But I'm stunned by the hatred being unleashed by critics about King Arthur. I don't get it and won't stay silent. I've seen it twice (once in 3-D) and loved it. And I'll see it again. I'm not sure what critics wanted or expected from this movie. But they seem to love to hate Guy Ritchie. It's almost international sport at this point. If you don't like Ritchie's signature style, the movie probably isn't for you. His mark is all over it, though it's a very different genre for him. It's a fresh take that breathes new life into an old legend. It's perfect for the video game generation. That's not a bad thing.
Oops! This image does not follow our content guidelines. To continue publishing, please remove it or upload a different image.
Charlie Hunnam does an extraordinary job with this character and shows that how perfect he is for roles like this in a movie .
I am a big fan of Arthurian legend and all the movies and stories that have come before. This version doesn't take away from that. It's different and the Arthur origin story hasn't been done before. He's growing into his role as King. The editing, pace, sharp banter, and brotherly inflicts lighten some of the heavier moments and there are so many great scenes. And I can't say enough about Daniel Pemberton's score. It's a character unto itself and gives the film a medieval, modern, rock-and-roll edge. I was mesmerized and wasn't bored for a second. The film is visually dazzling, and I wanted to know more about these characters.
I came into the movie with no expectations, other than I couldn't wait to see Charlie Hunnam on the big screen again. I'm a devoted Sons of Anarchy fan, and it surprises me that he isn't a household name yet. He brings so much to this role. He flat-out looks incredible. He already lights up any screen, but putting on 20 lbs. of muscle makes him look like a superhero. But he also brings depth to the role – not easy to do in a movie full of stars and big-time special effects. He's cocky, charismatic, but also vulnerable. A reluctant hero, who's not sure he's ready or willing to embrace his destiny. I want to know more about his relationship with the Mage, played by Astrid Berges-Frisbey. There's subtle sexual tension between those two, that hints at more. I read that she's supposed to be Guinevere, so I hope they make more movies.
Jude Law has so much fun with his role and I liked his mix of swagger and shame. Djimon Hounsou and Aiden Gillen are fantastic, as well as the rest of the cast. You want to hang out with these guys and have a beer and you definitely want them fighting for you. The action scenes are big and over the top, but that's the fun of a Summer movie.
It's no secret that Guy made a 3.5 hour Arthur film that he had to cut down to 2 hours. There's more story to be told. But that was the plan for multiple movies. Stupid critics are trying to ruin that. Don't listen to them. And if you want to see more of Charlie's range, check out the Lost City of Z.
The film remains the definitive incarnation of Arthurian legend for me.
Eric Bana delivers one of the fantasy-action highlights in Warner's "King Arthur: Legend of the sword "...
So that's my way of letting you know the bias I bring into my assessment of King Arthur: Legend of the Sword -- I'd argue the "bias" translates into "I love a prior definitive cinematic rendition that captures the epic heart of Arthurian legend in gorgeous, faithful, timeless style," or maybe just "I'm biased in favor of superior storytelling and craftsmanship for Arthurian adaptations." Regardless, take it as you will. That said, however, I made every attempt to also weigh and judge Legend of the Sword on its own merits, just as I did with the 2004 movie that was clearly not on par with Excalibur or Knights of the Round Table, but which I could still consider apart from those comparisons and appreciate enough to include it on my list of favorite Arthurian films.
