Ok who the fuck actually enjoyed this iteration of King Arthur? This shit had me laughing out loud a few times because how silly it was.. Was it supposed to be comical?
Also who ok this as the final villian, looks like something straight out of dark souls or some Anime.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
I also really enjoyed it, but I get that it's not everyone's cup of tea. Maybe it helps if you're familiar with Ritchie.
No one that's why it bombed
It was okay.
There's some logical inconsistency and Vortigaunt isn't powerful enough. Fucker needed to give us atleast one good display of evil magic before activating his Devil Trigger.
I really don't get why they even called it King Arthur. It has less than nothing to do with anything from the Arthurian legend beyond the most basic shit that's disseminated into the popular fantasy culture for decades that it wasn't necessary at all to evoke the name. Did they think the name would put asses in the seats?
the fight looked like a video game complete with quicktime events
No they really cared about the legend and wanted a twist on it.
Which one is worse?
I liked it but I'm not British so...
Was this one actually bad? I heard it was kind of dull but not outwardly a shit movie. Ritchie's is just trash.
>The most basic shit that's disseminated into popular fantasy
Elaborate? Curious
I enjoy the roman version, but its a vastly different take on the myth (Arthur is neither a king nor has a magic sword). Its more like grossly inaccurate historical fiction than actual fantasy. As an Arthurian legend movie, its a little lacking, but pretty cool as a roman war film.
you know the typical stuff, the magic sword stuck in a stone, the hero being a street urchin but actually royalty, bad guy killed the good king and usurped him, is stuff that has been so thoroughly ingrained in fantasy stories it doesn't need to be specifically branded King Arthur. It just seems so utterly baffling to me to me because in my mind anyone who'd brand their movie that way must love the mythology to some extent and would want to stick at least marginally close to it, but Ritchie didn't give a fuck so why even bother with the name?
>Literally the most important moment in Arthur story given to a celebrity athlete cameo
This, honestly.
>Law
>Bana
>CIA
Too bad it was shit.
Eric Bana being the stone was an interesting touch. Stripped of dialogue this was an excellent music video at the very least. Lots of interesting faces and images.
It really was fantasy on the level of a throwaway fantasy videogame, the ending was so fucking weird I felt like I should just be playing Dark Souls 3 instead of watching
Isn't King Arthur *the* standard, guideline Fantasy story though
What the fuck are those costumes
Do actors ever feel stupid when they wear this stuff?
fuck you that was a fun movie to watch
Arthur is supposed to look like the iconic roman legionary, the costume at least looks similar to pic related.
Yeah sure, but that doesn't mean every story with those elements needs to be a King Arthur story
Movie is kino. That opening alone is worth the watch let alone Jude Law.
I went in with low expectations and it was pretty fun. I enjoyed it.
>that theme at 1:00
reminded me of the first matrix film
But Roman soldiers hadn't looked like that for like 300 years by Arthur's time, they should look more like pic related
holly shit they gave him a shit ton of lines
it wasnt half bad for a cameo if he wasnt beckham i wouldnt have thought nothing bout it
>maybe it helps if you’re familiar with Richie
It doesn’t. Snatch and Man From UNCLE are fucking masterpieces of stylized crime comedy and that doesn’t translate well to an Arthurian epic
what time you think he is from?
it's one the same level as Dracula Untold
dumb fantasy that turns into a videogame during action scenes
5th or 6th century?
One thing this movie did right was the music. fucking had me pumped first watch.
Rome started pulling out around 400AD
they had changed by then but they were still wearing stuff similar to the classic look within 150-200 years of then
but all the shit in that movie was completely made up even if it did look sorta kinda Roman, still it was kinda a novel take on the Arthurian story
That looks pretty cool. Aside from the stupid skull face and boring torso. Kind of reminds me of Ichigo.
Expected it to be shit from the webms and trailer. Ended up liking it. Would be a kino tv series of just them fucking around on medieval adventures and bantz.
Growing Up Londinium and The Devil And The Huntsman were prime fucking tracks and belonged in a much better film.
>We are ODST
The whole based street urchin crime lord schtick is the absolute antithesis to the Arthurian legend.
>bollocks, scuse me mate
This is exactly how people conversed in Pre-Saxon Britonian England
Not to mention the way a criminal London wideboy saves Britain even before London effectively existed. Londinium was just a port back then, not even the biggest town in post Roman Britain, and certainly not the size depicted.
Ritchie seems to think the London criminal underground produces the world's most amazing and unstoppable people.
Dudes on the horses look pretty much how I imagine the torturers from Book of the New Sun. These costumes are stupid but in a cool way.
>Also who ok this as the final villian, looks like something straight out of dark souls
Put me more in mind of Senua's Sacrifice and its wispy-misty proto-viking monsters.
I honestly thought I was on Sup Forums when I saw the image. Did a quick double-take since I thought it was Senua's Sacrifice.
It had a kino score and the design of the world hit all the right spots for me. It was a very different take on the Arthurian legend but I didn't actually mind since it established what it wanted to do right out the gate and stuck to it. Also that opening sequence was pure gold.
If I'm honest I didn't realize that was beckham until this thread. Scene was awesome tho
I know Jews love their public domain movies but I really would be fine never seeing another King Arthur/Robin Hood/Sherlock Holmes movie
Britannia was officially dropped in about 410, but southern England remained Romanesque until nearly 500. Saxons and Picts were invading simultaneously throughout the century, Saxons beginning closer to 450 but the film suggests that the Saxons in it are like the 'first wave' or something so you they could fudge the years. Its kind of a mish mash of a film and they stretch history but it could've been worse probably.
I liked at a lot more than i thought i would, same as the cruise Mummy
I actually loved this movie and I'm sad there won't be a sequel.
It was goofy retarded fun
>Video game tier fight scenes
>Aiden Gillen literally playing Bill Wilson
>the fucking go pro chase scene
>dat music
>Ends with a kind of sequel hook that's still a fine ending since it's never getting a sequel
Overall I enjoyed it
thats Guy Ritchie in a nutshell
It was super gay how his charged up sword turned into a fucking blunt object and just knocked dudes around. Would have been way cooler is he was cleaving fully plated dudes in half
it was really dumb and i thought it was pretty okay
the slow mo sword is pretty dope
Guy Ritchies Action scenes are almost always fucking stupid and look even stupider
Vid related
Have you read Once and Future King? Its comical as fuck