(As a note, I have not read much King Arthur history/literature, so my comments will be made purely out of the content of the film, and not in comparison to how it may deviate from what people expect from the original story.)
I like the first half of this movie. I've seen it at least twice for every time I've seen the second half--I usually turn it off before then. The first hour or so is fresh, enjoyable, and has (in my opinion) well-done filming. I don't know why, but it seems like everyone was getting tired about halfway through: the writers lagged in the screenplay, the actors weren't as easy to associate with, the flow of the movie just seemed to run down a bumpy road before finally landing in a pothole near the end of the movie. To be generous, I would rate the first half an "8" and the second half a "4"; thus my overall rating is a "6".
If the movie had stayed as good as it started out (minus the cliché flashbacks to childhood disaster we've seen for so many of these types of heroes: "Batman Forever", "King Arthur", "The Saint"...) I think it could have been a quality movie.
In my opinion, your best hope of really liking this movie is to be a fan of one or more of the actors. A King Arthur historian would most undoubtedly find too much fault to be able to enjoy it. An action-adventure-seeker would find it mediocre in the battle scenes. And someone looking for a good romance...well, it's OK, but not enough to win the movie entirely.
I like the first half of this movie. I've seen it at least twice for every time I've seen the second half--I usually turn it off before then. The first hour or so is fresh, enjoyable, and has (in my opinion) well-done filming. I don't know why, but it seems like everyone was getting tired about halfway through: the writers lagged in the screenplay, the actors weren't as easy to associate with, the flow of the movie just seemed to run down a bumpy road before finally landing in a pothole near the end of the movie. To be generous, I would rate the first half an "8" and the second half a "4"; thus my overall rating is a "6".
If the movie had stayed as good as it started out (minus the cliché flashbacks to childhood disaster we've seen for so many of these types of heroes: "Batman Forever", "King Arthur", "The Saint"...) I think it could have been a quality movie.
In my opinion, your best hope of really liking this movie is to be a fan of one or more of the actors. A King Arthur historian would most undoubtedly find too much fault to be able to enjoy it. An action-adventure-seeker would find it mediocre in the battle scenes. And someone looking for a good romance...well, it's OK, but not enough to win the movie entirely.