KING ARTHUR: LEGEND OF THE SWORD - REVIEW


After re-imagining Sherlock Holmes his own way, Guy Ritchie recently turned his attention to the Arthurian legends and delivered King Arthur: Legend Of The Sword. Due to a ridiculous budget that didn't translate to much on screen, the film was a box-office flop and was mostly panned critically.

The film opens with a scene in which Uther Pendragon (Eric Bana) takes on giant elephants in an over-the-top sequence that would fit quite well in a Lord Of The Rings movie. This could set the tone for a proudly ridiculous, action-packed epic but, while it is indeed shamelessly silly, it's not exactly the thrilling actioner you'd expect. Parts of the film are over-stylised, bloated and full of giant CGI creatures, other parts feel bare and not unlike a relatively low-budget effort like Centurion or an Uwe Boll movie. But it's the sub-par writing that really prevents this King Arthur film from being the fun roller-coaster ride it wanted to be. The masterful Excalibur understood the importance of creating a certain atmosphere to tell these stories of magic, romance, tragedy and heroism. This movie wants to be a Robin Hood-style origin story that deals with the legends in a more realistic way but it also wants to be a goofy fantasy epic and that just doesn't work, especially when your film lacks visual flair, mood and characters you actually care about or at least recognize from the iconic stories.

Charlie Hunnam could have made a good Arthur but he is not given anything to work with, none of the cast are. Jude Law does stand out as the villain but only because he over-compensates for an under-written script by hamming it up constantly. The film fails to build any sort of pace or urgency as it repeats the same few scenes over and over again: the heroes plan something, this is intercut with a montage of what happens next, then a poorly edited fight scene and an anti-climactic resolution. This goes on for over two hours and it gets repetitive fast. Guy Ritchie knows how to put together a decent montage and he knows how to make a scene look good but you'd never know it here. By being over-ambitious and expecting this to turn into a full-on King Arthur franchise, the film is mostly filler setting up a potentially more interesting sequel as Merlin is teased throughout and Arthur fails to master Excalibur's Thor-like powers until the end. Parts of the film are amusing due to how silly they are and some brief sequences look cool but you'll find it tough to enjoy much more than that.

To say that Legend Of The Sword is a missed opportunity would be an understatement. It's easy to imagine a typically over-the-top King Arthur movie directed by Guy Ritchie that's low on accuracy and brains but high on sheer popcorn entertainment. Sadly, you'll have to keep on imagining all that as this is an underwhelming flop with an uneven tone, a serious lack of fun and very little substance.

Disappointing.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

STAR TREK: FIRST CONTACT - REVIEW

Image
Finally free from the clutches of the iconic Original Series , Picard and co. finally got their own movie to play with and delivered this much better, much darker, much less gimmicky outing. This time, we're introduced to the Borgs, a race of soulless, zombie-like drones capable of assimilating people completely. A popular race of bad guys in the series, their Hellraiser -style S&M look certainly begged for a movie! First Contact opens with Picard having a nightmare about the time he almost became a Borg forever and little by little, as the current Borg threat increases, he starts to crack up, feeling a responsibility to sort that problem out himself as he still has a slight connection to them but also wanting a kind of revenge, closure if you will, for what they did to him the first time around. The plot sees the crew of the Enterprise witness the Earth get completely assimilated by the Borgs so they go back in time before Earth made its "first contact" with al
Read more

24: SEASON 1 - REVIEW

Image
I know, I'm like 100 years late. But I'm The "Retro" Critic! :P I remember catching a glimpse of this iconic show back in the day and actually finding it pretty entertaining. Sadly, I hadn't followed the thread from the very beginning so it felt like catching the season about halfway through would be a bit of a waste. I decided to wait until I could check it out on DVD. 10 years later... Well I finally made it, that's the main thing, right? So was it worth the wait? What do I make of this very first season? It's good. I thought it would be quite good and it was. Basically I'm rarely taken by a cop-themed series unless you've got a mad scientist in there ( Fringe ), evil twins ( Alias ) or... Columbo ( Columbo ). But 24 did a hell of a good job keeping me entertained throughout and making me care about MOST of what was going on. Kiefer Sutherland's Jack Bauer is a hard one to dislike and is pretty much the glue holding the whole sho
Read more

THE ADDAMS FAMILY MUSICAL - REVIEW

Image
 Looks like every Broadway comedy musical these days is trying to be The Producers ... Mel Brooks' hugely successful show now being the basic template for shows based on movies (with the exception of the admittedly *ahem* unique Spiderman musical), after Dirty Rotten Scoundrels we're treated to Broadway's The Addams Family. An odd release but probably an inevitable one. Not based on any of the movies, the story actually follows up from past adaptations and sees a now grown-up Wednesday falling in love with a "normal" dude and having to face her unconventional family. It's essentially Addams Family Values with Wednesday taking on the Fester role. A good idea which should please both fans of the films and those looking to see something new. But what works for The Producers just doesn't work for everything. Nathan Lane as Gomez Addams? So much for the tall, suave, maniacal Gomez we all know and love! Don't get me wrong, I love Nathan Lane but list
Read more