headache like i did.
.