They really think there will be interest in doing 6 films? This has bomb written all over it.
shareexactly. looks like a "hip" tough guy version, not anywhere near the last great version, Excalibur. typical from the current system (call it Hollywood, despite it being British; since everyone wants in on that good ol' Hollywood cash!!)
shareMy problem with King Arthur movies is this: The legends and stories are awesome enough, that's why they lasted this long and are retold for almost a millennia. Why does every telling of it have to be so different from the original stories? I can't wait for the day there's actually a realistic (no magic perhaps) but faithful rendition of the original material.
And the "real" King Arthur probably fought the Saxons in 5th-6th century Britain. The armor and stories never show that (except the 2004-ish King Arthur which I enjoyed but wasn't a great King Arthur movie).
"Excalibur" is so remembered and revered today BECAUSE it stayed so close to the source material and captured what people have enjoyed about the legends. Honestly I think it is a little dated now, but I would love to see a mix of Excalibur with King Arthur (2004). There are ways to make the legends realistic (no dragons/magic/etc) without completely rewriting them.
As an independent movie it looks good, as a King Arthur movie, it looks bad.
shareLol, you should watch the 2004 version, you'll probably love it. I didn't like it though, the opposite of the magic of Excalibur, very bland Imo.
share[deleted]
I rubbed willy while watchin dis
shareI agree the trailer didn't really recommend the film and unfortunately it seems to be bombing bit it is a great film!
Is Excalibur your favorite Arthurian film?