Based on a more realistic portrayal of "Arthur" than has ever been presented onscreen. The film will focus on the history and politics of the period during which Arthur ruled -- when the Roman empire collapsed and skirmishes over power broke out in outlying countries -- as opposed to the mystical elements of the tale on which past Arthur films have focused. Written by
Despite the fact that this was filmed in Super 35, the theatrical release listed "Filmed in Panavision" in the end credits. It was removed from the credits of the home video releases. See more »
The Pope did not have the power to give land to a people in the fifth century. This was not possible until nearly 400 years later. See more »
By 300 AD, the Roman Empire extended from Arabia to Britain. But they wanted more. More land. More peoples loyal and subservient to Rome. But no people so important as the powerful Sarmatians to the east. Thousands died on that field. And when the smoke cleared on the fourth day, the only Sarmatian soldiers left alive were members of the decimated but legendary cavalry. The Romans, impressed by their bravery and horsemanship, spared their lives. In exchange, these ...
[...] See more »
There are no opening credits, not even the production company and studio bumpers, only the title. See more »
A movie without any redeeming historical value other than living in the 5th century C.E. involved a lot of dirt! I do admit I only scanned about 15 percent of the 812 comments available, but feel that this represents a pretty good cross-section of the reviewers.
Some things others may have missed.
1. The unhistorical armor - obviously inspired by the "visual consultant" to Mr. Fuqua, Chris Achilleos whose fantasy art I adore, but ax blades of the forehead of horse barding? Pity the horse who uses it and brains himself.
2. Saxons marching in step on ice - either they are organized enough to march in step and know not to do it on ice or they are like the real Saxons and would not have ventured onto the too-thin ice in the first place. Either way this battle cannot happen, especially on a lake no Brit seems to know about.
3. Bors must be the richest Sarmatian ever as he tows around a wagon with what appears to be every hand powered weapon available on earth at the time, true riches to the warriors of the time. (Not to mention he supports 10+ children somehow)
4. Who is Dagonet? Never heard of him. Wikipedia lists him as King Arthur's jester and the guy in the movie is not funny.
5. Guinivere pulling a strong re-curve bow only a couple days after getting her dislocated (if not broken) fingers reset by Arthur? Ever dislocated (or even sprained) a finger? Takes a lot more than two days to get the function and flexibility back.
The rest of the mistakes are in other posts. The one rating puts this below "Plan 9 from Outer Space" which is so bad as to be actually funny which "King Arthur" definitely is not.
Those who 'loved' this movie must have seen some other movie or are using standards vastly different from mine.
58 of 91 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?