King Arthur: Legend of the Sword | Guy Ritchie | May 12, 2017 | Charlie Hunnam

[Mulder]

43 minutes ago, Mikasa Ackerman said:

 

Now I'm curious, what made the original a classic? All I know about the legend is that Arty pulls a sword out of the stone and then hangs out with David Beckham, and this version has both those things.

You're a fan of anime, watch Fate/Zero and you'll find out quick. It's how I got into Arthurian lore ((Was only mainly into Greek myths before hand))

[Plain Old Tele]

Yikes, I don't like his take at all.  But to each their own.

[Spidey Freak]

16 minutes ago, Tele Came Back said:

 

What?! Say it isn't so.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

The interesting thing about Arthurian legend is that it's a loose combination of Middle Ages romanticism (with a heavy dose of French influence) and much earlier myths from the Celts. There are core elements: Arthur, the sword in the stone, Merlin, the queen Guinevere, the round table, Lancelot (the greatest of all the knights), Arthur's incestuous affair with his half-sister and the bastard child Mordred who eventually wounds him mortally, the quest for the Holy Grail, and so forth. The saga of Arthur can be roughly broken into three general (classic) arcs: his rise, his fall, his redemption. The Arthur of legend is the true king of Briton, and when weaker (physically, morally, etc) the land literally weakens with him. So his story is thematically also a story of Briton rising, falling into moral decay and struggle, and the hint of recovery as Arthur -- mortally wounded but not dead -- is taken away from the lands of mortal men to be tended by the maidens of Avalon as he sleeps in a coma, and when he returns Britain will be renewed and renourished. There's a lot of emphasis on the moral rightness of one's actions and how even great and noble men can be waylaid by terrible temptation and fall from grace, and then must exert tremendous effort to regain their grace. Wrapped up in all this is the quest for the Holy Grail -- supposedly something that could only be found by someone utterly pure and virtuous -- and how Arthur (the greatest of kings) and Lancelot (the greatest of knights), failed in this quest and failed in their own moral efforts within the kingdom (Lancelot had an affair with Guinevere and Arthur succumbed to jealousy).

 

I'm rambling and I'm not doing the saga justice, but like all great ancient myths, it's sprawling, epic, and codifies the best and worst of human behavior as a way of setting up and explaining the world as it is.
 

 

 

Anyway, if any of this sounds remotely interesting, dig up EXCALIBUR and have a look. Among others, it co-stars a young Patrick Stewart, a young Liam Neeson, and a young Helen Mirren. It's flawed but majestic.

 

The Mists of Avalon is more of my jam than the original Arthurian legends. Which, yeah shout out, coz it is one of the stronger early examples of deconstruction and subversion of established myths and themes. Have you read it or watched the early 00's mini-series adaptation? The latter is all kinds of cheesy but Angelica Huston.

Edited May 10, 2017 by Spidey Freak

[Mulder]

2 minutes ago, Tele Came Back said:

Yikes, I don't like his take at all.  But to each their own.

Nasu's take? I think he got the Arthurian myths pretty right. A lot closer then stuff since Excalibur has done. As much as I like BBC Merlin it's a huuuuge break from the norm, Fate's probably the closest despite the intrinsic twist to it. 

EDIT: Just now noticed that there might've been a few other posts above mine. Oops if that wasn't directed at me, my bad. 

Edited May 10, 2017 by Mulder

[Mikasa Ackerman]

3 minutes ago, Mulder said:

You're a fan of anime, watch Fate/Zero and you'll find out quick. It's how I got into Arthurian lore ((Was only mainly into Greek myths before hand))

 

I'm a fairly recent anime fan; Hunter x Hunter blew my mind and I've been slowly going through all the critically acclaimed shit since then. I've seen art for Fate/Zero floating around online but I never connected it to King Arthur, but I'll check it out!

[Mulder]

Just now, Mikasa Ackerman said:

 

I'm a fairly recent anime fan; Hunter x Hunter blew my mind and I've been slowly going through all the critically acclaimed shit since then. I've seen art for Fate/Zero floating around online but I never connected it to King Arthur, but I'll check it out!

Zero's a bit dense on the lore but if you let yourself get absorbed it's phenomenal. A great intro to a lot of different myths.

[Plain Old Tele]

18 minutes ago, Spidey Freak said:

 

The Mists of Avalon is more of my jam than the original Arthurian legends. Which, yeah shout out, coz it is one of the stronger early examples of deconstruction and subversion of established myths and themes. Have you read it or watched the early 00's mini-series adaptation? The latter is all kinds of cheesy but Angelica Huston.

 

I read the Marion Zimmer Bradley book a long time ago and don't remember a whole lot except I generally liked it. Haven't seen the miniseries -- caught a few bits here and there and it never grabbed me. (1990s and 2000s mythic miniseries in generally weren't very good, IMO). 

 

17 minutes ago, Mulder said:

Nasu's take? I think he got the Arthurian myths pretty right. A lot closer then stuff since Excalibur has done. As much as I like BBC Merlin it's a huuuuge break from the norm, Fate's probably the closest despite the intrinsic twist to it. 

EDIT: Just now noticed that there might've been a few other posts above mine. Oops if that wasn't directed at me, my bad. 

 

Yes, sorry there, I was replying to aabattery's post about that Reddit link and your reply snuck in ahead of mine. 

[Mulder]

1 minute ago, Tele Came Back said:

 

I read the Marion Zimmer Bradley book a long time ago and don't remember a whole lot except I generally liked it. Haven't seen the miniseries -- caught a few bits here and there and it never grabbed me. (1990s and 2000s mythic miniseries in generally weren't very good, IMO). 

 

 

Yes, sorry there, I was replying to aabattery's post about that Reddit link and your reply snuck in ahead of mine. 

I was very shocked that you knew of Fate until I realized what had happened. 

[TLK]

6 hours ago, Barnack said:

 

$102m would be really great for a movie like that (that had a very long pre-production hell).

 

That article is talking about something closer to what Tarzan rumored cost was:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hollywood/la-fi-ct-movie-projector-king-arthur-20170508-htmlstory.html

 

$175m

 

Yeah, there is no way this movie cost only $100 million. I get the studio's urge to give millions to Guy Ritchie after the Sherlock Holmes movie but he hasn't made a good movie since 2001.

[somebody85]

*sigh*, well so much for seeing this in theaters.

[robertman2]

This is the best adaptation of King Arthur

Spoiler

 

[kayumanggi]

#KingArthur: Utterly boring & dull mess w/ lame humor. JudeLaw fine, rest forgettable. Great score. Bizarre artistic choices by #GuyRitchie.

— Gitesh Pandya (@GiteshPandya) May 10, 2017

[kayumanggi]

This will kill my summer game. lol

[JennaJ]

Save Aladdin!

[John Marston]

a friend of mine said "King Arthur 2" is coming out this weekend. He thought it was a sequel to the Clive Owen movie lol 

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, John Marston said:

a friend of mine said "King Arthur 2" is coming out this weekend. He thought it was a sequel to the Clive Owen movie lol 

He probably saw Eric Bana's cameo in the ads and got confused lol.

[TheDarkKnightOfSteel]

27 minutes ago, kayumanggi said:

Even though i liked the film  i agree with this.Guy Ritchie,who i like as a director,was not just suitable for a story like this.And Jude Law was a clear standout in an otherwise serviceable cast.But what can i say?I liked it.Some of its jokes landed with me and maybe it was a bit generic but i didn't get bored.

[MrGlass2]

1 hour ago, kayumanggi said:

humor. JudeLaw fine

 

And from 9% to 23% on Rotten Tomatoes in just one day, and a decent 43 on Metacritic. Much better than many expected!

 

[Arlborn]

29 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:

 

And from 9% to 23% on Rotten Tomatoes in just one day, and a decent 43 on Metacritic. Much better than many expected!

 

 

 

It would be funny if it caught up with Tarzan's reviews but I doubt it.

[The Futurist]

5 minutes ago, Arlborn said:

 

It would be funny if it caught up with Tarzan's reviews but I doubt it.

 

No Tarzan vs King Arthur : Dawn of Freedom then ...