The sadly underrated "King Arthur" provides a rip-roaring and original take on the classic Medieval legend. The film is set in the brutal world of the 5th Century AD, right at the moment when the crumbling Roman Empire is turning inward and withdrawing its forces from far-flung outposts such as Briton, where barbarians from the north, sensing Rome's weakness, are beginning to make incursions into the regions south of Hadrian's Wall. In this version, Arthur's famous Knights of the Round Table are a compendium of conscripted tribesmen who have faithfully and courageously served the cause of Rome for the past 15 years. Now, just at the moment when they are about to be granted their hard-earned freedom and are eager to return home, they are sent on a final dangerous mission deep into Saxon territory to rescue a boy who may be a possible successor to the Pope in Rome.
"King Arthur" focuses more on the geopolitical aspects of the tale than the customary romance and magic - although neither of those has been completely slighted in this telling. The film opts for a darker, more realistic treatment of the story - there's no talk of Camelot here - one in which, Arthur, Lancelot, Guinevere and the rest undergo internal conflicts and moral struggles often overlooked in earlier versions of the story. Arthur, in particular, the product of a Roman father and a Saxon mother, is torn between his loyalty to Rome and to the island he calls home. But, above all, he is faithful to the men who have served under his command and, with whom, he has been able to forge a chivalric code of ethics - one whose very cornerstone is individual rights and freedoms - that seems like an anachronism in a world dedicated to enslavement, brutality and destruction. The violence in the film is grim, graphic and gory but appropriate to the times in which the movie is set.
David Franzoni has written an intelligent, dramatic screenplay, and Antoine Fuqua has directed the movie with flair and style. The action scenes are vivid and intense, and the film features the best ice floe battle sequence since "Alexander Nevsky." The acting - by Clive Owen as Arthur, Keira Knightley as Guinevere and Ioan Gruffudd as Lancelot - is no great shakes, but at least it's unobjectionable.
For the most part, the movie's attempts at de-romanticizing the legend work well - although turning Guinevere into a halter top-wearing, bow-wielding combatant on the order of a Boudicca or even Xena-Princess Warrior, does seem a bit much. However, since the film is less a retelling of the Arthurian legends and more a chronicle of the "real" people on whom the characters were allegedly based, such re-imaginings are more forgivable than they might otherwise have been. And like most actions films these days that don't seem to know when to leave well enough alone, "King Arthur" is saddled with a saggy third act whose repetitive battle scenes drain some of the life out of the story.
All in all, though, "King Arthur" emerges as a handsomely produced, thrilling tale of love, hope and freedom that should satisfy the schoolboy adventurer in all of us.
"King Arthur" focuses more on the geopolitical aspects of the tale than the customary romance and magic - although neither of those has been completely slighted in this telling. The film opts for a darker, more realistic treatment of the story - there's no talk of Camelot here - one in which, Arthur, Lancelot, Guinevere and the rest undergo internal conflicts and moral struggles often overlooked in earlier versions of the story. Arthur, in particular, the product of a Roman father and a Saxon mother, is torn between his loyalty to Rome and to the island he calls home. But, above all, he is faithful to the men who have served under his command and, with whom, he has been able to forge a chivalric code of ethics - one whose very cornerstone is individual rights and freedoms - that seems like an anachronism in a world dedicated to enslavement, brutality and destruction. The violence in the film is grim, graphic and gory but appropriate to the times in which the movie is set.
David Franzoni has written an intelligent, dramatic screenplay, and Antoine Fuqua has directed the movie with flair and style. The action scenes are vivid and intense, and the film features the best ice floe battle sequence since "Alexander Nevsky." The acting - by Clive Owen as Arthur, Keira Knightley as Guinevere and Ioan Gruffudd as Lancelot - is no great shakes, but at least it's unobjectionable.
For the most part, the movie's attempts at de-romanticizing the legend work well - although turning Guinevere into a halter top-wearing, bow-wielding combatant on the order of a Boudicca or even Xena-Princess Warrior, does seem a bit much. However, since the film is less a retelling of the Arthurian legends and more a chronicle of the "real" people on whom the characters were allegedly based, such re-imaginings are more forgivable than they might otherwise have been. And like most actions films these days that don't seem to know when to leave well enough alone, "King Arthur" is saddled with a saggy third act whose repetitive battle scenes drain some of the life out of the story.
All in all, though, "King Arthur" emerges as a handsomely produced, thrilling tale of love, hope and freedom that should satisfy the schoolboy adventurer in all of us.