• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (really) Rottenwatch - Currently 5% RT / 44 MC

K

kswiston

Member
EDIT: The title will probably be out of date as more reviews are added. Unless one of our mods decides to change it, just look the stats below for updated scores. I will try to check back over the week and update as necessary.

It looks like critics are not fans of Guy Ritchie's latest. On to Aladdin!


Rotten Tomatoes - 38 Fresh, 102 Rotten - 27% / 4.6 avg
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_arthur_legend_of_the_sword

Metacrtiic - 41 reviews, 41 (mixed reception)
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword?ref=hp


Critic Quotes:

From one moment to the next, it's possible to on some level enjoy the shaking up of tired conventions in a swordplay fantasy such as this and then to be dismayed by the lowbrow vulgarity of what's ended up onscreen. The film gives with one hand and takes away with the other, which can be frustrating in what's meant to be entertainment.

Hunnam is game for the rugged demands placed upon him and takes the physical punishment administered to him in stride. Playing the figure of unalloyed evil here, Law gives the malice of this man who would be king full rein, while Bana provides convincing contrast as the betrayed brother.

After using visual effects to extensively create huge masses of armies and mayhem, the film suddenly resorts to a herky-jerky video game approach in a climactic stand-off that looks quite lame in contrast to most of the action.

- Todd McCarthy
Click to expand...

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/king-arthur-legend-sword-review-1001614


After playing the straight man to Robert Downey Jr.’s borderline-unhinged Sherlock Holmes in two Ritchie-directed blockbusters, Law seems to relish getting to let loose here, and his villainous Vortigern has all the gristle of a high-camp performance. But Ritchie’s overwrought sense of flamboyance isn’t nearly queer enough to achieve “so bad it’s good” self-parody. Rather, he comes across as an aging rebel worried about being judged un-hip, clearly over-compensating in order to remain one step ahead of fellow stylists Zack Snyder (“300”), Tarsem Singh (“Mirror Mirror”), and Alex Proyas (“Gods of Egypt”) — all of whose genuinely outrageous, inadvertently awful work appears to be a source of inspiration here.

Collectively, these directors have reached a point where their films run the risk of collapsing under the weight of their own production design, especially since Hollywood no longer makes stars big enough to compete with the environments that surround them. (Have you noticed: Even Trump looks tiny when photographed at Mar Lago?)

At least Hunnam has the potential to be the next Brad Pitt, having begun his career in a series of demanding acting roles — including a long run on FX’s “Sons of Anarchy” — before making the transition to blockbuster screen idol. He’s got presence, along with a sense of vulnerability that’s essential to the Arthur role, in which he plays a true-blood prince, orphaned by his uncle, raised in a brothel, educated on the streets, and thrust into the unlikely position of saving the kingdom.

But Hunnam’s competing with so much ridiculous window-dressing here. It’s as if Ritchie, who began his career with the rowdy follow-that-shotgun caper “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels,” has once again tried to build an entire movie around the whereabouts of a rare weapon, when the legend of the sword isn’t nearly as interesting as that of the man who wields it.

-Peter Debruge
Click to expand...
http://variety.com/2017/film/reviews/king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-review-guy-ritchie-1202420937/


Amidst the frantic cutting, Ritchie keeps loading on the phallic imagery: Arthur’s power derives from his sword, while Vortigem must be stopped from completing his tall, tall tower. And then there are the constant snakes: some challenge Arthur or provide him with hallucinogenic venom, while Vortigem receives advice from a group of serpent women who appear to have swum in from “The Little Mermaid.”

This isn’t an actor’s movie, although Law does at least find a few moments to play Vortigem like a preening Mussolini, shouting at the assembled masses while swathed in fur and eagle-head epaulets. Otherwise, the characters are there to move the story along and to be consistently heroic or villainous throughout.

In a sense, Arthur — aristocrat by nature, thug by nurture — is the ideal Ritchie hero; the filmmaker’s lineage can be traced back to Edward I, but he’s spent most of his directing career celebrating small-time gangsters (“Snatch,” “RocknRolla”) and backing the proletariat in the class struggle (“Swept Away”).

If you like Guy Ritchie in blam-blam-blam mode, then “King Arthur” will be your grail of mead; those who prefer his work on a film like “The Man from UNCLE” — which feels like “My Dinner with Andre” compared to the hyperkineticism on display here — may find that there’s too much “a lot” in this Camelot.

- Alonso Duralde
Click to expand...
https://www.thewrap.com/king-arthur-review-legend-of-the-sword-guy-ritchie-charlie-hunnam/


As Law’s Vortigern snarls about how he wants this threat to his black-magic reign dead, Arthur saddles up with a group of rebels (and one pouty, catwalk-ready mage, played by Astrid Bergès-Frisbey) to bring Vortigern down. It’s here that the film briefly sparks to life, as Arthur’s grifting, wisecracking cronies (with colorful names like Goosefat Bill) hatch their throne-toppling scheme in thick Cockney accents reminiscent of Ritchie’s East London street toughs from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. They’re rascals you want to spend some hang time with. But the film never allows you to. There are too many phony-looking special-effects sequences of giant marauding elephants and magical eel creatures to get to. It doesn’t matter if they don’t help the story; what seems to matter is that Ritchie had enough money at his disposal to conjure them, so why not spend it? Hunnam and his charismatic band of merry pranksters get lost in the sea of pixels. Which is a shame. Because King Arthur could have been a rollicking blast. Instead it’s just another wannabe blockbuster with too much flash and not enough soul.

- KEVIN P. SULLIVAN
Click to expand...
http://ew.com/movies/2017/05/09/king-arthur-legend-of-the-sword-ew-review/
 
N

Ninjimbo

Member
Messed up. I was kinda looking forward to this since the trailers were rad. Guy Ritchie usually makes entertaining movies.
 
B

Broken Joystick

At least you can talk. Who are you?
Saw this a week(?) ago. Some funny moments and I think Hunnam is really charismatic, but as an action film it fails on almost all levels. Some classic Ritchie moments too but doesn't really save the film.

It's also a good 20 minutes too long.
 
B

BumRush

Member
I know RT and Metacritic work VERY VERY differently, but I feel like a 44 MC is pretty high for a film with a 5% freshness. No?
 
P

Pinko Marx

Banned
Lock, Stock, and 2 Smoking Barrels is one of my favorites of all time. But Richtie has not been able to match that since, at least for me. The trailers for this looked pretty horrible and the reviews just confirm.
Will wait for Netflix release.
 
M

MLCodest

Member
Still going to see it most likely, love me some Charlie Hunnam. Hopefully this doesn't hurt his career too much if this flops hard.
 
K

kris.

Banned
Broken Joystick said:
Saw this a week(?) ago. Some funny moments and I think Hunnam is really charismatic, but as an action film it fails on almost all levels. Some classic Ritchie moments too but doesn't really save the film.

It's also a good 20 minutes too long.
Click to expand...

pretty much my thoughts exactly. the action was boring as hell and the movie was way longer than it should have been.
 
J

JonnyDBrit

Member
Welp, guess fantasy gets knocked back down from film for a bit.

So the general gist of it seems to be that the film is trying too hard to come across as subversive, and/or ends up focusing on the wrong aspects of its story, even though the material for something better is right there?
 
K

kswiston

Member
BumRush said:
I know RT and Metacritic work VERY VERY differently, but I feel like a 44 MC is pretty high for a film with a 5% freshness. No?
Click to expand...

This film seems to be getting a lot of 2/5 and 5/10 type scores, and very few that get into the 6/10 "fresh range".

The RT average is basically the same as the Metacritic score.
 
B

Broken Joystick

At least you can talk. Who are you?
Data West said:
charlie hunnam is a bad actor
Click to expand...

I disagree, he was okay in this. Jude Law is clearly the superior actor here though.

Banderdash said:
Not really a surprise... the trailers looked like shite.

Isn't this supposed to be the first film in a trilogy?
Click to expand...

torre_avenue said:
Remember, this was supposed to be the first of 6 movies.

6.
Click to expand...

The ending clearly sets the path for this to happen, so I wouldn't be surprised. I actually think they could do it if they drastically cut the budget. Seems like Ritchie was given too much to know what to do with and the film suffers for it.
 
V

vatstep

This poster pulses with an appeal so broad the typical restraints of our societies fall by the wayside.
The new TV spot has review quotes from Twitter users. I think that says it all.
 
G

GabeTheGrouch76

Member
Woof. That's a pretty low score. Likely guaranteed to be a bomba now.

Brad Jones in his Midnight Screening review did mention however that he wouldn't be surprised if the studio took the film way from Ritchie, due to how uneven the whole film was. Given how dodgy editing seems to be a recurring complaint in the reviews, the inconsistent tone in the trailers, and how WB reportedly did the same thing to Suicide Squad...

torre_avenue said:
Remember, this was supposed to be the first of 6 movies.

6.
Click to expand...

lmao

WB so thirsty they will probably make a franchise/cinematic universe of even the most barely-profitable turds they push out this point.
 
Grizzlyjin

Grizzlyjin

Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I mean after the trailers were people expecting any different? This looks like the hottest of garbage.
 
E

Einchy

semen stains the mountaintops
Well, shit.

I had heard some positive word about it and the trailers made it seem like a fun story. Also, we're in dire need of more fantasy films. Shit sucks, yo.
 
B

balohna

Member
I thought this looked terrible, then saw some positive early impressions and thought maybe it was good via the 4D chess of doing a bunch of cheesy "cool" shit but actually being clever about it somehow. Guess not.
 
N

NandoGip

Member
Is it just me or are most movies in the theaters from the last few years complete garbage? Has it always been this way and I never noticed?
 
B

Broken Joystick

At least you can talk. Who are you?
Creamium said:
He never had it.
Click to expand...

XXmFyXK.gif


NandoGip said:
Is it just me or are most movies in the theaters from the last few years complete garbage? Has it always been this way and I never noticed?
Click to expand...

You're gonna have to be a bit more specific with your questioning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes | Rotten Watch
News 2
51
2K
Days like these... replied
Zack Snyder's Rebel Moon: Part Two - The Scargiver | Rotten Watch
Community 2
54
3K
jason10mm replied
Army of Darkness (1993) and "The Long Night" from Game of Thrones are similar tales with stark differences.
0
729
Madflavor replied
Dune: Part Two - Review Thread
News 7 8 9 10 11
515
29K
Mossybrew replied
Animation Appreciation - Feature Lengths Only
Social Opinion Community 2
60
4K
CGNoire replied
Top Bottom