The official King Arthur Thread (or how bad did this movie suck)
07-11-04, 07:56 PM
#51
DVD Talk Legend
If the producers wanted to do an R, then why seek finacing from Disney?
He hasn't worked with Paramount since the eighties, he has only produced three films with Sony (the Bad Boys films and Black Hawk Down), and Kangaroo Jack was with Warner (because nobody else wanted to touch it probably).And if you think about it, most of his films are R. He's made few PG and PG-13 films...
07-11-04, 08:21 PM
#52
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I guess I am in the minority with this movie. I absolutely loved it! I loved it as it was, and nothing more. I do agree this movie is flawed, most have been mentioned, about the PG13 rating (though it was tolerable, but I am looking foreword to the DVD R cut) the battle scenes were nothing like Gladiator and Braveheart, but still good.
I personally think the performances were great! I think there is a little hesitation in giving these actors some credit on there performances because most of them are fairly new (with the exception of the always brilliant Stellen Skarsgard) most of the actors are not well known. I think they did well with the material they had, and once again the performances were great.
I didn't really like the flow of the movie at times, at times it seem to have went too quick and at times it needed to be sped up. I think Clive Owen played a great Arthur though.
I thought how they played the Guinivere character being a "warrior" was great.
However I didn't like the fact that they didn't play on the Guinivere/Lancelot attraction, they touched on it briefly and then nothing, a little disappointing, I think it would have added an interesting element to the story and a way of creating tension to the trio.
I don't what it is with my deal and snow in epic movies, but I loved the touch they used in the movie, gave it a sense, beauty to something that was ugly going on.
Loved the scenes with Merlin, Guiniver and Arthur in the forest, awesome!
Keira can sure handle a bow, very very nice!
8/10
I personally think the performances were great! I think there is a little hesitation in giving these actors some credit on there performances because most of them are fairly new (with the exception of the always brilliant Stellen Skarsgard) most of the actors are not well known. I think they did well with the material they had, and once again the performances were great.
I didn't really like the flow of the movie at times, at times it seem to have went too quick and at times it needed to be sped up. I think Clive Owen played a great Arthur though.
I thought how they played the Guinivere character being a "warrior" was great.
However I didn't like the fact that they didn't play on the Guinivere/Lancelot attraction, they touched on it briefly and then nothing, a little disappointing, I think it would have added an interesting element to the story and a way of creating tension to the trio.
I don't what it is with my deal and snow in epic movies, but I loved the touch they used in the movie, gave it a sense, beauty to something that was ugly going on.
Loved the scenes with Merlin, Guiniver and Arthur in the forest, awesome!
Keira can sure handle a bow, very very nice!
8/10
07-11-04, 10:36 PM
#53
DVD Talk Limited Edition
I saw this last night and I enjoyed it. It wasn't a great movie, but I am happy that I saw it. Hearing that there will be a, presumably extended, R-rated cut on the DVD makes me happy, because I think the two things that really harmed this film were awkward action sequences (presumably from removing the R-rated violence) and a lack of time to develop characters and their relationships. There were just too many people and too many interactions to develop in such a short amount of time.
One of the highlights, I thought, was the portrayal of the relationship between the knights. I think it was the most realistic relationship between the Knights of the Round Table, of any I have ever seen. When guys fight together for 15 years, they should be making cracks about each others wives. Brilliant move.
I also liked how they left the story open to include the stories that are, presumably, what the legend is built on. They make reference to the Round Table and all that had gone on around it over the years. They leave a 15 year time period in which they accomplish feats that have earned them a herioc and legendary reputation throughout England. At no point does it really contradict the possibility of any of the stories of legend and I was impressed by that (some of the relationships, yes, but not the "feats").
The only thing that really bothered me was the "sex scene", if you can call it that. Completely . . . in all senses of the word . . . gratuitous. It didn't establish anything, it wasn't out of any kind of love ("we don't know what will happen tomorrow" . . . please
), and it seemed very randomly placed into the storyline. I can't believe I'm saying this, given that it was Kiera Knightly in it, but, if they couldn't have done better with it, I'd almost rather that they had left it out altogether.
One of the highlights, I thought, was the portrayal of the relationship between the knights. I think it was the most realistic relationship between the Knights of the Round Table, of any I have ever seen. When guys fight together for 15 years, they should be making cracks about each others wives. Brilliant move.
I also liked how they left the story open to include the stories that are, presumably, what the legend is built on. They make reference to the Round Table and all that had gone on around it over the years. They leave a 15 year time period in which they accomplish feats that have earned them a herioc and legendary reputation throughout England. At no point does it really contradict the possibility of any of the stories of legend and I was impressed by that (some of the relationships, yes, but not the "feats").
The only thing that really bothered me was the "sex scene", if you can call it that. Completely . . . in all senses of the word . . . gratuitous. It didn't establish anything, it wasn't out of any kind of love ("we don't know what will happen tomorrow" . . . please
), and it seemed very randomly placed into the storyline. I can't believe I'm saying this, given that it was Kiera Knightly in it, but, if they couldn't have done better with it, I'd almost rather that they had left it out altogether.
Last edited by talemyn; 07-11-04 at 10:39 PM.
07-11-04, 10:46 PM
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Illinois
Posts: 781
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by talemyn
The only thing that really bothered me was the "sex scene", if you can call it that. Completely . . . in all senses of the word . ,. . gratuitous. It didn't establish anything, it wasn't out of any kind of love ("we don't know what will happen tomorrow" . . . please ), and it seemed very randomly placed into the storyline. I can't believe I'm saying this, given that it was Kiera Knightly in it, but, if they could have done better with it, I'd almost rather that they had left it out altogether.
The only thing that really bothered me was the "sex scene", if you can call it that. Completely . . . in all senses of the word . ,. . gratuitous. It didn't establish anything, it wasn't out of any kind of love ("we don't know what will happen tomorrow" . . . please
), and it seemed very randomly placed into the storyline. I can't believe I'm saying this, given that it was Kiera Knightly in it, but, if they could have done better with it, I'd almost rather that they had left it out altogether.
07-11-04, 11:07 PM
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Esco, CA
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by animalmystic
Well I guess I am in the minority with this movie. I absolutely loved it! I loved it as it was, and nothing more. I do agree this movie is flawed, most have been mentioned, about the PG13 rating (though it was tolerable, but I am looking foreword to the DVD R cut) the battle scenes were nothing like Gladiator and Braveheart, but still good.
I personally think the performances were great! I think there is a little hesitation in giving these actors some credit on there performances because most of them are fairly new (with the exception of the always brilliant Stellen Skarsgard) most of the actors are not well known. I think they did well with the material they had, and once again the performances were great.
I didn't really like the flow of the movie at times, at times it seem to have went too quick and at times it needed to be sped up. I think Clive Owen played a great Arthur though.
I thought how they played the Guinivere character being a "warrior" was great.
However I didn't like the fact that they didn't play on the Guinivere/Lancelot attraction, they touched on it briefly and then nothing, a little disappointing, I think it would have added an interesting element to the story and a way of creating tension to the trio.
I don't what it is with my deal and snow in epic movies, but I loved the touch they used in the movie, gave it a sense, beauty to something that was ugly going on.
Loved the scenes with Merlin, Guiniver and Arthur in the forest, awesome!
Keira can sure handle a bow, very very nice!
8/10
Well I guess I am in the minority with this movie. I absolutely loved it! I loved it as it was, and nothing more. I do agree this movie is flawed, most have been mentioned, about the PG13 rating (though it was tolerable, but I am looking foreword to the DVD R cut) the battle scenes were nothing like Gladiator and Braveheart, but still good.
I personally think the performances were great! I think there is a little hesitation in giving these actors some credit on there performances because most of them are fairly new (with the exception of the always brilliant Stellen Skarsgard) most of the actors are not well known. I think they did well with the material they had, and once again the performances were great.
I didn't really like the flow of the movie at times, at times it seem to have went too quick and at times it needed to be sped up. I think Clive Owen played a great Arthur though.
I thought how they played the Guinivere character being a "warrior" was great.
However I didn't like the fact that they didn't play on the Guinivere/Lancelot attraction, they touched on it briefly and then nothing, a little disappointing, I think it would have added an interesting element to the story and a way of creating tension to the trio.
I don't what it is with my deal and snow in epic movies, but I loved the touch they used in the movie, gave it a sense, beauty to something that was ugly going on.
Loved the scenes with Merlin, Guiniver and Arthur in the forest, awesome!
Keira can sure handle a bow, very very nice!
8/10
07-12-04, 07:48 PM
#57
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PopcornTreeCt
Also another big thing I didn't like about the movie: Romans and Knights together in the same period. That's kinda like saying the Civil War happened at the same time as Vietnam.
Also another big thing I didn't like about the movie: Romans and Knights together in the same period. That's kinda like saying the Civil War happened at the same time as Vietnam.
an end (Rome being attacked by barabrians from all sides or
something to that effect).
I saw this today and really liked it. You could see moments in
the film where it was evident that it suffered from cuts to water
it down to a PG 13. That's unfortunate. If it's true of a directors
cut on DVD I'll pick it up.
I really felt that this film was much like 13th Warrior which I also
liked. Not that the story was the same, but it had the same feel
to it. One of the main reasons I liked it so much.
It really is too bad when studios meddle with things like Disney
apparently did with this film.
Jason
07-14-04, 09:40 AM
#58
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One vote in for a thumbs up. Despite horrible reviews I enjoyed the movie for what it is. Not the greatest movie ever but really enjoyable.
The only thing that really bothered me, as discussed before, was the cutting of battle scenes to get a PG13 rating. But then again, there was a family sitting behind me so I guess they didn't mind...
The only thing that really bothered me, as discussed before, was the cutting of battle scenes to get a PG13 rating. But then again, there was a family sitting behind me so I guess they didn't mind...
07-14-04, 03:07 PM
#59
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Finally saw this today and it was fine, much better than Troy IMHO but that wasn't difficult to achieve. I read the EW story on it yesterday and I think the director's cut will be a better film (would have been even better if Fuqua had the full time to develop it but what can you do). The director's cut DVD should be interesting.
07-20-04, 10:23 PM
#61
Suspended
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went to see this movie. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen!
Too many stuff resembled Lord of the Rings. Here are some I spotted (spoilers):
1. The girl in the group who used the bow and arrow was like Legolas.
2. The kid wore his father's ring around neck.. just like Frodo wearing the One Ring.
3. What's with the horses at the end of the movie? and why one of them a white horse? The white horse reminded me of Gandalf's horse Shadowfax.
4. Catapults were used during the battle sequence.
5. King Arthur riding back and forth in front of his men giving a speech before the battle begins.
6. The music in the background was somewhat similar to the feel and music in Lord of the Rings but not as good.
7. The marriage of King Arthur and Guinevere occurred at the end of the movie just like when King Aragorn married LOTR.
Too many stuff resembled Lord of the Rings. Here are some I spotted (spoilers):
1. The girl in the group who used the bow and arrow was like Legolas.
2. The kid wore his father's ring around neck.. just like Frodo wearing the One Ring.
3. What's with the horses at the end of the movie? and why one of them a white horse? The white horse reminded me of Gandalf's horse Shadowfax.
4. Catapults were used during the battle sequence.
5. King Arthur riding back and forth in front of his men giving a speech before the battle begins.
6. The music in the background was somewhat similar to the feel and music in Lord of the Rings but not as good.
7. The marriage of King Arthur and Guinevere occurred at the end of the movie just like when King Aragorn married LOTR.
07-21-04, 01:18 AM
#62
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Originally posted by Regurgitator
I went to see this movie. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen!
Too many stuff resembled Lord of the Rings. Here are some I spotted (spoilers):
1. The girl in the group who used the bow and arrow was like Legolas.
2. The kid wore his father's ring around neck.. just like Frodo wearing the One Ring.
3. What's with the horses at the end of the movie? and why one of them a white horse? The white horse reminded me of Gandalf's horse Shadowfax.
4. Catapults were used during the battle sequence.
5. King Arthur riding back and forth in front of his men giving a speech before the battle begins.
6. The music in the background was somewhat similar to the feel and music in Lord of the Rings but not as good.
7. The marriage of King Arthur and Guinevere occurred at the end of the movie just like when King Aragorn married LOTR.
I went to see this movie. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen!
Too many stuff resembled Lord of the Rings. Here are some I spotted (spoilers):
1. The girl in the group who used the bow and arrow was like Legolas.
2. The kid wore his father's ring around neck.. just like Frodo wearing the One Ring.
3. What's with the horses at the end of the movie? and why one of them a white horse? The white horse reminded me of Gandalf's horse Shadowfax.
4. Catapults were used during the battle sequence.
5. King Arthur riding back and forth in front of his men giving a speech before the battle begins.
6. The music in the background was somewhat similar to the feel and music in Lord of the Rings but not as good.
7. The marriage of King Arthur and Guinevere occurred at the end of the movie just like when King Aragorn married LOTR.
Those are all just generic medeival/fantasy elements. If those were the reasons that you didn't like the movie, then I'd suggest not seeing any other movies in this genre . . . you'll be disappointed.
07-21-04, 01:29 AM
#63
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by talemyn
Those are all just generic medeival/fantasy elements. If those were the reasons that you didn't like the movie, then I'd suggest not seeing any other movies in this genre . . . you'll be disappointed.
Those are all just generic medeival/fantasy elements. If those were the reasons that you didn't like the movie, then I'd suggest not seeing any other movies in this genre . . . you'll be disappointed.
07-21-04, 02:34 PM
#64
Suspended
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by talemyn
Those are all just generic medeival/fantasy elements. If those were the reasons that you didn't like the movie, then I'd suggest not seeing any other movies in this genre . . . you'll be disappointed.
Those are all just generic medeival/fantasy elements. If those were the reasons that you didn't like the movie, then I'd suggest not seeing any other movies in this genre . . . you'll be disappointed.
For example:
1. Willow
2. A Knight's Tale
3. DragonHeart
4. DragonSlayer
5. Krull
There's so many things they could have done differently for King Arthur that it didn't have to resemble much like LOTR. Here are some things they could have done:
1. Have King Arthur marry Guinevere in the middle or even at the start of the movie. Why does it have to be at the end like LOTR?
2. Instead of having the kid wear a ring around his neck.. why not something else?
3. Why did they have to show a white horse running at the end of the movie? Why not a grey horse or just leave them all the same dark color horses running?
4. Catapults didn't have to be used. They've could have used Ballistas.
07-22-04, 12:30 PM
#66
Moderator
Originally posted by lisadoris
Finally saw this today and it was fine, much better than Troy IMHO but that wasn't difficult to achieve. I read the EW story on it yesterday and I think the director's cut will be a better film (would have been even better if Fuqua had the full time to develop it but what can you do). The director's cut DVD should be interesting.
Finally saw this today and it was fine, much better than Troy IMHO but that wasn't difficult to achieve. I read the EW story on it yesterday and I think the director's cut will be a better film (would have been even better if Fuqua had the full time to develop it but what can you do). The director's cut DVD should be interesting.
07-22-04, 12:56 PM
#67
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Originally posted by Rypro 525
bruckheimer said something to a like of that he didn't want questions from the press on "why was did you put too much blood and gore" ect, so he just cut it.
bruckheimer said something to a like of that he didn't want questions from the press on "why was did you put too much blood and gore" ect, so he just cut it.
07-22-04, 04:26 PM
#68
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Un-Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 2,718
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just saw this as well this week. I'm a Arthurian Legend geek and I found this to be extremely well done. I know the history of the documented Artorious Castor (from initial Roman conquest period), and I thought they did a wonderful job weaving history into the myth. Great visuals, good acting. A nice story line. I'm looking forward to the DVD release to see it even more fleshed out.
07-26-04, 04:50 PM
#69
Moderator
what an extremely horrible movie:
- the cinematography was monotenous and grating, the green color scheme got tired real fast, all it did was make everything and everyone look sick.
- the battle on the frozen lake is the only reason to see this film, and that's about it
- Ray Winstone, a normally great actor, came across as just a Ray, complete with dirt, scars and silly dialogue.
- Kiera Knightley is wasted here, all she effectively comes across as tragic wannabe GWAR band member.
- attrocious drool dialogue from everyone else as well, half the time one is left scratching his or her head in complete dumbfoundness as to what anyone is saying and what meaning, if any it has.
- the film's pacing drags and the storyline is predictable.
- Nothing of the story's original mythology is retained, nada, nothing - go and read 'The Once and Future King' by T.H. White
- a friend of mine said nearly half the theatre in Manhattan he had seen it at left the theatre in disgust on how bad this film was, now I know why.
- the cinematography was monotenous and grating, the green color scheme got tired real fast, all it did was make everything and everyone look sick.
- the battle on the frozen lake is the only reason to see this film, and that's about it
- Ray Winstone, a normally great actor, came across as just a Ray, complete with dirt, scars and silly dialogue.
- Kiera Knightley is wasted here, all she effectively comes across as tragic wannabe GWAR band member.
- attrocious drool dialogue from everyone else as well, half the time one is left scratching his or her head in complete dumbfoundness as to what anyone is saying and what meaning, if any it has.
- the film's pacing drags and the storyline is predictable.
- Nothing of the story's original mythology is retained, nada, nothing - go and read 'The Once and Future King' by T.H. White
- a friend of mine said nearly half the theatre in Manhattan he had seen it at left the theatre in disgust on how bad this film was, now I know why.
07-26-04, 05:02 PM
#70
DVD Talk Legend
I saw this over vacation last week and thought it was pretty good. I must agree with what others are saying that not having the R rating really made it look awkward at times. I look forward to the DVD.
Question:
Question:
Spoiler:
07-26-04, 05:15 PM
#71
DVD Talk Legend
Saw this movie a couple of weeks ago.
Agree with all points. I'm not even sure if I will rent this movie.
Originally posted by Giles
what an extremely horrible movie:
- the cinematography was monotenous and grating, the green color scheme got tired real fast, all it did was make everything and everyone look sick.
- the battle on the frozen lake is the only reason to see this film, and that's about it
- Ray Winstone, a normally great actor, came across as just a Ray, complete with dirt, scars and silly dialogue.
- Kiera Knightley is wasted here, all she effectively comes across as tragic wannabe GWAR band member.
- attrocious drool dialogue from everyone else as well, half the time one is left scratching his or her head in complete dumbfoundness as to what anyone is saying and what meaning, if any it has.
- the film's pacing drags and the storyline is predictable.
- Nothing of the story's original mythology is retained, nada, nothing - go and read 'The Once and Future King' by T.H. White
- a friend of mine said nearly half the theatre in Manhattan he had seen it at left the theatre in disgust on how bad this film was, now I know why.
what an extremely horrible movie:
- the cinematography was monotenous and grating, the green color scheme got tired real fast, all it did was make everything and everyone look sick.
- the battle on the frozen lake is the only reason to see this film, and that's about it
- Ray Winstone, a normally great actor, came across as just a Ray, complete with dirt, scars and silly dialogue.
- Kiera Knightley is wasted here, all she effectively comes across as tragic wannabe GWAR band member.
- attrocious drool dialogue from everyone else as well, half the time one is left scratching his or her head in complete dumbfoundness as to what anyone is saying and what meaning, if any it has.
- the film's pacing drags and the storyline is predictable.
- Nothing of the story's original mythology is retained, nada, nothing - go and read 'The Once and Future King' by T.H. White
- a friend of mine said nearly half the theatre in Manhattan he had seen it at left the theatre in disgust on how bad this film was, now I know why.
