King Arthur (2004)
4/10
Not the King Arthur I thought I was going to see
6 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I was expecting to see a really good (big budget) reworking of a classic tale about King Arthur and the nights of the round table, and Merlin the Magician, Exacilur,Camelot,Sir Lancalot having an affair with Queen Genevier and Sir Galahad's quest for the Holy Grail........

This was not the King Arthur I thought I was going to see....

**************possible spoiler ************* In fact Arthur isn't even a King, He is a Roman commander (yes you heard me correct) and he leads his knights into the Saxon northern occupied territory of Britain to retrieve a family of High Roman Pedigree - none of which resembles the King Arthur story I was familiar with It's not a bad movie - I just think they should've called something other than KING ARTHUR - the studio that made this film should've used all original characters in this film, because the title and the use of the Arturian characters give one a false impression of what this movie is about.

However this film has a battle scene on a frozen lake (and of course the ice cracks) --this is perhaps the best mid-eval/fantasy battle scene I have ever seen (that scene is worth watching the movie for) Its a good movie but I still only gave it 4 stars out of 10 because the studio should've never linked this movie to the King Arthur legend because this film has nothing to do with it! ! ! ! !
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed