Since 1992
Print and digital marketing
‘King Arthur: Legend of the Sword’
(Warner Bros. /Village Roadshow Pictures)
By Lucas Allen
You can always expect to see a movie or two based on a long-existing property to start a new franchise during summer movie season. Some of them work, depending on the interest of the audience. This summer, we have Hollywood’s attempt to reinvent the legend of King Arthur, the sword Excalibur and the Knights of the Round Table. Then we have their choice of director, Guy Ritchie, whose own style of action film, including “Sherlock Holmes” and “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.,” makes him stand out from the usual studio fare.
So how does “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” fare?
The story begins during a great battle in Camelot between soldiers led by King Pendragon (Eric Bana) and an army of all-powerful mages. Although Pendragon defeats them, he doesn’t know that his brother Vortigern (Jude Law) has used dark mage powers for his own desires. During a late-night siege, Pendragon is killed by dark forces, but not before he helps his young son, Arthur, escape. Years go by and a now grown Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) is living a hard life in a Viking town stealing from the rich. But upon returning to Camelot as a prisoner, he sees a sword caught in a stone that no one can pull out.
When he touches the sword, not only can he pull it out, but he also inhabits its power, which his father also had. He’s later told by a mysterious female mage (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey) that the sword Excalibur was made by Merlin, who gave it to Pendragon as a peace offering. Reluctant at first, Arthur soon realizes his destiny of overthrowing Vortigern and taking back Camelot. With the help of Bedivere (Djimon Hounsou) and his merry men of prisoners, Arthur has to find the courage to hold the sword and save the kingdom.
Right from the start, you can see Ritchie’s hand prints all over the film, not only as director but also as co-writer and co-producer. His version of the Arthurian legend involves fast-paced, non-linear editing like a late-90s music video on MTV. Sometimes, the movie tends to zigzag between two different scenes at the same time that while humorous can get aggravating very quickly. Making an action-packed historical fantasy with stylistic editing works better with 300, but it makes this film look more like a knockoff than anything special.
If you go into this movie thinking it’s going to be a fun action film, then you’re going to get more than you bargained for. While it does have some good action scenes despite the crazy editing, Ritchie and the filmmakers had some weird ideas that somehow ended up in the film. It includes war elephants that seem more acceptable in a Middle-Earth movie, giant bats, rats, and snakes that pop out of nowhere, and there’s a Lovecraftian creature that is an octopus with a head of a fat woman and two lovelier women for arms.
It’s those strange ideas alone that makes one think what were the writers smoking when they come up with it.
Amid all the madness, there’s a very talented cast that seems game to be in a fantasy movie. Hunnam chimes in his natural British accent playing Arthur as a very rugged yet charming anti-hero like he’s a British Han Solo. He seems to be at his most comfort getting down and dirty, especially after starring in “Sons of Anarchy” for many years. Frequent Ritchie collaborator Law hams it up a bit in a villainous performance while remaining both sly and charismatic. Unfortunately, the other cast members representing the Knights of the Round Table are used very little and not giving much to do making the whole Round Table setup seem pointless.
While the director’s fans might considered this his worst since his ill-fated “Swept Away” with ex-wife Madonna, “King Arthur: Legend of the Sword” is simply another mediocre attempt at making a franchise starter without enough real thought put into it to make it interesting for audiences. There are far better King Arthur/Camelot films out there, probably the most popular being the ultra-hilarious “Monty Python and the Holy Grail,” which came out in 1975 and is a a satirical take on the legend, with flying cows, killer rabbits, and fourth wall-breaking action is worth more of your time than this new version.
THE MOVIE’S RATING: PG-13 (for sequences of violence and action, some suggestive content and brief strong language)
THE CRITIC’S RATING: 2.25 Stars (Out of Four)
