[Miyazaki]

Was a bit apprehensive about this new film. I thought it could either be very good or very bad. Having Keira Knightly as a Boudica inspired Guinevere, I thought would probably be a bit too cheesy for my liking.

The film has been almost unanimously slated, and I don't think I can bring myself to watch it.

Shame really.

[ELV]

And??

[captaineyecatch]

Also read that its been cut down to a PG 13 much to the annoyance of the director. So wait for the dvd to watch the proper movie.

[Rambo John J]

if they let him do a "harder" directors cut release on dvd, that is.

I've seen a few reviews and haven't seen anyone give it a proper panning yet.

[Joe Pineapples]

From what i've seen with trailers. clips, tv interviews etc, this looks like a right old pile of shi*te. Think i'll stick with John Boorman's 'Excalibur'.

[the_pauley]

Everything about this movie that I've seen and read to date screams "TURKEY" to me.

And the tagline "From the producers of Pirates of the Carribean" won''t exactly have me rushing to queue up for it either...

[scrapbook]

OK guys..this is a good movie!

Wasn't expecting much following the reviews and had made my mind up about Clive Owen before entering, but I was wrong!

If this had been directed as well as gladiator I think it could have been excellent! Amongst other things the battle scenes were not as good..maybe something to do with the film being cut and it was a weee bit cheesy in places, but overall thumbs up from me..and I'm not easily pleased

Better than Troy, not as good as Gladiator.

[mjn]

Originally Posted by Rambo John J

I've seen a few reviews and haven't seen anyone give it a proper panning yet.

todays Irish Independant..... 2 stars out of 5

[the_pauley]

Must admit that another thing putting me off was yet another "rave" reviiew from Paul (Woss) Ross in the "News of the Screws", being used as the sole blurb in some of the newspaper ads.

In the past he has come to the rescue and given a usable thumbs up quote to be used on the advertising of some widely-panned and extremely lame ducks.

[scrapbook]

3.5 close to 4.0 out of 5 for me.

Would put troy at 2.5 to 3 personally.

The 'wife' would give it a strong 4 and she is even fussier then me!

[Bristol Pete]

My brother is a film critic and in the guild of film writers. Most of them detest Paul Ross and his inane 'drops' calling films like American Pie the Wedding 'The best comedy of the year' and so on.

Frankly, he is a terrible film critic.

Mind you, Jonny Vaughan is the worst there is.

Cap

[the_pauley]

Ross typifies the growing trend of "Rent a Review" film "critics".

Basically hack journos who know zilch and couldn't care less about movies.

This is particularly rampant in the USA.

They exist purely to give gushing reviews to pump up crummy movies made by studios in turn owned by larger corporations that spend gazillions per year advertising with said publishing/media conglomerates. Or in many cases the same corporations that own the studios often own the newspapers and magazines, so good reviews guaranteed...

To call Ross a "film critic" is to enoble him and denigrate legitimate critics with a genuine passion for the subject. His cringeworthy blurb for "Spiderman 2" just about sums up his journalistic credibility: "WEBTASTIC!!!"

Hardly Pauline Kael, is it?

[ELV]

Well the wife dragged me to see this on Friday night, I was put off by the negative comments on this thread,mostly by people who have'nt seen it but i have to say that i really enjoyed it!
No it wasn't Gladiator or Braveheart or Lord of the Rings but i don't think it was trying to be, It did remind me of all of them at certain points and i did'nt think it was imo better either, wich in my opinion is asking a lot.Good casting a couple of good set peices. There are a couple of ropey cgi effects but if historical action films are your thing (using historical in the loosest sense of the word) then go and see, if you don't enjoy it well at least youv'e made your own opinion.
Moral of the story, don't be to quick to judge a film by what you see written down either good or bad. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5.

[roohster2]

I can't bring myself to watch it - interesting premise, but terrible casting.
Clive Owen and Ray Winston? "Leave it aaaaaaaaaht, Arfur you slaaaaaaaag!""Shaddit Bors, or I'll give you a slap"

[ELV]

Maybey we should have used the Yanks, that would have been better!!!!Proper film stars

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by roohster2

I can't bring myself to watch it - interesting premise, but terrible casting.
Clive Owen and Ray Winston? "Leave it aaaaaaaaaht, Arfur you slaaaaaaaag!""Shaddit Bors, or I'll give you a slap"

CLive owen surprisngly good...Ray Winston is pretty much Ray Winston, but still reasonable

[roohster2]

Originally Posted by ELV

Maybey we should have used the Yanks, that would have been better!!!!Proper film stars

Perhaps Keanu Reeves could have treated us to his authentic English accent?
He turned Bram Stoker's Dracula into a comedy.
OOH - Gary Oldman! There's an idea for King Arthur!

30% on RottenTomatoes.com. Also, despite MASSIVE marketing, this film is still going to lose money.

But the clincher for me was the trailer. I'm not averse to a bit of a rework of the classic story, but this whole thing reeks of "Bruckheimer movie in a can"; exactly the kind of film that I detest.

[Wasabi]

Just $80million so far worldwide. http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=kingarthur.htm

Its gonna do gauranteed loss, they won't recoup its production and marketing costs at $160million.

Wasabi

[ELV]

Roohster 2, i think you missed the point i was being sarcastic.Agree with you on Gary Oldman but why oh why is everyone against using these so called British B-List stars just because there not living in Hollywood and getting 7 million a film does'nt mean they can't act or perhaps to enjoy a film we've got to have a Bruce or Mel to give it that authentic epic feel!!

[seany]

As someone who's a huge fan of Excalibur, i was never going to be overly impressed by this film, and god was i right. Clive owen was wooden. Last time i saw that much wood was in a bendover dvd. The best actor in the hole film was the main bad guy i thought he had a lot of presence.No sword pulled, more like a tooth

[Zone]

Originally Posted by keanyboy

Last time i saw that much wood was in a bendover dvd. The best actor in the hole

He is good isn't he

[roohster2]

Originally Posted by ELV

Roohster 2, i think you missed the point i was being sarcastic.

No, I got the point...I was joining in the dissing of using American actors to play British parts.
I agree that the part of Arthur should be played by a Brit, as should most of the cast, but I don't agree with the choices made.
there are many fine Brit actors out there who would have been ideal.

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by Azrikam

30% on RottenTomatoes.com. Also, despite MASSIVE marketing, this film is still going to lose money.

But the clincher for me was the trailer. I'm not averse to a bit of a rework of the classic story, but this whole thing reeks of "Bruckheimer movie in a can"; exactly the kind of film that I detest.

30% on Rotten Tomatoes is probably down to the fact that the yanks do not like any movie with British actors without Hugh Grant in it!!!!

As far as the "rework of the classic story" is concerned you need to know your history. The classis story, as such, is complete myth and bunkum based upon truely fictional characters originally written and set in 12th/13th century.

However the supposed true origins of Arthur revolve around a warlord in the dark ages of England dating back to 6th/7th century. This is the basis of the movie.

If you want to watch true fiction watch Excalibur, if you want to watch something that tries to be historically correct and gives an interpretation of true history then watch this.

This is no way a Bruckheimer attempt of rewriting history, it is the most accurate representation of the facts surrounding arthur you will have seen in a movie before.

YOu should also give the Director a bit more credit, after all was the director of Training Day and Tears of the Sun. A guy that puts in a lot of research into his films.

[runningback]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

YOu should also give the Director a bit more credit, after all was the director of Training Day and Tears of the Sun. A guy that puts in a lot of research into his films.

another reason for me not to even watch it (definitely not going to spend money on that in the cinema), these two very, very mediocre films he did before. Training day was only watchable to see what Denzel Washington would make out of the laughable script and the clichee characters,
tears of the sun is not even worth mentioning in my opinion.

Originally Posted by scrapbook

However the supposed true origins of Arthur revolve around a warlord in the dark ages of England dating back to 6th/7th century. This is the basis of the movie.

I warlord in the 7th century with a kickass girlfriend, I assume.

Originally Posted by scrapbook

30% on Rotten Tomatoes is probably down to the fact that the yanks do not like any movie with British actors without Hugh Grant in it!!!!

The Full Monty = 94%
Trainspotting = 80%
Calendar Girls = 75%

That's just the first ones that came to mind.

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by Azrikam

I warlord in the 7th century with a kickass girlfriend, I assume.

I never said the whole film was based upon actual events.I was merely trying to indicate that they had not rewrote the classic story, but interpreted the factual character that was Arthur whilst keeping the familar elements of the classic story to make it more comfortable for us.

Originally Posted by Azrikam

The Full Monty = 94%
Trainspotting = 80%
Calendar Girls = 75%

That's just the first ones that came to mind.

I was of course joking about the Hugh Grant thing, but lets face it the yanks are a little short on intelligence aren't they?

[sc1977]

this film was so made for the Hallmark channel, clive owen displayed the acting talent of a plank, ray winstone? ha ha sure "the cockney knights of the round table" dont make me laugh and as for the main enenmy cedric was it? stellen skarsgard not bad but bore a striking resemblance to the guy from minder

bruckheimer films are usually popcorn flicks ,leave your brain at the door jobs
but this was bad even for him

[Pooon]

What have you people got against Clive Owen??? Has he done something to you all in a past life or something. I have not yet seen King Arthur but am looking forward to seeing it, despite all the iffy reviews the film has gotten. Have any of you seen Croupier? top top film, Owen as the lead in it as well, and i think he is awesome in that, i even think he's good in the Bourne Identity, for the few scenes he has.

[pjclark1]

If they release an uncut version with the girl "naked"
on DVD then it might make some cash...................
But what a turkey this movie was.