Got Arthur?
So, I went and saw King Arthur today and totally loved it. Not in a "OMG THIS IS THE BEST THING SINCE LOTR!!!!" way but in a "Oooh, I wanted to be entertained and enjoy a decent action movie and I got it!!" way. Will be buying the soundtrack as soon as it's released at the end of the month.
Course, before I saw it, I kept worrying it'd be another Troy, and thankfully, it wasn't. I think seeing Troy has kept me from putting to much hope in epic-adventure movies, and I shall never be disappointed again. :) Mainly though, it boils down to this: no matter what you read, the story of King Arthur has no REAL source material. It's nothing but legends retold, and that's what the movie was. The only real grain of historic value the movie held was the time period it was set in, and the current notion the man the legends was based off of was indeed Roman. That's it.
Another thing about the movie: originally, it was supposed to be released this Christmas, with a rating of R slapped on it. However, given Disney's current track record with movies and the lack of funds it's been pulling, they decided to push up the release date and make it more accessible to more viewers, which meant welding the movie into a PG-13 sucker. So, any plot holes, and lack of gritty realism in battle you can blame on Disney. Cause dude, Disney.
So, with that said, I actually liked the characters, the way it was shot. The movie didn't bore me in the slightest, and I liked how the characters were introduced. I was surprisingly fond of Clive Owen's performance as Arthur, and was pleased with the supporting cast.
So it's a good action flick, and it's a helluva lot better than Troy. Will be buying the dvd when it comes out, which, incidentally, with be released with it's original rating. Which means more footage. Which makes me happy. :)
*wants to make King Arthur icons now*
In other news, I got the Chronicles of Riddick novelization today (yes, I'm a dork) and watched the Last Samurai on dvd tonight, which is a awesomely great film that I would've gladly seen win Oscars had LOTR not been in the running. Not seen it yet? GO!
Course, before I saw it, I kept worrying it'd be another Troy, and thankfully, it wasn't. I think seeing Troy has kept me from putting to much hope in epic-adventure movies, and I shall never be disappointed again. :) Mainly though, it boils down to this: no matter what you read, the story of King Arthur has no REAL source material. It's nothing but legends retold, and that's what the movie was. The only real grain of historic value the movie held was the time period it was set in, and the current notion the man the legends was based off of was indeed Roman. That's it.
Another thing about the movie: originally, it was supposed to be released this Christmas, with a rating of R slapped on it. However, given Disney's current track record with movies and the lack of funds it's been pulling, they decided to push up the release date and make it more accessible to more viewers, which meant welding the movie into a PG-13 sucker. So, any plot holes, and lack of gritty realism in battle you can blame on Disney. Cause dude, Disney.
So, with that said, I actually liked the characters, the way it was shot. The movie didn't bore me in the slightest, and I liked how the characters were introduced. I was surprisingly fond of Clive Owen's performance as Arthur, and was pleased with the supporting cast.
So it's a good action flick, and it's a helluva lot better than Troy. Will be buying the dvd when it comes out, which, incidentally, with be released with it's original rating. Which means more footage. Which makes me happy. :)
*wants to make King Arthur icons now*
In other news, I got the Chronicles of Riddick novelization today (yes, I'm a dork) and watched the Last Samurai on dvd tonight, which is a awesomely great film that I would've gladly seen win Oscars had LOTR not been in the running. Not seen it yet? GO!