Metropolis Reality Forums - Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jul 2^nd, 2026, 10:07am

Home

Metropolis Reality Forums « Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur' »

Hot Movie News and Reviews at Entertainment Spectrum!
www.EntertainmentSpectrum.com

   Metropolis Reality Forums
   Off-Topic Forums
   Movie Discussion (Moderators: Heather, yesteach, Isle_be_back)
   Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'

Previous topic | New Topic | Next topic »

Pages: 1

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic

Author

Topic: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur' (Read 384 times)

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« on: Jul 9^th, 2004, 7:40pm »

Quote

Modify

Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
Camelot drags a lot, despite good performances
By Christy Lemire
Associated Press
Tuesday, July 6, 2004 Posted: 4:08 PM EDT (2008 GMT)

(AP) -- There's no Camelot, no Excalibur. There's no Arthur-Guinevere-Lancelot love triangle.

There is a table, and it's round, but nobody sits at it for too long.

And nobody ever, ever bursts into song in "King Arthur" -- though it might be sort of fun if they did, if only to break up the intensity of the battle scenes, and to brighten the literal and thematic sludge through which the warriors valiantly slog.

All this movie shares with the King Arthur you're familiar with is a name.

Supposedly, it's the story behind the legend -- set in the Dark Ages, not the Middle Ages -- with the half-Roman, half-British Arthur (Clive Owen) leading a seemingly outmatched band of Sarmatian knights, including his best friend, Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd), against the invading Saxons.

Although he's torn ethnically and struggles to maintain his religious faith in the face of cynicism and hypocrisy, Arthur somehow finds time to get it on with Guinevere (Keira Knightley), who is not the fragile flower you've seen before, but a buff warrior princess who's deadly with a bow and arrow.

The real story behind the story-behind-the-story, though, is that this is a Jerry Bruckheimer movie, striving desperately to be taken seriously.

"King Arthur" was directed by Antoine Fuqua, and resembles his earlier film "Training Day" in the visceral, gritty nature of its battles. It was written by David Franzoni, and resembles his earlier film "Gladiator" in its manly-manness and its obsession for historical lore.

Grainy and gritty
If "King Arthur" brings to mind any previous film that Bruckheimer produced, it's "Black Hawk Down." Both share the same cinematographer, Slawomir Idziak, and at times share a similarly bleached-out, grainy look. It's an especially effective aesthetic when Arthur and his heavily armed posse are trekking on horseback through the snow, and on a cracking frozen lake, where the film's most suspenseful brawl occurs.

Knightley's Guinevere is a brash warrior, dressed in leather.
For all its attempts at innovation, though, "King Arthur" falls back on the hackneyed "one last mission" idea. Arthur, Lancelot, the brutish Bors (Ray Winstone) and the rest of the knights -- who aren't nearly so well characterized -- must rescue a Roman nobleman and his family, which includes a son who's a favorite of the pope.

Their assignment takes them north as Saxon forces are spreading under the leadership of Cerdic (Stellan Skarsgard), whose long hair and messy, braided beard make him look like a redheaded Rob Zombie. His men, meanwhile, who are heavily garbed in leather and fur, seem to have stepped off the runway of a Sean John fashion show.

The point being that despite its pretenses otherwise, this is still a big summer action movie, full of cliches and sexed-up details.

It's hard to believe Guinevere actually chose her own battle gear, which consists of little more than a couple of brown leather belts strapped across her chest. Granted, the movie takes place far prior to the advent of the jog bra, but this is a woman who apparently managed to find lipstick and eye liner in the forest. She should have been resourceful enough to craft more protective clothing during the dead of winter, as her male counterparts did.

But Knightley continues to prove herself a versatile young actress: She can do comedy ("Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl"), she can do romance ("Love Actually"), she can be young and fresh in a girl power movie ("Bend It Like Beckham"). Here, she just plain kicks butt.

Winstone, so excellent in "Sexy Beast," here provides sporadic, much-needed comic relief as a knight whose girlfriend has given birth to so many of their children, they've assigned them numbers rather than names.

They "mean something to me," Bors says during a rare moment of introspection. "Especially No. 3 -- he's a good fighter."

The best fighter of all, though, is Arthur himself. And Owen, so suave in the excellent noir hit "Croupier," provides weight, intelligence and heroism to go along with his dark good looks.

He deserves a movie more worthy of his innate magnetism and strength -- and following "King Arthur," he should be able to find such a holy grail of roles.

"King Arthur," a Touchstone Pictures release, is rated PG-13 for intense battle sequences, a scene of sensuality and some language.

IP Logged

sweetmisery
ForumsNet Member

I am The Game!

Gender:

Posts: 1105

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #1 on: Jul 11^th, 2004, 11:16am »

Quote

Modify

Yeah I read that it aint that good. Even normal viewers' reviews(which are normally always more than average)... One critic in Yahoo! Movies states that it is just a cheap version of "Gladiator"...

Anyways, good or not, I never planned to watch this til I get it thru rentals or DVD... I rather watch "I, Robot".

IP Logged

"When it comes to compliments, women are ravenous blood-sucking monsters always want'n more... more... MORE! And if you give it to them, you'll get plenty back in return."
--- Homer Simpson

Rhune
ForumsNet Administrator

Gender:

Posts: 292

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #2 on: Jul 12^th, 2004, 12:10pm »

Quote

Modify

It baffles me as to why they would get rid of one of the key elements to the Arthurian tales - they completley eliminated the love tirangle between Arthur, Lancelot and Guinevere. Huh

IP Logged

sweetmisery
ForumsNet Member

I am The Game!

Gender:

Posts: 1105

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #3 on: Jul 12^th, 2004, 12:55pm »

Quote

Modify

Yeah, that is one of the most intriguing and beloved parts of the story. As well known as when boy Arthur removed Excalibur from the stone.

IP Logged

"When it comes to compliments, women are ravenous blood-sucking monsters always want'n more... more... MORE! And if you give it to them, you'll get plenty back in return."
--- Homer Simpson

Pau
ForumsNet Member

Proud to be Filipino!

Gender:

Posts: 3042

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #4 on: Jul 12^th, 2004, 7:49pm »

Quote

Modify

yeah... from the first look and feel of it from the movie trailer... this movie didn't catch my attention... its very far out from the Arthurian tales... I don't intend to watch this too... very strange that they made the reserved lady Guinivere into an Amazon-like barbarian.... and even many of the characters and venues look very Barbaric.. Grin

IP Logged

Check out my travel blogs at http://www.pautravels.com

JP
Moderator
ForumsNet Member

Ditch IE. Use Firefox.

Gender:

Posts: 14708

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #5 on: Jul 14^th, 2004, 12:36pm »

Quote

Modify

Well, they want it to appear that this is the TRUTH, but I agree with Pau. When I saw the trailer for this movie, I knew that this film won't be any good.

(I have been reading Da Vinci code, and I find myself open-minded about such things as the TRUTH.)

IP Logged

Pau
ForumsNet Member

Proud to be Filipino!

Gender:

Posts: 3042

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #6 on: Jul 16^th, 2004, 4:32am »

Quote

Modify

Jaypee... don't trust much of the "TRUTHS" tackled in the book.... be careful with what you read....you may get yourself decieved by centuries old altered Truths... Cheesy

IP Logged

Check out my travel blogs at http://www.pautravels.com

JP
Moderator
ForumsNet Member

Ditch IE. Use Firefox.

Gender:

Posts: 14708

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #7 on: Jul 17^th, 2004, 1:27pm »

Quote

Modify

Of course I won't. I just broadened my mind and to not take things without question.

About the movie, I think when LOTR was shown, many producers made movies with huge battles in them, like Troy, Timeline, Alamo, King Arthur, and others that I forgot. But with what happened with this movie, I hope they stop making movies like this one for now. Give it a rest, say 1 year. Grin

IP Logged

david
Guest

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #8 on: Jul 17^th, 2004, 1:31pm »

Quote

Modify

Remove

Problems with both movies and Tv is if someone makes money on a certain idea everyone jumps on and tries also Example Who wants to be a Millionaire suddenly Tv was overwhelmed with similar game shows. Survivor then we get tons of reality Tv shows most of which fail quickly. Movies are the same. This will pass soon as someone makes a bunch of money on a new idea!

IP Logged

Pau
ForumsNet Member

Proud to be Filipino!

Gender:

Posts: 3042

Re: Review: A ponderous 'King Arthur'
« Reply #9 on: Jul 18^th, 2004, 9:10am »

Quote

Modify

I agree... just like what happened after Schindler's List came out.... there followed the Pianist, Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, Behind Enemy Lines, Black Hawk Down and the rest of war movies.... Cheesy

IP Logged

Check out my travel blogs at http://www.pautravels.com

Pages: 1

Add Poll

Notify of replies

Send Topic


Previous topic \| New Topic \| Next topic »