 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
63.124.17.198
I love the romanticism and ideals of the fuedal period epics, but this was not original in any sense. I liked "Troy" better, which was not really my favorite action flick either. Hell, "The Lord of the Rings" was more mystical and magical than Merlin here. Camelot did not exist and they basically plodded about barren English soil killing Germans and Italians in an endless cycle of drudgery...
-Bill
Follow Ups:
...but I do have a problem with bad movies, and this one was a real stinker - the only striking scene in it was stolen from Sergei Eisenstein. I don't expect much from Bruckheimer and this movie didn't change my mind. What an incredible waste of fine actors like Clive Owen, Ioan Gruffud and Ray Winstone.You were expecting "Camelot" maybe? The historical "Arthur", BTW, if he existed (scholars think he did, although it's likely one or more RL heroes were merged into the "Arthur" of legend), was probably a British-Romano commander of roughly the same period as that of the movie...the tales of medieval knights familiar to us are the romanticized products of a much later, courtly age.
I do prefer a historical approach to Arthur, as long as it's well done - I always hoped someone would make a film of Mary Stewart's The Crystal Cave & the Hollow Hills. Another series in this vein is Bernard Cornwell's The Winter King (BC wrote the Sharpe series, adapted by the BBC).
A bunch of pissed off guys sent on a LAST dangerous mission to save ungrateful rescuees.
----Be right there, Mom.
...a entire plot in one sentence!
8
Frankly, I eagerly anticipated King Arthur, and it stunk up the theater. I don't tend to like movies that Jerry Bruckheimer is associated with (Pearl Harbor was a disaster [no pun intended]).Alexander was grating . . .
Troy was the best of the lot . . .
I'm looking forward to Kingdom of Heaven and The New World this year. Both have skilled directors--Scott and Malick respectively. Of the two, I'd place my money on Malick's work.
all the best, townsend
Since the subject is now Bruckheimer, what I have seen:
(1) The Rock - lots of things that go boom. Decent popcorn entertainment
(2) Con Air - More of the same
(3) Armageddon - more of the same, only more moronic. Seven Samurai in space.
(4) Enemy of the State - good thriller. Fewer explosions.
(5) Gone in Sixty Seconds - idiotic. Fast cars going boom.
(6) Coyote Ugly - No explosions. Still pretty moronic. Already did Flashdance
(7) Remember the Titans - Decent feel good film. No explosion. Not his typical production.
(8) Pearl Harbor - explosions, terrible, insults memories.
(9) Black Hawk Down - His best film. I thought very good. Boom's actually make sense.
(10) Bad Company - Taking talented people, put in goofy plot.
(11) Kangaroo Jack - Terrible. Stupid. Waste of time.
(12) Pirates of the Caribbean - Good popcorn movie.
(13) Veronic Guerin - Good political film. No explosions. Why did he do this?
(14) Bad Boys II - Another waste
(15) King Arthur - certainly flawed, but if you like genre...All in all, If Bruckheimer's name is attached, you are likely to be sitting with adolescent males. Which is why the industry loves him. Would love to seem him try to direct. That would be fun.
Although the liner note at the beginning of the movie state that this movie is the closest portrayal of Arthur as he was in those days. One thing that I have learned about this movie was Merlin was not a magician but lowly druid.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
