Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

looks so bad, maybe it's just the trailer that's crap but from what i've seen form it they could of done it better...plus the music is really uninspiring

whose in this movie?

Keria Knightley's the big name in here, but it also stars Clive Owen and Stephen Dillane

Umm actually I think it looks great
and it can not be shit since it's from the same producer as Pirates of the caribbean I am expecting great things

Trailer here : http://kingarthur.movies.go.com/trailers.html

It comes out this summer

Its also from the same Producer of Pearl Harbor!
You should say its directed by the same guy that directed Training day...producer means very little when talking about the quality of the movie.

meh he's a big name right now I would say
Like I mean really who hasn't heard of PotC

Jerry Bruckheimer productions were very well known way before POTC.

The trailer imo looks great. Sometimes I don't like a big name guy to be the main character because then its hard to look past that so thats a plus. The catipult scene looks awesome.

I saw the trailer, looks really awesome.

ya it dose, don't know whats matter with 113, I love movies like these

what's wrong w/ the music???? it looks like an awsome movie.

Jerry Bruckheimer rocks!!!!

This trailer sucks!!!!!!

what, then, would you have them do to improve it?

looks great... i like those era movies... plus the war scenes look kick a$$...

thank you Kalantiaw!!!!!

ahh i love people that say the producer is so good!! when they have no idea what a producer does and the only production they know of with jerry brockheimer is PotC

One of the things I like best about this is that they're approaching it from a more realistic biew instead of the hyper-mythic, sterotypical manner that everybody knows already. That'll make a hell of a lot more original

KR> so true...

for which we are VERY thankfull. no more Disney version sugar coated stories

Don't you think this movie looks cool. Besides Troy i'm very anticipated to c this movie with Clive Owen and Keira Knightley. It also has a great looking poster!!!!

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=24571&highlight=king+arthur

I wanna see this movie, and Troy only because I'm all into those time periods. But I think King Arthur looks cooler then Troy

this movie is going to ROCK! the trailer is good, but ive seen better Bruckheimer trailers!

Hmmm...

The hype has the tagline of 'the true' story' (obviously an exaggeration even in the absolute best of times) and someone mentions earlier that it is nice thay are taking a realistic view...

Bah- strikes me as a gimmick. Arthurian lore is an interest of mine, and it should not be forgotten that King Arthur is a LEGEND, constructed, like all legends, over time, and all that which this interpretation is saying is 'false'' is PART of that legend, as rather well explored in the grim 80s film Excalibur.

Because for this film to claim this is true as opposed to that falsehood is complete balderdash. Aside from that no-one knows the true story, this film has only made a half-hearted effort to be even remotely close to accurate. Ok, it is nice that Arthur and co are going around in quasi-Roman gear, which has not been seen before, but to be honest just because we has Romano British is no guarantee he would have done that. They have cavalry- wrong. Metal armour- wrong. And STONE CASTLES! Completely wrong by some 500 years. Camelot, if it ever existed in as much as whatever the Camelot legend i based on, would have been a tent.

So if they are only going to go halfway, I am not convinced of the point- might as well stick with the legend; probably far more exciting. And anyone who thinkls the mystified version- which frankly, literarility speaking, is the ONLY version- is 'sugar coated'- you really SHOULD watch Excalibur...

But.... we shall see.

In fact, on further reflection, this talk of demystifying... Guinevere, Lancelot, Galahad and Merlin are all part of the myth, so I am not sure what they are doing there...

It's just gibberish to talk of this as true, or in any way more valid than, say, Disney's Sword in the Stone in ways of 'accuracy'. If they would just say this is a new interpretation and stop pretending it is more 'true' than any other, I would feel a lot happier about it.

What I'm excited about is the fact that they aren't using the hyper-mythic 'Lady of the lake, magic exacalibur, green knight, grail legend' that all of the other movies have (although I myself am I self-proclaimed scholar and avid fan of Arthurian legend). I'm happy that they're at least exploring the the truth behind the legend, if not being entirely truthful itself. It's a step in a new direction, which I respect

I would see a Jerry Bruckheimer movie because I loved

POTC
Gone in Sixty Second
CSI
Cold Case
Pearl Harbor
didnt like Bad Boys 2 tho

But usually when its a bruckheimer production its worth seeing

Nah... it's just a gimmick. First Knight didn't have any of that either; didn't make it any better.

It is simply the latest in a long line of interpretations and it has no place pretending it is endemically better than the others in concept.

It might not be trying to pretend it's better....but w/e, I think it looks fun!

Ok, now, I have been doing some research into this...

Apparently, this story is based on a very specific interpretation of Arthurian legend that staes that the whole Arthurian 'thimng' was based on the idea of imported Kataphraktoi heavy riders from the East- from modern day Russia/Turkey, who would later become the vanguard of the Byzantine Empire and the foprerunner of the Medieval Knight...

... and so therefore that Arthurian legend is based upon these foreign 'pre-Knight-Knights' helping the Romano-British fight off the Saxons.

Whilat this makes it a decidedly skewed interpretation of Arthurian Lore... I concede that this interpretation DOES actually excuse the use of cavalry. It is interesting... but it still is subject to my basic criticisms (vis a vis, there is still ntohing that makes it 'true', as such).

My friend Barries brother was in it. I'm from Dublin Ireland & they shot it in Wexford with is 1 county away so he got a bus to the location everyday for like 3 months. & like me he's a movie buff so he snuck a camera on set abunch of times & got some impressive shots. He was playing a warrior on the same side a Kiera Knightly so he was fighting with her alot wearing blue face paint. We all called him the smurf cus even after a shower he never got it all off.

From the photos i saw it looked good.. They included siege machines large armies fighting with lots of tyre burning for the ancient mythic look etc.. & an anyonmous big wall.. I presume they will lengthen it & put a castle behind it or something in Post Production.. but I'd agree with you guys, the trailer does make it look kind of crap.

If you guys are interested in pics send me an E mail my friends brother might let me scan some in..

Peace

I totally cant wait for this move....It looks interesting, id love to see it.

And if the movie sucks, well....then Lancelot will make it worth going to see

i think the trailer looks good and so does the movie, with bruckheimer producing it should atleast be entertaining and with mrs knightly something pleasant to look at and you got hanz zimmer on sound which is always a plus

I dont like Kiera Knightly at all, but i still think it will be interesting to see.

i think this movie will show her versitality(sp) as an actress and at only 19 shes quite beautifull as well.. i think she will be one of the big stars

they're not putting in the Lady of the Lake and Excalibur things??? ah DAMN! Morgan (Arthur's sister, i've seen several versions of her name, so just in case) was my fav character!
doesn't matter, i wasn't gonna watch that anyway cos Keira Knightly is Gwynevera (far out, can't spell) and it's annoying enough with anyone playing Gwyn, but now they have Keira playing her, which will make her doubly annoying.

I am unsure of this movie right now. Its going to be hard to top other similar movies about King Arthur, but i do love that time period. So I will probably end up seeing sometime.

In Switzerland, King Arthur isn't in the cinemas yet. So.. who's acting (I know Keira Knightley and... ??)
And what's the storyline and stuff ....
So, please talk about King Arthur in this forum...





Thanks ..

(Sorry for my English, but I'm a young SwizZ girlie...)

cu, Angie

I dont think it's out in the UK yet either.

There is already thread about King Arthur

its not out anywhere so we cant take this poll

Since ... uhm... yea ever I like movies like this... in this age...

dudidum...

bye

I think this move looks fun. I'd definitely would see it in the theatre.

Plus, helloooo Kiera Knightley.

I started this new thread bc this one doesn't have that poll in it... King Arthur as many of you know is one of my most anticipated this summer... it's opening in about a month so... here's a good place we can call get excited about it.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/153/862598.jpg

You know this is gonna get closed right ?Or merged with the other one.

AH, another year and ANOTHER king arthur movie.

damn cant they make anything orginal ANYMOE>!?!??!?!

Lancelot hubba hubba.

Im lookign foward to this film, even though i dont like Kiera Knightly, i will deffinitivly be going to see it....after my Psyhology exam that is.

King Arthur

Is anyone looking forward to upcoming release of King Arthur?

I am. Does anyone know when it comes into theaters? I know it's on a Wednesday.... it's really soon.

i want to see it 'cause Keira is in it

Debuts this Wednesday. I'll be there for the first showing. Unfortunately, I don't think it will fare as people hope, just because it will be held up to LOTR-esque standards.

i just dont think it will be good at all, as i wont rush to see it i might still give it some respect and see it in theaters if i have the time

I'm thinking that it won't be that good. I'll go see it but I'm not expecting too much. Looks like too much will revolve around Knightley.

nah, this movie will be god awful, not worth the time or effort IMO, though most people will probably like it, big budget, CG effects, cast to swoon over and a love story at the centre, typical run of the mill stuff with a mythological twist; as I said, not worth the effort...

I want to see it, but what's up with the tag line "The True Story That Inspired the Legend"? WHAT true story?

Yep I'm looking forward to it. Comes out Wed. July 7th and unfortunately will probably get killed off on the weekend by Anchorman. sorry but I can NOT stand Will Farrell

if u dinbt no will farrel then you dont no funny. i dont no the times he has made me laugh, he is one of the best. i still wish he never left the crew at SNL

I am looking forward to seeing Ray "Who's your Daddy" Winstone in it, cos he is the man!

Well, I saw the movie this morning, and suffice to say, I thought it was garbage. Not being at alll familiar with "King Arthur", this movie won't help anyone that is in the same boat.

There is no explanation of how he came to be "King Arthur", which he was only referred to as such ONE time in the movie, at the very end.

It was a tedious 2 hours and 15 minutes of cliched war epic scenes, slow motion sword swinging, a love triangle, 3 big wars with alot of boring filler in the middle. The characters were very bland, the dialogue was flat, and there was an apparent lack of excitement overall.

Your money is better spent on "Spider Man 2", and while I said I wasn't familiar with "King Arthur", I don't think this is a very fair representation of the story even to the most loyal of K.A. fans.

To think Antoine Fuqua went from "Training Day" to this crap.

see thats what i htought it would be. thank you now i know never to spend my money on it.

I'm gonna go see it tonight despite these criticisms..From the beginning it has looked good to me, so i hope it's well worth it. I'll let you guys know tommorow what i thought of the movie.

if ur gonna review it try the review forum

why cuase he will be disscusion the movie so this forum is perfect.

I saw it, its ok. Could of been 10 times better. I think they kind of rushed it, but thats just me

Stat of the week, and it's pretty scary:

There are 109 members registered at KMC whose User ID begins with some form of reference to Orlando Bloom.

It was never going to explain that- it being a re-telling of the King Arthur legend 'as it really was', so they very erroneously say.

That being the case, as it was trying to contrast with the traditional legend, this film would be a poor place to learn that legend in the first place (go rent Excalibur instead).

For the fans, though, the contrast might well interest.

i saw it last week.
i actually really really like d it. its fun and cool. and i love the arthurian stories

..and how many for Orlando Jones?

http://ia.imdb.com/media/imdb/01/I/56/86/12m.jpg

Crooner, Tony Orlando, anyone?


http://ia.imdb.com/media/imdb/01/I/59/68/22m.jpg

i say the only reason well guys see it is because keria knighnly is hot and half naked (prtty much)

Haven't seen it. Even in the commercials I don't feel like it's a story about King Arthur in any way shape or form besides the love triangle. I dunno...it looked like senseless fun war sequences, but I didn't see much plot from the trailers.
I am still undecided whether I will see it or not. Maybe I'll rent it one day when every other movie I actually want to see is rented out...

I basically just wanted to know if king arthur is worth watching, I don't particularly want to know what the film entitles or anything I just want to know is it worth the trip???

hell no.

rent it unless you really love seeing movies in theater

or you just love wasting money on seeing a movie youll walk out on

Read the reviews here.

dont see it its shit

I was hoping against hope that it would be good but it's not. When will someone make the definitive King Arthur movie?

Same thing said with amity75, I thought that this movie was gonna be good because the trailer made it good..and asometimes i think that "...i wanna see the movie they showed in the preview...". There was only about 1 good scene in the movie.

exactly. i hate when they show all the good scenes in the previews and then the movie suxs

maybe i will give this film a miss then

NO

they sed it was virtually wat happened bak in them times but it is bull... arthur wasnt italin or forgien... utter bullshit

worth WHAT? lolz...

remove all conceptions you have about Sir Thomas Mallory's ARTHUR, forget CAMELOT, forget THE story, treat this like any other ordianry film, then, you might actually like this.

actually he was a Brit in this one too, only he was in the service of the Roman Empire

Actually, the real King Arthur wasn't all about castles and stuff. It was in more primitive times.

The famous version of King Arthur is actually wrong.

1 the worst movies of the summer.

thanks for the advice all, I have decided to spend my money on I-robot instead, because that is supposed to be brilliant!!!

it is but pple say it isnt

i know i am probs going to get bashed for this but i saw king arthur and i honestly think it is a decent movie, i really enjoyed it. of course there are flaws and the ending kind of smacks of cheese but the rest of the movie is really very good, especially ioan gruffud's (sp?) preformance as lancelot

well your intitled to your opinion so thats cool. and my friend said he saw and liked the movie but i still think it will be bad so i'll wait.

Erm... they already have:

EXCALIBUR
***.imdb.com/title/tt0082348/

Boorman had originally planned to to a Lord Of The Rings movie/trilogy, but couldnt get enough money and ended up making this instead


FURY

excuse this joke:

sounds like BOORman was a POORman hahahaha...




I understand, that wasn't REMOTELY funny but take closure in the fact that I didn't sit here all day thinking that up.. King Arthur had high expectations because my celtic background was incorporated in it and Guinevere was really cool. It entertained me but I was so pissed off it wasn't as good as I thought it would be.. boo!

hysterical

I love that smiliehysterical

hysterical

ok guys, really my joke wsn't that funny.. wow.. I should get my own show started

this stuff is COMIC GOLD!






sorry, I had to respond to your sarcasam with not acknowledging sarcasam.

I'm seeing King Arthur this weekend, for free. And I heard that if you just think of it as a medieval movie and not a King Arthur movie, then you might like it.

then why would they call it King Arthur.? ppple went to see King Arthur not Medeival times

but if you've read 'King arthur and the knights of the round table' and you're really posessive about it, then you might not want to see this because they ruined it.

i hate this movie with my heart so pure

lol now i like that look at this movie.

Under orders to try and make more money, the makers of the movie released the PG-13 theatrical version. It cut a lot of the gore and blood out, making the battles rather choppy, as you see guys swinging swords and it cuts to people just falling down dead. The theatrical release also has some bad jokes about bladder problems and stuff, like the movie is trying to appeal to immature viewers, or something.
The director's cut restores the violence, making the battle scenes much bloody and smoother, and the joking scenes are replaced by much more serious ones showing more character development, giving Arthur and Lancelot more depth. All in all, the director's cut is better; it makes the climax of the movie, and Arthur and Lancelot's final decisions, much more understandable and moving.

Anyone agree?

ive seen it the movie was crappy

I rented the DVD, I didn't totally hate it, Troy was much worse.