One of the selling points for this movie is that it is the guy who the legend we know as King Arthur is based on. As an amatuer Arthurian lore freak, even I could pick out a few things in just the trailer that are known to be complete fiction. I don't suppose it would be too much to ask for a movie to do at least a little research, would it?

Says a lot when the movie is called KING ARTHUR and the character depicted front and center is Gwen?

That being said, I will still go see any movie that has Knightly scantily clad.

I am excited to see this movie because of keria knightly. I have seen her in Pirates, course, and I want to see her act in a different role. And I respectfully say, Clive Owen is a hottie.

I don't know that this role would be much of a stretch for Keira. Her Pirates role was light in action, but this is definately along the lines of the little known Disney flick called "Princess of Theives" in which she plays the daughter of the legendary Robin Hood.

Yes. She uses a bow in that movie too. Not a bad film, but still one in my obscure collection!

The camera viewing was horriable. It was always shaking and it gave awkard angles that made it hard to enjoy the movie.

I loved this movie. I have read most of the arturian legends & seen most of the movies based on those legends. Even though most of the reviewers (I've read) say they felt that the life was sucked out of those legends by watching this movie and that it was too "real" for them, I would disagree. I really liked the new spin put on these characters that we have all grown to know and love...I thought it made the movie very fresh and daring.

This movie was truely amazing.. i'd like to fix kate's comments up a bit.. the camera views were just as any big group fighting movie would be, and they only had that at the begining.. through the important battle the camera was better than most. i'd also like to add they followed a differnt storyline to what really happend.. allthough it was only a couple things i noticed. i would not like to ruin the movie for you so if you really are in need of knowing email me and ill send you all the changed events in the movie. with that i reccomend this movie It was unbelievably great. i will be looking forword to buying the dvd. as well as troy's dvd. the game is going to be sweet for king arthur!

HORRENDOUS! Anyone over 9 years of age stay the hell away from this piece of garbage. I'm still in shock from wasting 9 bucks on this extremely slow-paced, horribly-directed disaster. It's sad to see audiences' standards sink low enough to give this crap a good review. The acting was piss poor and the dialogue was overwhelmingly repetitive and boring. What ever happened to interesting character development, solid storylines and realistic dialogue?
How many close-ups on arrows flying does it take before it gets extraneous? With that said, this wreck made 'troy' look like 'the Godfather'.

This movie is horrible for the fact that Lancelot (This comment has been edited by The Movie Blog because the commentor gave too much of the movie away) had one of the most infamous affairs in history (whether legend of real).

The part where rachel had her comment edited was what i mentionned that i noticed above. which was the part i didnt enjoy either because they hadnt followed the story line of his life at all. they made their own. other than that i stick with my theory of GREAT movie anyone who tells you otherwise probbly didnt pay attention.
The film was not slow paced. the dialog was not repettitive but said as though they would in that time, the arrows close ups? well lets just say alot of the fighting was close ups.. and with bows...

If KING ARTHUR it's changed anymore than TROY (supposedly based on the Illiad) was, it's a disgrace to its classic base. As mentioned above, can anyone stick to a classic tale without jazzing it up for our dumbed-down audiences? How about simply a visual rendition of an oral tale? Sadly, children will see this, TROY, TITANIC, PEARL HARBOR, etc. and believe that these cinematic stories and renditions of classic tales and historic events occured as they saw them: with Leonardo D., Josh Hartnet, and Brad Pitt locked in love affairs and lose the real story--or even worse not read the book! It's sad when a movie becomes one's source of worldy knowledge--I will always vote read the book, there is a reason these are classics and/or momentus historic events.
WHERE HAVE ALL THE CLASSICS GONE!

It was an entertaining film, I thought.

And Clive Owen is hot.

My husband and I were looking forward to this movie for months. Inspite of some of the obvious things in the trailer, we were convinced this legend could not be spoiled. Instead this was someone trying to rewrite the the whole story as said with a jazzed up (jacked Up) 21st century point of view. We truly hated it and considered walking out several times but stayed thinking it had to get better. The fight scenes few and far between were unrealistic and boring. This movie made our previously viewed hero's out to be misfits. Not since the movie Cabin Boy have I hated a movie so. I can honestly say that I have not enjoyed one movie that I have seen directed by Antoine Fuqua and will not waste my money or time again. He has like others before him, taken a classic and just pissed on it.

I just don't understand why many people are complaining about how it doesn't follow the traditional tale. The movie itself tells you that it wasn't going to be the traditional tale in the first 10 seconds! I rather enjoyed this movie. It was something new and something different from the classic story. I did find this version of Guinevere a little over the top though. Aside from that I liked it. Would have liked to seen Percival in it though. :-)

this film is just absolute, utter rubbish. the opening narration says the story is based on "recent archaeological eveidence" which is insulting to anyone who knows anything about archaeology, history or Arthurian legend. The acting is non-existent, the dialogue embarassing, and the the historical context jumbled, contradictory and nonsensical. Avoid like the plague.

Vali

Some people's reviews here are truly shocking. If people had actually bothered to research this film, they would have found that this film was really heavily researched, and apart from the appearance of Lancelot, is based entirely on historical records. This fact has been heavily publicised so I don't know how you missed it! For this reason I am really looking forward to seeing King Arthur.

In case you were wondering, my 'appearance of Lancelot' phrase refers to the fact that there are no records of Lancelot living in the same period of time as Arthur, Guinevere and Co. :)

Err ... I actually did a major research project on Arthurian legend back when I was in school and there are no historical records of ANY of these people. It's all speculation. Best guess is that he was some sort of tribal leader who successfully fought against the Angles and Saxons. In other words the most significant figure in English folk lore is famous for having successfully fought against the English. Go figure.

This movie was amazing, great, awsome, excellent!!! Of course, I don't know much about Arthurian legend, so that may have been the key. But I thought it was a wonderful film! The battles were not tedious unil the end, and just as you're thinking, "Ugh, not ANOTHER battle!" it ends and you can enjoy the movie again. A lot of tension during the battles and some sad parts. But all of this contributed to the making of this brilliant film!

Magnificent! Intense! I will enjoy this again and again!