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

ok this may seem stupid to sum but i was just wondering what if they made a sequel to king arthur i think it would be pretty cool because there are so many storys about king arthur and his knights if you know what i mean like they could make the story of his life as a king so what do you guys think do you think it could be made some day.

ps i made this thread because there was some talk of it over at some other place so yea

I don't know. If Lancelot isn't in it, I probably wouldn't be very excited.

I think there should be a sequel....I dunno.

That movie really confused me but it came out to be really good.
Maybe I should rewatch it again & see......@_@?

Seeing as the film had absolutely nothing to do with Arthurian mythology, the fact that stories exist of Arthur and his knights is completely irrelevant to a sequel- which would have no value.

On a personal note....

I completely avoided King Arthur when it was released in theaters and I still refused to see the DVD. I find it very atrocious that a film was made and tried to portrayed itself as real history.

Excalibur deserves better recognition than King Arthur. And a sequel just proves that whoever is behind this production is trying to play with British history. This wasn't neither a documentary or even fictional history. It was just crap!

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf

Excalibur deserves better recognition than King Arthur. And a sequel just proves that whoever is behind this production is trying to play with British history. This wasn't neither a documentary or even fictional history. It was just crap!

Another Great Movie was "camelot". All though it was a musical. It still had Richard harris.

I haven't seen Camelot in ages. Great film as I recall...

The first one was awful. Don't make another.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Seeing as the film had absolutely nothing to do with Arthurian mythology, the fact that stories exist of Arthur and his knights is completely irrelevant to a sequel- which would have no value.
Agreed

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
On a personal note....

I completely avoided King Arthur when it was released in theaters and I still refused to see the DVD. I find it very atrocious that a film was made and tried to portrayed itself as real history.

Excalibur deserves better recognition than King Arthur. And a sequel just proves that whoever is behind this production is trying to play with British history. This wasn't neither a documentary or even fictional history. It was just crap!

Yes, the history is horribly butchered, but it's still worth seeing for it's entertainment value and imo it has plenty of that.

You want to see the definitive King Arthur tale, watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

I'd prefer it if there was no sequel. I thought it was somewhat entertaining, the history dodgy. Hardly cause for another. And really, there's not much left for Arthur to do now he's stopped the Barbarians against absurd odds, had some of his "knights" head up to the round table in the sky and slept with Kiera Knightly.

I wouldn't call it sleeping with, it was probably just an uncomfortable roll which just ended in tears, his, when she poked him with one of those razor sharp ribs and made him bleed.

Anyway, I refused to see King Arthur....and shall continue to do so, I believe.

Originally posted by silver_tears
I wouldn't call it sleeping with, it was probably just an uncomfortable roll which just ended in tears, his, when she poked him with one of those razor sharp ribs and made him bleed.

hysterical Ah, the many dangers of being a hero, I bet they didn't teach him about that one in school. Though I guess if things got to bad he could just keep his armor on all the time.

That would make for uncomfortable sex

Remember to wear Metal Kids

I believe in safe sex, But that's just rediculous.

Originally posted by Neo_Version 7
I don't know. If Lancelot isn't in it, I probably wouldn't be very excited.

ME TOO I Hate the Movie..Cause he Died and since the film was less then i was suspecting

Different versions really, in First Knight with Richard Gere as Lancelot, Arthur played by Sean Connery dies.

Originally posted by silver_tears
That would make for uncomfortable sex

Armor or getting cut on ribs....either way it'll be uncomfortable

It is really hard to make a sequel to a movie which everyone made fun of while watching.... man I have the best memories making fun of King Arthur while watching it with my roommate.... SCOOOBBYY DOOO!!!!

Sorry you had to be there to catch that one...lol....

Very poorly acted movie too... i found it rather bland and uninteresting myself.. i gave it a chance... i didnt judge til I saw it.. but I was disappointed... and I doubt they will ever think of making a sequel to it

Originally posted by Lana
Armor or getting cut on ribs....either way it'll be uncomfortable

Hehehe. I can imagine the day after....



Which is where the sequel would pick up.

Now that I'd watch

KA 1 was entertaining...but not in a good way.

cheers Here's hoping there is no sequel.

This was a Movie I enjoyed watching the Good guys die.

I should have gone in there with my Glamdring and Staff, and Saved myself 126 minutes.

Plus in middle earth we learn that Antoine Fuqua is not exactly an "acclaimed" Director. I Despised "Training Day" with great intensity. It seemed like it was trying to buy me off with cheap tricks and unwanted curse words. Good thing my Wizard eyes could see beyond it.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Hehehe. I can imagine the day after....



Which is where the sequel would pick up.

classic.

The film was garbage a sequel would be a waste of money and time.