King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

10

BloodyrusMay 21, 2017

Определенно, лучший фильм этой весны и определенно один из лучших фильмов Гая Ричи. Не любить этот фильм невозможно. Будем надеяться на продолжение, которое по идее ожидается.Определенно, лучший фильм этой весны и определенно один из лучших фильмов Гая Ричи. Не любить этот фильм невозможно. Будем надеяться на продолжение, которое по идее ожидается.

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

7

russiangamerMay 20, 2017

Хорошее кино.
Что понравилось: Визуальная часть получилась отличной, режиссёрские фишки Ричи работают и выглядят потрясно, хороший саундтрек.
Равнодушным оставил только сюжет, просто скучноватый он, но не настолько, чтобы заснуть прямо вХорошее кино.
Что понравилось: Визуальная часть получилась отличной, режиссёрские фишки Ричи работают и выглядят потрясно, хороший саундтрек.
Равнодушным оставил только сюжет, просто скучноватый он, но не настолько, чтобы заснуть прямо в кинотеатре, как это сделал мужик сзади меня.
Лично я сделал для себя такой вывод: если бы я не пошёл в кино, то, наверное, ничего важного для своего киноманского взора не упустил. Идите на ваше усмотрение, если нравятся фентези или Ричи.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

5

EstebanBozaMay 19, 2017

Went to watch the movie expecting much more. The acting was not bad, it was actually quite good, the sound editing top notch as well, but that's pretty much it. The movie after a while gets exhausting with the exagerating CGI effects andWent to watch the movie expecting much more. The acting was not bad, it was actually quite good, the sound editing top notch as well, but that's pretty much it. The movie after a while gets exhausting with the exagerating CGI effects and crazy camera movements. Almost seems like they are pushing you through the whole movie without focusing on a good story. The script at times gets cheesy, with jokes or lines that looks like they tried to make it funny but failed (nobody laughed at the movies). This movie is similar to what happens in many modern day video games, focus too much on the graphics and sounds but not on a solid, interesting and intriguing story and experience.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

10

unfhuntMay 19, 2017

The story of the king Arthur is a legend so many times spoken, i really glad to see something fresh and daring like this on. This is like a new dark fantasy wave. Such modern middle ages. Full of stylish and solemn moments that touched me soThe story of the king Arthur is a legend so many times spoken, i really glad to see something fresh and daring like this on. This is like a new dark fantasy wave. Such modern middle ages. Full of stylish and solemn moments that touched me so deeply with the help of a good music choice. I even watched it twice and i realy don't understand so many negative critics reviews. That is unfair and that's what motivates me to write my one review to the glory of justice!… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

5

CineAutoctonoMay 19, 2017

"King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" was a somewhat passable film, because if the essence of history, and history in general were respected, but the performances were acceptable, and the action scenes were more of the same, some Were good, and"King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" was a somewhat passable film, because if the essence of history, and history in general were respected, but the performances were acceptable, and the action scenes were more of the same, some Were good, and others were stuck with the camera moves of a "Sucker Punch" scene, but I think it's unfair to compare Sucker Punch with King Arthur, but the bottom line is that Guy Ritchie needs some scene management Of action that has always been handled, as in Sherlock Holmes, or The Man of UNCLE, and that the film is enjoyable, but very regular at times.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

10

Aggie82May 19, 2017

Return of the King meets Matrix with Guy Ritchie smartass all over it! Loved it! I was laughing many times when no one else in the theater appeared to get it. Going to see it in theater again! Official "movie critics" never get it right!

3 of 11 users found this helpful38

All this user's reviews

7

bloopbymimiMay 19, 2017

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is, you know… an interpretation of the story of King Arthur; as in Knights of the Round Table, Merlin the Magician, etc., King Arthur. It’s one of those stories that has been told many, many times and in manyKing Arthur: Legend of the Sword is, you know… an interpretation of the story of King Arthur; as in Knights of the Round Table, Merlin the Magician, etc., King Arthur. It’s one of those stories that has been told many, many times and in many ways on film, including animation, satire, fantasy/action/adventure/drama. And I totally had to go see it after I heard Sandy Kenyon’s review, which was just too sad to even be funny.

Where this film goes wrong lies with two crucial elements of this movie are just “off.”

#1 – Director. Not that I don’t care for Guy’s work. He’s okay with me. But here he imposes his sleek, modern style of film making into this late 5th-early 6th century tale and the result is at times it works well and is charming, and at other times it’s a painfully bad fit. I use the word “imposes” because during the course of the entire movie things just feel very forced; when had his style been “infused” into the film it might have flowed more effortlessly. For example, in one scene Charlie Hunnam walks across the set with all the swag of Jax Teller and it is as if Jax Teller were playing King Arthur! No! No! No! Nobody in 5th century England was likely walking with a bop in their step; I mean it’s possible, but not probable. Little things like this made the movie laughable at times (and I’m not talking about the good kind of laughable, or the moments that were intended to be funny – and there were a few), and with just a bit more care and effort, we all could have had a better movie.

#2 – The screenplay. Guy helped co-write the screenplay, and the story felt as though it had more than a few hands on it – as if it had been a bit overwritten. This story didn’t quite know if it wanted to be historical, mystical, beautiful, comical, dramatic, tragic, epic – it was just all over the place and it did not work as all of these things at once. The balance in the story just wasn’t there. The story itself is definitely stale, having been told many times over the years, but the attempt to “freshen” the material with Ritchie’s style was a mistake, unless he was going to modernize the setting or just make the characters straight-gangster and make an R-Rated version. Now THAT would be a movie worth making and one I would be more likely to pay to see. I must say that this is the most multicultural cast of characters I have ever seen in the telling of this particular story, and I appreciated that. It is a beautiful thing to see people of color working on the big screen – BUT, it did absolutely nothing to modernized the story in any meaningful way (because the setting was still 5th century England), nor did it change the story in a way that made it more interesting or entertaining. Someone else may feel differently about it. Me personally, I don’t care if the entire cast is whatever nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or whatever, as long as the movie is good. And as far as the story itself, it may have worked on paper, and in theory I can even see where it might work, but the execution fails.

While watching Mr. Kenyon’s review he made mention of the terrible acting by David Beckham (I believe he mentions another critic claimed it is some of the worst acting he’d ever seen on film or something to that effect). But let me just say, Becks (see how I refer to David Beckham as though we’ve met…) only had two lines and they were two terribly written lines. The worst part of this movie by far for me was listening to Astrid Bergès-Frisbey as The Mage. I thought she was absolutely and tragically, terrible. This character has no presence, no energy (as she tried to be “ethereal” and came off as horror movie creepy), no emotion (yes, I understand she is The Mage, but give us something) and her accent was super-annoying. I mean, to point out one character with such a small role, just because it’s Becks and exclude this horrible, large (she is billed second on IMDB) role from criticism, is unfathomable to me. Now I’m critiquing the critic! I’m done with this movie!

What saves the movie from being a total wash out is the wardrobe (particularly the well tailored clothes on Hunnam), the cinematography/camera work, the choreography of the battle scenes, the effects, some of the acting, the jokes, and I gotta tell ya – looking at Charlie Hunnam for two hours will never a problem for me (unless something goes horribly, horribly wrong, heaven forbid, and God bless him).… Expand

4 of 8 users found this helpful44

All this user's reviews

5

sanchopanchoMay 18, 2017

What a silly mess. I've lost a few neurons watching this, but I had fun. Don't walk in late because the opening scene with the giant elephants is probably the most spectacular of the whole movie.

6 of 9 users found this helpful63

All this user's reviews

7

silkLRMay 18, 2017

Très loin de ce que Guy Ritchie peut faire, c'est un film d'action avec de mauvaise images de synthèse. Les 30 minutes de snatch médiéval sauve le film...

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

10

XanditzMay 17, 2017

The movie is awesome. First, lets just say it: It's not a classical view of the legend. But for real? Does anyone though it would be? Just check any trailer that you would know better. Ok, with this out of the way, the movie is a really coolThe movie is awesome. First, lets just say it: It's not a classical view of the legend. But for real? Does anyone though it would be? Just check any trailer that you would know better. Ok, with this out of the way, the movie is a really cool Action/Fantasy thriller. Great shots, awesome fights and and really fantasy stuff like magic and monsters. The story isn't anything different than Hollywood has been offering over the last decades; A classical path of the reluctant hero. The pace of the movie is really fast, and because of it some characters has not a proper developments, so you don't feel really attached to them when they die. But I'll repeat here: Is a ACTION movie. If you put a proper mind set you'll see the beauty of it.… Expand

3 of 9 users found this helpful36

All this user's reviews

10

wakeboardjakeMay 17, 2017

This movie contains one of the most accelerated, vibrant scenes that synced along with Daniel Pemberton's amazing music makes for one of my top favorite movie experiences, EVER! BOY Oh Howdy! I almost listened to critics and didn't go see it.This movie contains one of the most accelerated, vibrant scenes that synced along with Daniel Pemberton's amazing music makes for one of my top favorite movie experiences, EVER! BOY Oh Howdy! I almost listened to critics and didn't go see it. I would have regretted that! This movie is original in composition, style, orchestration, and especially MUSIC! Don't make the mistake of not seeing this in theaters. A lot will be lost watching it on a 15 inch laptop.… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

10

sshinkleMay 17, 2017

I was honestly shocked by all of the negative critic reviews for this movie after going to see it. Reading through a few blurbs of them, they seem to be upset that Guy Ritchie made a film that looks like a Guy Ritchie film. for one, I am gladI was honestly shocked by all of the negative critic reviews for this movie after going to see it. Reading through a few blurbs of them, they seem to be upset that Guy Ritchie made a film that looks like a Guy Ritchie film. for one, I am glad that I decided to not listen to critics this time and just went and saw it. It delivered exactly what I was hoping it would. It was fast paced and fun, with a great cast and beyond incredible music. I think this movie is a perfect example of how flawed our system of rating and critiquing movies is these days. People look at a low number on metacritic or rotten tomatoes and then don't even bother with the movie or even reading the why of the low scores. This movie didn't earn its low score or low box office numbers. If you want an exciting, action packed Guy Ritchie film, this is one delivers.… Expand

8 of 16 users found this helpful88

All this user's reviews

10

ArgonautMay 17, 2017

Most of the critics' statements are just bad excuses for them being unable to stomach the storytelling of Guy Ritchie. Or they are simply biased against fantasy.
Not tr00 story? Seen through Rithcie's filter? Common, that's the whole point:Most of the critics' statements are just bad excuses for them being unable to stomach the storytelling of Guy Ritchie. Or they are simply biased against fantasy.
Not tr00 story? Seen through Rithcie's filter? Common, that's the whole point: we have already seen so-called true versions of King Arthur, we already know the story, we want the execution. And it's a damn fine one.
Underdeveloped secondary chars? Yes, it all revolves around protagonist and antagonist, it is a classic fairy tale. Not a 5-season series here. All supporting actors deliver strong performances.
Too much VFX? Go and see yet another super-hero cocktail you gave a good score last week, was it really any better than this fantasy film? VFX is inseparable part of all uncanny narratives, live with it.
Bad writing? Well, I might be interested to see a version where they talk in verse, but I bet the street talk was much more common in dark ages. The king and his buddies are street-wise, not university wise.
Finally, I think this version of King Arthur is as good and as valid as any before it. The film is good, go see it. I do not believe in sequels, but for the first time in 10 years, I am actually craving one.
Oh, and I am very glad it did not steer away from dark-fantasy tale to e.g. throw-in some second-hand romance. There's simply no time for romancing, when you have to learn how to fight your demons.… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

3

DrollgorgMay 17, 2017

As summer arrives, so do blockbuster summer movies. Usually simple and straightforward, often campy, and always flashy and action-packed. However, it seems like these movies are less able to leave their mark every year– the market isAs summer arrives, so do blockbuster summer movies. Usually simple and straightforward, often campy, and always flashy and action-packed. However, it seems like these movies are less able to leave their mark every year– the market is practically oversaturated with action movies and TV shows, with what would have once been tentpole features now seeming to come out every weekend. Many of these vying chunks of screen-time are now written more smartly than ever, making it difficult for the crowd-pleasing mediocrity of summer action flicks to justify taking two hours of the audience’s time. “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” is one of 2017’s first summer blockbusters, and 2017’s first summer flop. This attempt at a gritty, dark fantasy retelling of the Arthurian legend strides confidently onto the stage, attempting to wow audiences without managing to stand out favorably from its competitors in the slightest. Taking place in ancient England, “Arthur” is essentially a prequel to the classic tales of the Round Table. It follows the rise to power of an amoral Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) raised on the streets after his uncle Vortigern (Jude Law) seized power and killed the sitting royals– which only happened after they had seized victory over the rebellion of the evil mage Mordred, who betrayed the previous mage kind and forced Merlin into forging Excalibur, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. If you fail to see how that was necessary to my explanation of the plot, so did I as I was suffering through reams of exposition and flashback whose only place in the movie seems to be to remind you that the screenwriters read the source material. But to return to the story, “Arthur” moves frenetically from the title character’s life of crime, to his discovery of his magical destiny, to his joining of the rebellion against Vortigern; sprinkling in enough “refusal of the call” and “now it’s personal” tropes to grow an entire crop of B-list, testosterone-poisoned fantasy movies. Most actors are very serviceable, except for perhaps the only name-branded star on the cast– Jude Law, whose over-the-top and yet sort of bland delivery does not at all help the fact that he’s basically playing Magical Hitler with Extra Dark Souls. Come to think of it, Astrid Bergés-Frisbey I also could have done without, not because the script ever calls on her character “the Mage” to speak or emote like a normal human, but because her enunciation is like listening to a child who just broke into a veterinarian’s supply of ketamine. I’ll finish by saying that there’s nothing in the plot of the movie that’s actually that bad, except for what I would argue is the use of a poor man’s storytelling crutch- using magic to solve problems when the magic isn’t understood by the audience. What hobbles “Arthur” is the editing. Ritchie apparently couldn’t decide what style to cut the movie in, so he threw in every shot and angle used by mankind in the past three decades, usually with no actual reason for why this should be happening. There are some sequences I enjoyed- particularly when the camera moves with the tip of Excalibur. But most of the time the incessant montages, slow-motion, and everything in between makes the pacing utterly nonexistent and ruins the presentation of whatever good material there is. Narrative beats are replaced by constant motion which does nothing to justify itself, like Guy Ritchie wants to prevent the audience from being able to understand, much less appreciate, anything on screen. The cutting in this movie gave me a headache, and that isn’t an exaggeration.
You may have gathered that I did not enjoy this movie. Perhaps that is due to the fact that the writing is so consistently uninteresting. Perhaps it’s due to the fact that the movie’s insistence on flashy set-pieces and erratic presentation makes it all feel empty of any real heart or anything to say, and makes the narrative stakes so irrelevant that when something actually interesting happens it’s too late to care. The only coherent theme I could draw from this movie is that those who possess power deserve to use it as they wish. And perhaps I don’t like “Arthur” because it squanders all of the potential in the Arthurian legend in favor of a movie that distinguishes itself in no discernable way. The best demographic I can think of for this movie would be middle schoolers, because they are the most likely to be adequately distracted and engaged by its bounty of fast movement and bright lights. From me, it earns a score of 3.5 out of 10. It lost a lot of points because there are few things more painful to me than being able to see exactly where the potential for something to be good was lost. Most of that 3.5 was earned back, grudgingly, because this movie had a very high level of snake inclusion, which I have to give points for. The very large size of some of the snakes was something of a salve for my weary eyes.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

9

kendrickdkMay 17, 2017

Loved It! I love how the dialog was carried out... felt like ocean's 11 meets Excalibur. The acting was top notch. Plot was pretty good. The most important thing was that it was fun.

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

8

One_RifleMay 16, 2017

This film was weird, strange, and fantastic, full of Guy Ritchie-isms and style.The climax was absolutely ridiculous that left me wondering if people around me were seeing what I was seeing (in a good way). Absolutely love the Soundtrack fromThis film was weird, strange, and fantastic, full of Guy Ritchie-isms and style.The climax was absolutely ridiculous that left me wondering if people around me were seeing what I was seeing (in a good way). Absolutely love the Soundtrack from Daniel Pemberton just as good as the film. Would definitely recommend this.… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

4

KadeemluvmusicMay 14, 2017

I don't know if this is the perfect time to bring a King Arthur movie come back to life because it should've been that exciting. The last time King Arthur came to theaters was in 2004 (Touchstone) and it was above average, but I wasI don't know if this is the perfect time to bring a King Arthur movie come back to life because it should've been that exciting. The last time King Arthur came to theaters was in 2004 (Touchstone) and it was above average, but I was disappointed at Antoine Fuqoa's direction that led the film into a forgotten poorly executed movie despite a great cast with fairly solid performances including Clive Owen, Keira Knightley, and pre-Gift star Joel Edgerton. Boy, 2004 turn out to be a bad year for summer movies. but on the other hand, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is less Reign of Fire and more Eragon. Try as Guy Richie's might, but this is probably one of his weakest movies in his career. No disrespect to Richie, he's a talented directed. But having Warner Bros. to call him up for another summer blockbuster is not very good. Charlie Dunham is not a proven Hollywood star (Pacific Rim flopped, but an underrated gem) and despite the awesome Djimon Hounsou, Annabelle Wallis, and Aiden Gillen showing what they can to deliver a solid performance, Eric Bana, on the other hand, is just so boring. He's not a great actor, I still didn't like him as The Incredible Hulk. But still Warner Bros. just completely forgets that this is another s**tty origins story that tries to wow its audience, but ended up getting flat on their faces. Jack The Giant Slayer, Pan, The Legend Of Tarzan (last year), and this. Another retelling of the folklore known as "The Knights Of The Roundtable." Great, they just copied Disney's beloved animated film "The Sword In The Stone" and turned it into another pointless rip-off by Warner Bros. I'm also quite confused why Soccer legend David Beckham wanted to make a cameo in this movie. Man, this smells like box office bomb all over again. Really, if you really want a perfectly executed tale of King Arthur, then grab your couch, head on over to Netflix, and re-watch either "Excalibur (1981)" or I can't wait to watch this again "Monty Phython And The Holy Grail (1975)." In the meantime, King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword is just plain dumb. Like I said, the acting is confusing and the story is forgettable, but there's a nice touch to it. The visuals were beautiful and the CGI is pretty damn good. But if you wanted to succeed as an action blockbuster, make sure it doesn't ruin the benefactor of getting your audience hyped up to see this movie. But King Arthur: Legend of The Sword is one of my worst movies of 2017 (So Far). I'm sorry, but this is the biggest low point of Guy Richie's career.… Expand

7 of 11 users found this helpful74

All this user's reviews

5

Compi24May 16, 2017

Guy Ritchie tries his best to grip and tug on the hilt of Arthurian legend in "King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword," an undeniably flashy, semi-entertaining cgi-fest that, unfortunately, didn't make a lick of sense to me. True, the more generalGuy Ritchie tries his best to grip and tug on the hilt of Arthurian legend in "King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword," an undeniably flashy, semi-entertaining cgi-fest that, unfortunately, didn't make a lick of sense to me. True, the more general aspects of the story came across pretty clear. Jude Law is evil and needs to die. Charlie Hunnam is the one, true king and also in pretty good shape. Magic is complicated. Snakes are cool. But it's the intricacies of this narrative that really, truly, and tragically escaped me. A lot of the "how's" and "why's" are either completely disregarded or swept up in the fracas of a traditional Guy Ritchie montage sequence. Yes, the "Excalibur" sword fight sequences (all one-and-a-half of them) are super incredible from a visual standpoint, but without any of the emotional weight or stakes needed to make them more engaging, this film ultimately ends up wandering into the "mindless" end of the action film spectrum.… Expand

6 of 11 users found this helpful65

All this user's reviews

0

straycat73May 16, 2017

There is no logic in actions of all characters. The plot is worse than in Prometheus. The main baddie is just dumber than a sack of potatoes. No "Guy Ritchie style" at all.

6 of 25 users found this helpful619

All this user's reviews

9

BuggeurMay 16, 2017

I was really hype for that movie since I saw the first trailer and I wasn't disappointed. Sure the movie is not perfect and the 10-15 first minutes are not the best way to introduce the story. But except than that the rythm was good, theI was really hype for that movie since I saw the first trailer and I wasn't disappointed. Sure the movie is not perfect and the 10-15 first minutes are not the best way to introduce the story. But except than that the rythm was good, the action and fight scenes were pretty intense and well realized, the actors do their part (no oscar winners but still we believe in the characters and that's really enough, also Charlie hunnam is pretty convincing as Arthur and Jude law as the villain), the music is great and well integrated to the scenes, and finally I loved the fact that they included the fantasy part. So please don't listen to the critics and give this movie a shot, you'll have a great time :).… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

9

rohail6May 16, 2017

Awesome movie! Cinematography is amazing, music that keeps you on the edge of your seat and and acting is great too. For comparison, it's better than GuardiansV2. Can't understand the hate from the critics. Charlie Hunnam's acting isAwesome movie! Cinematography is amazing, music that keeps you on the edge of your seat and and acting is great too. For comparison, it's better than GuardiansV2. Can't understand the hate from the critics. Charlie Hunnam's acting is fantastic too he's the perfect hero. And Guy Ritchie does this thing with some of the scenes where he tells the story before and during and its hard to describe but really cool while it's happening. Give it a chance and go see it!… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

10

forevervagueMay 16, 2017

The movie was great. I loved it. I actually made an account just to review because I'm so surprised about the rating. It's stupid that only the critics score displays on google when most of the profit come from the public.. I haven't enjoyedThe movie was great. I loved it. I actually made an account just to review because I'm so surprised about the rating. It's stupid that only the critics score displays on google when most of the profit come from the public.. I haven't enjoyed a movie like I did this one in ages.… Expand

6 of 12 users found this helpful66

All this user's reviews

10

RKmericaMay 16, 2017

Saw this last night after screening was overbooked couple weeks ago. It was a great movie... from beginning to end. Regarding the bad reviews? Apparently, none of the critics have seen a Guy Ritchie movie. Maybe they should try watching oneSaw this last night after screening was overbooked couple weeks ago. It was a great movie... from beginning to end. Regarding the bad reviews? Apparently, none of the critics have seen a Guy Ritchie movie. Maybe they should try watching one before throwing eggs at this one. Just a minor suggestion for some clueless a-holes that call themselves movie critics. Good tip: start with Snatch and go from there.… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

6

TVJerryMay 16, 2017

Director Guy Ritchie has taken a very dark approach to the classic tale and turned the king into a superhero. Charlie Hunnam holds the title role as an orphan raised by prostitutes who pulls the famous sword. After initial protests, he leadsDirector Guy Ritchie has taken a very dark approach to the classic tale and turned the king into a superhero. Charlie Hunnam holds the title role as an orphan raised by prostitutes who pulls the famous sword. After initial protests, he leads the fight against his uncle (Jude Law) in one of the numerous battles that's a blur of action, quick cuts and aggressive music. There are some grand visuals, excess all around and a frantic pace (much of the time), but it still feels noisy and empty. (Yes, that's David Beckham in a small role at the stone.)… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

10

XendomMay 16, 2017

Beautiful movie! Photography is exceptional, engaging music and well-characterized actors. Guy Richie is a great director. Can't understand the hate from critics. Go see it!

7 of 14 users found this helpful77

All this user's reviews

5

KaptenVideoMay 15, 2017

Guy Ritchie… oh man. He used to be my hero. I loved his two first works – crime comedies „Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels“ (1998) and „Snatch.“ (2000) which I still name as my favorite movie of all time.
Number of (indie) filmmakers haveGuy Ritchie… oh man. He used to be my hero. I loved his two first works – crime comedies „Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels“ (1998) and „Snatch.“ (2000) which I still name as my favorite movie of all time.
Number of (indie) filmmakers have tried to capture his approach ever since – colorful, funny and full of energy, partially thanks to inventive use of modern dance music and snappy editing – but no one has come quite close.
Neither has Ritchie himself, actually. He lost his spark when his right hand man left to become a famous Hollywood director of his own. There’s an old rumor that producer Matthew Vaughn was actually the man behind most of the good **** in Ritchie’s early movies, and following their later careers, it’s actually easy to believe that.
Anyway, since 2009 Ritchie has had luck to reinvent himself as the man who makes big-budget modern versions of loved old heroes, so we’ve had two „Sherlock Holmes’es“ with Robert Downey Jr., a spy story „The Man from U.N.C.L.E.“ and now, „King Arthur“.
Ritchie has pitched „King Arthur“ as „Snatch.“ meets Tolkien but in reality we get something looking like „Game of Thrones“, only without interesting characters, story or even dialogue.
The pathetic excuse for a story used here is mostly for stitching the action scenes together and for the last maybe 45 minutes, they just give up, going for the overdose of generic fantasy cliches instead.
The result feels surprisingly similar to many recent superhero movies: looks good, is entertaining in short dosages, and gets progressively more tiresome during the last hour – except for the fanboys, maybe.
"King Arthur" is actually the first of planned six movies. Here's hope that critics are proven right and this will tank at the box office, so we can get something new instead. IMDb hints that Ritchie is thinking about live-action "Aladdin" and "Holmes 3" next.
So... "King Arthur" looks good visually and I wanted to like it. Sadly, there is just not enough movie here for 126 minutes.
At least the actors did what they could with the shallow material and Charlie Hunnam as the future king is suitably rugged and furious – think Chris Hemsworth in the first „Thor“. But this is not enough for serious contender.… Expand

6 of 10 users found this helpful64

All this user's reviews

9

pendratMay 15, 2017

Loved the movie from start to finish. Great music, nice banter and a few really cool scenes. A bit heavy on cgi at times and nothing too surprising plot wise but overall a great movie. Can't understand the hate from critics. A strong eight inLoved the movie from start to finish. Great music, nice banter and a few really cool scenes. A bit heavy on cgi at times and nothing too surprising plot wise but overall a great movie. Can't understand the hate from critics. A strong eight in my books, giving it a nine just for King Arthur.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

9

JuliagiaMay 15, 2017

I loved it. Guy Richie is one of the unique directors this days. Can't say it's his best work, but it's still pretty good. Too bad it had a bad start fees. Critics got paid by Disney for bad reviews :D

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

6

EpsilonSigmaMuMay 14, 2017

While Ritchie's frenetic editing and more action focused plot might miss the mark for some, I believe their's a charm about King Arthur: Legend of the Sword that saves it from being another mindless re-hash of a classic tale, particularly inWhile Ritchie's frenetic editing and more action focused plot might miss the mark for some, I believe their's a charm about King Arthur: Legend of the Sword that saves it from being another mindless re-hash of a classic tale, particularly in its production design, music, and enjoyable interpretations of *most* of the classic characters.… Expand

7 of 9 users found this helpful72

All this user's reviews

8

TheVilonius15May 14, 2017

Me agrada cuando se intenta hacer algo distinto y resulta de buena manera. Quizás las técnicas usadas por Guy Ritchie y su equipo, no son tan novedosas en el cine general, muchas de estas técnicas ya han sido utilizadas antes en películasMe agrada cuando se intenta hacer algo distinto y resulta de buena manera. Quizás las técnicas usadas por Guy Ritchie y su equipo, no son tan novedosas en el cine general, muchas de estas técnicas ya han sido utilizadas antes en películas independientes y otros montajes audiovisuales, pero esta es una de las pocas veces en las que podemos ver muchas de estas técnicas, y más encima bien hechas y aplicadas, en una película de alto presupuesto del muy criticado actual Hollywood.

La película está fuertemente desarrollada a través de montajes, prácticamente todo el desarrollo de la historia ocurre a través de ellos, esto no es nada malo, por el contrario, la mayoría de ellos están bien pensados y desarrollados. Sin adentrarme mucho y solo tomando en cuenta el montaje inicial, vemos el crecimiento del protagonista desde su infancia hasta su adultez, la secuencia no se hace más larga a dos minutos y logra dejar muy claro quién es, que es lo que sabe y que es lo que aprecia, además ser una introducción al estilo en cuanto a música y ambientación. Este tipo de montajes se repite a lo largo de toda la película, y si bien en algunas ocasiones puede resultar abrumador para los espectadores que no están atentos, la técnica utilizada no hace más que hacerla única en el género medieval, funciona excelente para las escenas de acción, el desarrollo de personajes y también de la narrativa, logrando presentar en tan solo dos horas y seis minutos, una historia que perfectamente podría abarcar toda una temporada de una buena serie. Hablando de buenas series y entendiendo que toda creación surge a través del remix. Todo fanático de Game of Thrones rápidamente se dará cuenta de que hay muchos elementos de la serie presentes en la película. Ya sean las locaciones abiertas, reales y silvestres (dejando de lado el abuso de CGI para crear estos ambientes), la fijación y detención en la población y actividades medievales, un similar trato con los personajes, y las actuaciones que intentan apoderase de un extraño tipo de acento británico (sobre todo a la hora de decir “mi lord”). Demás esta mencionar que, para hacerlo menos sutil, hay dos actores de la serie presentes en la película, Michael McElhatton (Roose Boton) y Aidan Gillen (Petyr Baelish), uno ahora interpretando un papel menor y otro como personaje secundario. Solo falto agregar un poco más de “gore” y teníamos al primo lejano de la serie en la pantalla grande.

Terminando con algunas especificaciones técnicas y una breve conclusión. “El Rey Arturo”, logra crear su propio estilo a la hora de contarse a sí misma, posee un soundtrack un tanto peculiar para su género, y el mayor elogio se lo lleva su dirección, aplicar toma experimentales y poco regulares, sin duda marcan la identidad durante toda la película. Ideas que no solo son sacadas del cine, sino que de los videojuegos también, God of War y Shadow of the Colossus son un claro ejemplo de ello. En fin, esta nueva película es totalmente recomendable, tanto para los más dedicados y atentos al séptimo arte, como para el espectador común que solo busca entretenimiento cinematográfico.

https://jpvilo15blog.wordpress.com/2017/05/14/resena-el-rey-arturo-la-leyenda-de-la-espada/… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

8

StayloneMay 14, 2017

The only thing I could say is bad about this film - scenario and plot. Narrative is pretty bad too. But everything else is splendid. Graphics, nice fighting scenes, good and disclosed characters, decent soundtrack. Defienetly should beThe only thing I could say is bad about this film - scenario and plot. Narrative is pretty bad too. But everything else is splendid. Graphics, nice fighting scenes, good and disclosed characters, decent soundtrack. Defienetly should be watched, thanks rotten tomatoes and other "critics" for 41%… Expand

3 of 12 users found this helpful39

All this user's reviews

4

Rebecca31May 14, 2017

Can we all give Guy Ritchie a round of applause for making one of the worst movies of 2017. The King Arthur story has been massacred, instead you get a CGI monster infested movie, a badly written script, badly edited fight scenes and theCan we all give Guy Ritchie a round of applause for making one of the worst movies of 2017. The King Arthur story has been massacred, instead you get a CGI monster infested movie, a badly written script, badly edited fight scenes and the worst celebrity cameo you’ll ever see. That’s right I’m talking about David Beckham. Yeah you heard me, David Beckham. The dialogue has to be some of the worst I’ve heard in a movie. Charlie Hunnam is doing his best with what he is given but honestly there’s simply too much of “cor blimey mate I’ve gone and pulled this sword from the stone I ‘ave.” Meanwhile you have Jude Law skulking around the castle with a satanic presence. He really is born to play the villain, completely owning the role and without a doubt carries the movie. There’s only so much cringe I can take in one sitting and King Arthur is so full of it I was exhausted when it finally ended. However, for all its faults of which there are many it does at times manage to redeem itself in entertainment value. In two hours I was both bored and entertained at the same time. As over the top and bad as it is I wasn’t bored all the time and I’m sure I laughed at least once. It’s not just bad it’s brilliantly bad, so in order for you to enjoy this at all, best to switch your brain off as it most definitely will not be needed. A lower budget and a more focused story could have made this a great movie or at the very least a better than average movie. Alas is not the case, recommended if you enjoy swords, sorcery and supersized monsters.… Expand

5 of 13 users found this helpful58

All this user's reviews

9

AdamJohnson80May 14, 2017

I was looking forward to this movie since I heard about it last year. I really enjoyed the movie and hope they are able to make the planned sequels. I was entertained throughout the movie because it had plenty action and more laughs than II was looking forward to this movie since I heard about it last year. I really enjoyed the movie and hope they are able to make the planned sequels. I was entertained throughout the movie because it had plenty action and more laughs than I anticipated. I recommend this movie if you're looking to be entertained.… Expand

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

7

thehatcheteerMay 13, 2017

It's not Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but then again, it shouldn't be. Richie takes on a project much more like his Sherlock endeavor here, and I think his style is much more suited to medieval action than Victorian gum-shoeing.

IfIt's not Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but then again, it shouldn't be. Richie takes on a project much more like his Sherlock endeavor here, and I think his style is much more suited to medieval action than Victorian gum-shoeing.

If you go into this movie with the right expectations (i.e. sword-swinging, fast-paced fun) you will almost certainly have a good time. If you want Oscar bait, you are going to be disappointed. I think that sums it up.… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

10

NarthilMay 13, 2017

This was a great movie that surprised me in several ways. It's like a hybrid between a video game movie, an en epic movie and a dark movie. Different style, completely underrated. Good surprise.

6 of 13 users found this helpful67

All this user's reviews

9

MallshalayMay 13, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Okay, I must say I went in there with high expectations as you do when you want to see a new movie from a director that you know has never failed you and I was not dissapointed at all.

Great epic movie about one of the biggest myths ever that mixes serious scenes with fun elements that are typical for Guy Ritchie and ALL of it is filled with an awesome soundtrack music, especially that scene when Arthur (Charlie Hunman) is bitten by a magical snake a rides a horse back to Camelot, and I couldn't help myself but to enjoy it from start to end and for that I thank you, Guy.… Expand

4 of 13 users found this helpful49

All this user's reviews

10

DavidMolinaMay 13, 2017

I loved this movie! I just created a Metacritic account to help do it justice, given that most critics gave it poor ratings and reviews. Critics please, take into consideration that there is a public that love this kind of movies. PLEASE,I loved this movie! I just created a Metacritic account to help do it justice, given that most critics gave it poor ratings and reviews. Critics please, take into consideration that there is a public that love this kind of movies. PLEASE, give them fair reviews accordingly!

This movie is a MASTERPIECE. The story is relatively simple (given that it's inspired by a centuries-old tale), but the excecution is outstanding. It has almost every part of the King Arthur mythos, although there could have been more Merlin, but it wasn't necessary to complete the experience. The actors are incredible... All of them. The environments are spectacular and beautiful. There is a lot of fantasy elements that are wonderful as well.

The action and adventure are executed perfectly, as expected of the amazing director Guy Ritchie... IT EXCEEDED my expectations BY FAR! It has you on the edge of your seat every second, and even a lot of the sequences are absolutely jaw-dropping.

The story is conclusive but it has GREAT potential for follow ups, and I can't wait to see them. I hope this movie gets enough support from fans so there can be a sequel. I reccomend this movie to any fan of: Guy Ritchie, the King Arthur mythos, The Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, Pirates of the Caribbean and the also ufairly reviewed but absolutely great Warcraft movie.

EXCALIBUR!!… Expand

9 of 17 users found this helpful98

All this user's reviews

10

djmine46May 13, 2017

I have an obsession for sword-fighting and fantasy like Game of Thrones. This movie exceeded my expectations, it played with my emotions and the action in this movie was stunning!

8 of 16 users found this helpful88

All this user's reviews

2

thomasmckenzieMay 13, 2017

The story is inane. Characters are flat. The plot is filled with holes. The "guy richie" moments all seem out of place. But it looks cool, so there's that.

8 of 20 users found this helpful812

All this user's reviews

7

Rutger-KikkertMay 13, 2017

King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword is a pretty fun, enjoyable, throw-away movie with some good performances of Charlie Hunnam, Jude Law and most of the supporting cast (except for the lady who plays the mage). The movie suffers from some issuesKing Arthur: Legend Of The Sword is a pretty fun, enjoyable, throw-away movie with some good performances of Charlie Hunnam, Jude Law and most of the supporting cast (except for the lady who plays the mage). The movie suffers from some issues with storytelling. It has some of those typical Guy Ritchie sequences where the story is told on a unique and rapid way. But those sequences tell actually the most interesting and funny parts of the story, but they're glossed over like they aren't of any importance what's so ever. The movie would also be much better if it had a longer runtime, now it's a two hour long generic knights and fantasy movie with the name King Arthur wich makes it less generic. It could've been more if it had some more scenes where the supporting characters are more fleshed out (so we as audience could actually care more about them) and if it worked out those unique storytelling sequences more. Also it is clearly to see where the money went when it comes to CGI. Some sequences have beautifl CGI others look like something straight out of an animation movie from 2005. The same with the action: sometimes it's filmed and directed beautiful other times it's hard to see what's going on. But besides all those problems (wich by the way don't make the movie a bad watch) King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword is a good movie to watch with not too much expectations; a great movie for on tv on a friday night to watch with some familymembers or friends. I would even recommend seeing it in theaters or buy on blu-ray (not for the full price though).… Expand

3 of 8 users found this helpful35

All this user's reviews

9

WeskerrrMay 13, 2017

I have to say I was skeptical before going to see this movie with all the negative reviews but since it's Guy Ritchie I decided to give it a try...Very good decision. This is my kind of action movie: fast paced and action packed, the scenesI have to say I was skeptical before going to see this movie with all the negative reviews but since it's Guy Ritchie I decided to give it a try...Very good decision. This is my kind of action movie: fast paced and action packed, the scenes are very well shot and sometimes even beautiful. The pace rarely slows down.

The critics giving this movie a bad score seem to be confused. Make no mistake this is an action movie and it delivers as an action movie. The story is not going to be amazing and the movie has it fair share of flaws: from the main actor trying a little too hard to be convincing with his British accent to some wtf scenes. Also, some scenes could have been way more developed.

Overall the movie is highly entertaining and captivating, you are pulled into the world of Camelot and I can't wait for the sequel. Highly recommend 9/10… Expand

2 of 10 users found this helpful28

All this user's reviews

10

RiotshieldMay 13, 2017

I hope we will become a second one. This Movie was great and a masterpiece. I can not accept the press ratings ignore them this is really irritating that they underrate every Fantasy Movie.

6 of 16 users found this helpful610

All this user's reviews

3

paavovMay 12, 2017

This one has its Guy Ritchie moments (the coming of age sequence, some scenes with solid dialogue, and the chase after the assassination attempt). Also, I quite enjoyed the character of The Mage (even though she managed to spurt someThis one has its Guy Ritchie moments (the coming of age sequence, some scenes with solid dialogue, and the chase after the assassination attempt). Also, I quite enjoyed the character of The Mage (even though she managed to spurt some genuinely daft lines). But the film itself is a horrid mews of mediocrity. Just really bad. Avoid.… Expand

7 of 16 users found this helpful79

All this user's reviews

10

AceTrigger94May 12, 2017

Don't trust the critics this time. This movie is probably gonna flops but 10 years from now, it's going to be a cult movie and people are going to realized that this movie was actually awesome to begin with.

8 of 17 users found this helpful89

All this user's reviews

6

WiscoJoeMay 12, 2017

If you've ever wondered what would happen if Guy Ritchie directed a King Arthur movie, here's your answer. Other than that there's not much to recommend about this film. It's rarely boring, and Ritchie's style mixed with the near-sacredIf you've ever wondered what would happen if Guy Ritchie directed a King Arthur movie, here's your answer. Other than that there's not much to recommend about this film. It's rarely boring, and Ritchie's style mixed with the near-sacred source material often leads to some novel, if incongruous, moments. Still, it's mostly forgettable B-movie fantasy hokum, like Game of Thrones goes Grindhouse. Fair warning for those who care... Every female character, save one, is literally sacrificed to advance the story and the desires of men. The only female character with agency isn't even given her own name. For a movie set in the dark ages, this makes logical sense, except for the fact that Ritchie clearly doesn't care about anachronisms. It seems like the retrograde gender politics is less an essential part of the historical setting and more a signature feature of Ritchie's "blokes only" wheelhouse.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

10

zu-foxMay 12, 2017

Honestly, throughout the whole film I was sitting and smiling like a child. I loved fantasy books of 80-s and this film gave me exact same feelings. Some people find it to be historically inaccurate, but it's an action movie, a fantasy move,Honestly, throughout the whole film I was sitting and smiling like a child. I loved fantasy books of 80-s and this film gave me exact same feelings. Some people find it to be historically inaccurate, but it's an action movie, a fantasy move, one that entertains. I loved characters in it, I loved jokes (though, not many people were laughing in the cinema) and I can tell that that's the movie I would gladly rewatch and buy a blu-ray copy once it's out. It's ok that different people have different tastes, but it almost seems that nowadays hits are either Marvel movies or soon-to-become-mass-market author movies.… Expand

8 of 16 users found this helpful88

All this user's reviews

3

vinothMay 12, 2017

Feels of some of good moment in this film chopped with fast cuts and not blend well for period theme, it looks movie mess up period art with digital world, every scene move in fast can't merge to story due to quick cuts.

7 of 18 users found this helpful711

All this user's reviews

8

BorgorosMay 12, 2017

Finally a movie about a legendary character that doesn't use too much time on the origin-story. Cool action, music, characters that are true to themselves and a exiting story that uses the film's playtime for what it's worth.

8 of 16 users found this helpful88

All this user's reviews

3

tropicAcesMay 12, 2017

I really have no idea what this movie is, but then again the film itself has no idea what it wants to be. Half the time it's a magical epic, then the next second it's a boots-on-the-ground Knights tale. The climax is laughably awful, with CGII really have no idea what this movie is, but then again the film itself has no idea what it wants to be. Half the time it's a magical epic, then the next second it's a boots-on-the-ground Knights tale. The climax is laughably awful, with CGI flying on the screen with less coherency than Warcraft. The least demanding turn-your-brain-off moviegoers may find enough to be entertained, but this really is an awful excuse for a summer movie.… Expand

12 of 27 users found this helpful1215

All this user's reviews

10

domthom1016May 12, 2017

Looking at the mixed reviews, I was pleasantly surprised when seeing King Arthur. Even my anti history and fantasy movie girlfriend admitted that she liked it and can't wait till the sequel. For anyone that reads this, give the movie aLooking at the mixed reviews, I was pleasantly surprised when seeing King Arthur. Even my anti history and fantasy movie girlfriend admitted that she liked it and can't wait till the sequel. For anyone that reads this, give the movie a chance. You may think it's not for you, but I'm telling you, you'll be pleasantly surprised and will enjoy some point of the ride that is King Arthur Legend of the Sword.… Expand

33 of 51 users found this helpful3318

All this user's reviews

3

EpicLadySpongeMay 12, 2017

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword gets as old as you attempt to read numerous King Arthur stories so many times it gets as embarrassing and disappointing by a starters package.

6 of 18 users found this helpful612

All this user's reviews

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

User Reviews