Le Morte D'Arthur has all the elements to make a trilogy of great high fantasy films. We already got a gritty reboot back in 2004 and it flopped. This just looks like more of the same.I hope its good but I would of loved a LOTR style film
shareTry John Boorman's "Excalibur"....
shareExcalibur is probably what LOTR would have looked like if it had been made in the 80s. But I sympathize with the OP and also wish we could have an LOTR-like Arthurian movie (or several) today. Be it based on Le Morte Darthur, on other source material, or a synthesis of several medieval sources.
Alternately I would love to see Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicles adapted into a trilogy or a TV series; if they ever did that one day, I would probably feel like I have finally met my ultimate Arthurian movie.
"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."
Intrestingly enough, Boorman wanted to do LOTR,but when UA decided to go with the 1978 animated film, Boorman did "Excalibur" instead.
"Sword of Lancelot" with Cornel Wilde is a interesting Arthurian film,with some great battle scenes. It's pretty much "Camelot" without the music,and in interesting in that there is no magic/fantasy element in the movie;Merlin is simply a wise elder advisor and even jokes about how people think he has magical powers. It's worth watching.
BUt the more I see of it, the more I Think that this Arthurian film is going to be a fiasco. Guy Ritchie is simply, wrong,wrong,wrong, for this.
This one tries, with an opening battle scene reminiscent of LOTR, complete with GIANT elephants. But the film itself never really takes itself seriously, with a particularly hammy performance from Jude Law (and a laughable ending where he CGI hulks out for the final fight with Arthur). If you like Ritchie's cinematic style and editing/photographic tricks, you may enjoy this, but anyone looking for a serious treatment of the Arthurian legend will be sorely disappointed. It may very well have improved with reshoots and editing since I saw a screening last summer, but based on the trailers I've seen recently, probably not.
it rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again
I hope it has improved from what you are describing here.
Although, I have seen so many reboots of old fantasy stories lately.. all terrible in their own way. Egypt themed, mummies etc. all with terrible script and directors who do not understand their audience.
We all like special effects and cool action scenes.. but there is not point to have it if the story and background of the movie is terrible and not shown as it should as well. The action scenes should happen because of the story, as part of it, not as something extra they just add on to make it more fun and more pleasing to the eye.
love that idea!
shareI've always wondered this as well. The source material just seems so ripe for it.
shareI'm so glad Boorman made the excellent Excalibur instead, some of his ideas for Lord of the Rings were just plain crazy such as Frodo having sex with Galadriel!
Le Morte D'Arthur has all the elements for a fantastic trilogy if done right with so many legendary tales waiting to be told, they could even do six films if they get the first right, but I fear if ever the studios wish to pursue such a project in the lavish style it requires, we'd just get too many politically correct elements in the movie that blights so many fantasy/historical films made today.
Why does it have to be based on Malory and not, say, Geoffrey of Monmouth?
Or go even further back and use "Nennius", Gildas, and the anonymous authors of the Welsh tales.
Because there's more material in Malory, because many of the well-known and beloved fantasy elements of the Arthurian legend simply are not in Geoffrey, and because basically Malory is so much more famous that any fiction that wishes to reference medieval sources says "based on Malory". The series "Camelot" even claimed to be based on Malory, when there really isn't much in it to warrant a claim of "more or less roughly hinting here and there at Malory".
"Occasionally I'm callous and strange."
We have 2 now:
-Excalibur
-King Arthur 2017
This was planned as a 6 film series which may never happen unfortunately. :(
It's unfortunate that there wasn't a King Arthur film series. It's fortunate that *this* King Arthur movie didn't become a series.
shareI actually really like the recent King Arthur film and I think it will be like one of those classics derided upon first release like:
Stardust
Peter Pan
Scarface
The Empire of the Sun
The Thing
The 13th Warrior
People who didn't like the recent King Arthur are under the impression that the legend was set in stone and passed on untouched when it was a growing and living legend that changed with every iteration.
Also there's a series called Merlin which has King Arthur in it, but I've only seen an episode or 2.
Okay I see where you are going with the other titles... but Stardust and Peter Pan (assuming that you are talking about the 2003 movie, not the cartoon... if you talk about the cartoon, okay I see)?
Never heard anyone praising these two over time.
Really a lot of people like those films but many haven't seen it or do not appreciate it but it's getting there
share