To be fair, while this is fantasy rather than sci-fi, as is pretty common for sci-fi fans, as a sci-fi fan plenty of times we generally have to take their criticisms with a big ol grain of salt and still go see a lot of sci-fi movies they rant about, when it comes to those movies since many of them like virtually nothing and half the time seem to have a hate boner for the genre.
I'm hoping that's at least good fun, having seen bits and pieces of the animated series, and having liked the trailers, I'm looking forward to seeing that one.
It's only good in small moments (too brief considering how damn long this is) rather than an underrated whole tbh
Damn shame though. I disliked the last king arthur movie more than this (that was just straight up boring and dull) but I was really pulling for a good movie that would bring back the fantasy magic to the myth.
The trailer was so bizarre. Am I understanding correctly that King Arthur is supposed to be the villain with the Hitler youth / alt right haircut and literal Nazi salutes?
What a shocker, guy who hasn't made a decent film in almost two decades continues to make garbage. Hope Disney fires him from Aladdin.
And before you bring up the Sherlock Holmes films, don't. The ONLY reason those films worked was because of RDJ. Anyone else in the role and they'd be crap.
Listen, you can't say "he hasn't made a good movie in two decades" and then write off two of those movies with the caveat of "but those don't count." (Man from U.N.C.L.E. was certainly "decent" as well.)
Those movies, especially the first, were very well received worldwide. There are a ton of Sherlock Holmes adaptions, a number of which are from this era, if you didn't like his movies. He didn't "ruin" Sherlock.
There's a pretty clear difference between that movie and this one.
Those movies, especially the first, were very well received worldwide. There are a ton of Sherlock Holmes adaptions, a number of which are from this era, if you didn't like his movies. He didn't "ruin" Sherlock.
There's a pretty clear difference between that movie and this one.
this looked like butt, no surprises here - no idea how great Lost City of Z would have to be to convince me Hunnam's not a mediocre-at-best actor. Sam Worthington levels of forgettable in everything i see him in.
I feel like Guy Ritchie's style gets nurtured as soon, as the budget goes up.
There were moments in the first Sherlock where I was surprised to see that this was indeed a Guy Ritchie movie. The rest was the normal Blockbuster blend.
I saw the Led Zeppelin trailer. I rather like the idea of the mash up between medieval era fused with rock. At least it makes for some interesting trailers. I never saw it, but there was that film with Heath Ledger- A Knights Tale, which had a similar premise, and if I recall correctly, people didn't respond well to that either.
Fusing of such different styles is very difficult. Which is why its amazing when you come across something like Cowboy Bebop or Firefly, which blends completely different genres that give the audience polarizing connotations. Westerns and Sci-Fi and Jazz have little to do with one another, but they make it work.
Maybe there is a cheesy uncanny valley anecdote to it? Metal has always had this fascination with fantasy. Maybe a lot of people find rock + medieval era just to be bringe because it makes them think of 80s Dio music videos?
I saw the Led Zeppelin trailer. I rather like the idea of the mash up between medieval era fused with rock. At least it makes for some interesting trailers. I never saw it, but there was that film with Heath Ledger- A Knights Tale, which had a similar premise, and if I recall correctly, people didn't respond well to that either.
Fusing of such different styles is very difficult. Which is why its amazing when you come across something like Cowboy Bebop or Firefly, which blends completely different genres that give the audience polarizing connotations. Westerns and Sci-Fi and Jazz have little to do with one another, but they make it work.
Maybe there is a cheesy uncanny valley anecdote to it? Metal has always had this fascination with fantasy. Maybe a lot of people find rock + medieval era just to be bringe because it makes them think of 80s Dio music videos?
I watched it, though I arrived late I couldn't watch the first 15 minutes or so.
Spoilers maybe...
But it felt like a really weird movie, trying to set up many things by jumping to future events that Arthur explains as what-ifs then go back to the present , advance the present and then jump to a farther future when the what-ifs happended. Ok my explanation probably sounds confusing but you will know when you watch it.
Also the fights
when he uses Excalibur
is the exact same style used in a cutscene in Smash Bros. Brawn in Subspace Emissary when Meta Knight and Marth fight , aka normal speed and when te sword clashes against something it goes into slow motion and the sword glows, looks cool ,
when there is no Excalibur
it's just shaky cam you can't make out anything.
Are those even spoilers?
Sometimes the music is like me and my friends are drunk and we wanna start a band and hit any metal object we find near us.
If some executives on Warner like you and you can make a single box office sucess the company will finance all your dumb ideas even if all your other movies are a big failure
I saw it at a preview screening a couple of days ago and it really is terrible.
After a bunch of Marvel movies you kinda start taking for granted how those movies are able to create some emotional connection to superhuman characters in the middle of high action chaos. There is none of that here. Arthur is played like a smug gangster from Snatch, the acting of the sorcerers is SO bad and there's a million other small characters that have zero personality.
Besides that, 80% of the plot makes no sense, the jokes aren't funny, and the movies feels like it's 3 hours long because there's constantt flashbacks to the same early scene.
Some of the action scenes are alright because it at least looks good, but the actual fighting is a lot worse than Sherlock Holmes or any other big action movies in recent memory.
I actually hadn't expected much going in after seeing the trailers, but this was still a huge disappointment to me.
I updated the stats in the OP. The RT score is now at 23%, but still carrying that same 4.7 average. The Metacritic score dropped to 41.
With over 50 reviews now, RT went ahead and added a critics consensus
Critics Consensus: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword piles mounds of modern action flash on an age-old tale -- and wipes out much of what made it a classic story in the first place.
Studio tracking for this film is $25M over the weekend, but boxoffice.com is predicting $17.9M. The latter would put a $50M domestic total in doubt. King Arthur is now the prime candidate for box office bomb of the summer.
I had to choose between gotg 2 and this and went to see king arthur, since gotg 1 soared me so bad. Overall movie wasn't bad, little confusing and disjointed but it had great action visuals and 3d.
'So we made a movie about King Arthur, except we took out the parts about chivalry and added fucking Mumakils and Arthur is now a cursing badass!!'
Fans of Arthurian legends: '...wha?'
'So you liked Ritchies prior work about a group of charismatic neer-do-wells cursing their way through adversity? Great! We threw the recipe in a blender and added some CGI dragon eels and set-pieces you thought were cool than one time in 2008!'
Ritchie fans: 'you wot m8'
'So you like yourself some fantasy? We got fantasy for you baby! Or, y'know, a GRITTY and REALISTIC
2 colors, one of them grey
colour palette and David fuckin' Beckham, man!'
Fantasy fans: 'ehhhh, um, how many Mumakils again?
