Any movie about King Arthur and his Knights is bound to be great, right? I mean, the legend of Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table is on of the most exciting tales around, so a movie about them just has to be great. Especially when it claims to be the "true" story behind the legend. Well, you better think again. This movie somehow manages to take one of the most exciting, interesting and well developed stories that exist and turn it into a bore.
First of all, it is not the "true" story of Arthur, simply because nobody knows what the true story is. There are a number of historical figures that are assumed to have fueled the legend (the film's Roman Arthur is just one of them)and the most probable scenario is that the legend of King Arthur is based on several historic figures and events (and some of the legend's elements were created much later to spice things up). And the movie is not even historically accurate (weapons and things that were invented centuries later, the Saxons invading the wrong part of Britain etc.).
But besides that, is the movie any good? Well, not really. Mediocre acting, inadequate script, some lame dialog, undeveloped characters are some of the films characteristics. The portrayal of Arthur as a goodie-two-shoes Christan made me feel sick. And Xena, the warrior princess - sorry I mean Guinevere - delivers the final blow. But to be fair I have to admit that there were some great fight scenes and, for the most part, very good photography. Had it not been a story about King Arthur I probably would have liked it better. I can't really recommend it to anyone, watch it at your own risk. I give it 5 out of 10.
First of all, it is not the "true" story of Arthur, simply because nobody knows what the true story is. There are a number of historical figures that are assumed to have fueled the legend (the film's Roman Arthur is just one of them)and the most probable scenario is that the legend of King Arthur is based on several historic figures and events (and some of the legend's elements were created much later to spice things up). And the movie is not even historically accurate (weapons and things that were invented centuries later, the Saxons invading the wrong part of Britain etc.).
But besides that, is the movie any good? Well, not really. Mediocre acting, inadequate script, some lame dialog, undeveloped characters are some of the films characteristics. The portrayal of Arthur as a goodie-two-shoes Christan made me feel sick. And Xena, the warrior princess - sorry I mean Guinevere - delivers the final blow. But to be fair I have to admit that there were some great fight scenes and, for the most part, very good photography. Had it not been a story about King Arthur I probably would have liked it better. I can't really recommend it to anyone, watch it at your own risk. I give it 5 out of 10.