Jipay Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 No topic about this movie ?? it was such a great time I had ! Damn i wish every movie could be this great
ApophisV Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 LOL!!! i saw it yesterday.... i have to say three things about it: -> 2 hours battle. -> no plot. -> many things copied from LOTR so... im VERY disapointed.... the only good points of the movie are that the characters at the beginning (the first half hour) develope nicely. but when the invasion of that bad guys ("sachsen" in germany, no idea what the english word is) begins, the whole movie is becoming a big bloody battle... :( the LOTR similarities: - guinevere (please can any admin correct the spelling, i've no idea... :P) is some elfish girl (bow, the blue dress) - lancelot is legolas (bow skills, the two short sorts / scimitars or whatever) - artur is aragorn (majestic, but living a honest and simple life) now, my two cents, there were several other details (some good, but most bad) i could mention, but that would mean spoilers... :P
DoubleT Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 Ehhh I do think it must be the other way around...... LOTR is from the 1950-60's... King Artur Legend.... well alot older.....
ApophisV Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 no no no!!! thats not what i meant.... MY problem is: i think that the makers of king arthur used all this similarities to ride on the LOTR-wave... its just to attract the people that loved the LOTR movies (and that were MANY!!!)....
Jipay Posted August 24, 2004 Author Posted August 24, 2004 Sorry to say that Apo, but you're totaly missleading. The arthur movie is not a fiction. It's a movie made from recent historical findings. So nothing was copied. It's not the kind of movie you actually think it is. I found it great on many historical points.
jonfett Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 It's a movie made from recent historical findings. Recent?? What are you on about?? King Arthur is an old legend or folk tale that has been told in Britain for hundreds of years.. I very much doubt it is based on any recent findings. It is as much a story as Lord of the rings.. except it is actually based in England. Jon.
ApophisV Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 Noooo!!! you guys don't understand what i mean.... :$ <_< i don't talk about the story or whatever... i ONLY talk about the design of the things... the design that hadn't came with the original legends (i'm pretty sure nowhere was said the thin, tall guinivere wears a blue elegant dress and suddenly has a bow in her hands) i know that tolkien (from GB!!!) was much influenced by england's / great britain's history and legends... i don't wanna say ARTUR is a copy of ARAGORN.... i wanna say that the makers of the movie used several similar things to the LOTR-MOVIE... e.g. characters look like elves, behave like characters from the lotr-movie, have similar character traits (i'm sure there is much place to be filled with additional character traits, that aren't listed / viewable in the original legends)... you know, i talk about THIS movie.... i would never say that any guy from "excalibur" or "merlin" (with sam neill!!!) would fit in the LOTR movies... but most of the "legend of arthur"-guys would... AND i say that this hadn't happened by chance, the directors /script editors/producers made it that way, because LOTR'ish movies are MAINSTREAM and almost everybody tries to get on it, to make money... the same with troy... it hadn't happened by chance that suddenly many, many "historical" (or at least pseudo-historical) movies are appearing at the theaters.... if people (producers) see, that one kind of movies has success, they try to reproduce the success as ling as people are interested in it. look at the super hero movies.... the last 20 years, there came out a super hero movie every three years or something like that... and suddenly people see that you can earn much money with good superhero movies and BANG there is a spider-man series, batman and catwoman are returning, "the incredibles", the fantastic four, daredevil and many, many more (e.g. the thunderbirds) are making their ways to the theaters... so please don't think i'm saying anything against the arthur legends... i love this legend, i have seen "merlin" more than 7 times, i hope to get "excalibur" on dvd as soon as possible and i read at least two books about that theme.... BUT i still can say: this movie, this INTERPRETATION was not good.... AND i can say that the producers has tried to surf on a wave from another movie... AND i can say that they failed i hope that made clear what i think about that movie, about the legend and (not at least) about the movie industrie... ;)
ApophisV Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 It's a movie made from recent historical findings. Recent?? What are you on about?? King Arthur is an old legend or folk tale that has been told in Britain for hundreds of years.. I very much doubt it is based on any recent findings. It is as much a story as Lord of the rings.. except it is actually based in England. Jon. oh... there are said a few words at the beginning of the movie... they say that the arthur legend is based on a real "hero" (the roman commander "arturius"), and they say that there was these "recent" new archiological findigs that show this (correct me if this was wrong, please!) but they don't say if this archeological findings are true or just fiction to make a different looking arthur movie... (has anybody facts???)
Precious Jazz Posted August 24, 2004 Posted August 24, 2004 One thing I don't like is changing female characters from a small queenly role into one of the lead warriors who is in the same league as the heroes. Being a female myself I enjoy seeing women kick butt, but I hate it when Hollywood changes the characters just for female empowerment. In the LOTR books, you respect Eowyn a lot more when she rides into battle confronts the Witch-King because women didn't fight in that type of time period. Yet it didn't come across fake because of her backstory which made her seem like an equal. You didn't get the same feeling thanks to Arwen turning into an Elven Xena. It seemed really fake because her character wasn't the warrior type. The same is similar to Gueiniviere in a way.
Jipay Posted August 25, 2004 Author Posted August 25, 2004 Being a female myself :D Shall I anderstand that you are one of those extra rarefemale AFOL ? Wow, incredible :blink: Well I agree, I don't like genievre either that much. Eowyn is much more sexy. Well it' can't be worst than amidala in star wars :D Ok, ok just kidding (I just couldn't stop laughing at the scene when she falls of the republican gunship)
Recommended Posts