I suppose I liked it a smidge more than David; whatever my reaction was, I wasn't bored.
Why this is called KING ARTHUR is beyond me. I'm pretty flexible when it comes to adaptations of the Arthurian myths because those stories evolved and changed so much through the centuries, but this had virtually nothing to do with Arthur. A mixture of Tolkein, Game of Thrones, Robin Hood filtered through Guy Ritchie, but not King Arthur.
Charlie Hunnam's swagger was almost enough to distract me from him being about 15 years too old for the role, but no one else in the cast made much of an impression. Guy Ritchie's frantic cheekiness is even less well suited to a pseudo-Medieval era than Victorian London.
Another film where the FX and action scenes are all dark and/or rainy. They might as well just put up a black screen with a subtitle of what we're supposed to be seeing.
But, it was a rainy, dreary Saturday afternoon and this killed two hours without me falling asleep ...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum