drlydiamisskaufmann For those who wanted a film historically correct would be better off watching Discovery Channel, or History Channel.I loved the Gladiator because it was a fantastic film and not because it was historically correct. Idem with the last 2 Robin Hoods, and Braveheart, Ben Hur I enjoyed the STORIES. Titanic was not historically correct, but people loved it. I'm not a Titanic fan, but that's my point. In Titanic people enjoyed the love story between Jack and Rose.King Arthur is one of the rare films that I can see over and over without being tired of it. The actors are perfect for their roles, especially the alchemy between the handsome Arthur (Clive Owen)and Ioan Gruffud) (a very good looking Lancelot)and the knights with their differences, their bickering, their humor, each with their own fighting skills and their humanity. Guenivire less than the others. She was the person that I liked the least. But she was the perfect wife for Arthur. I really liked the actress who played Alecto's mom. She seemed to be a submissive but extraordinary woman, looking after the hostages Lucan with much human care, much like the knight Dagonet.The music is beautiful, as well as the scenery, the battles. There were some very sad moments, but they were necessary for the film. The Catholic church was bashed, but I wasn't surprised, because it became an institution and not a religion.To reply to one critic, Arthur wasn't shocked when he saw Roman torture, he was shocked when he saw the torture of the Catholic church, and when he found out that the priest he considered as his father was ex-communicated and murdered by the bishop "friend of my father". Don't confound the Romans and the Catholic Church. The Romans were as inhuman as the Saxons, but Arthur had a very naïve vision of the Catholic Church. All in all an excellent film that I really enjoy.Clive Owen was perfect as Arthur, an excellent fighter, yet a caring person, caring for others, especially for his knights. His attempt to save Dagonet was a perfect example of a man, of a king. His eyes were beautiful and added a dimension to the film.I loved the alchemy between the handsome Arthur (Clive Owens) and Ioan Gruffud (a very good looking Lancelot), and all the other knights. They were human beings, and they showed it marvelously.For those bashing the film because it wasn't historically correct, I DON'T CARE. I loved the film. I loved the story line, and I enjoy seeing it again and again.

nilen-51573 There where a few things that I thought strange and done to create conflict that made so sense. First they need to get the kid beyond the wall. Why do the Romans have a castle there. Why is it not south of the wall and why do they have such important persons(like the kid) in it. Why have not the Celts attacked that. They attack south of the wall but not the lightly defended settlement north of it. Then we have the Saxons that want to plunder. They do not land in the richer roman territories, but in the Celtic. Sure you could argue that they do not know, but because they want to go south, they should then return to the ships and land somewhere there so they don't have to storm the wall. Speaking of the wall, the last battle fells so strange. I imagine Arthur before the battle telling the battle plan, which everyone must think is a bit odd. He do not use the wall even though the Saxon just arrived and has no siege material such as ladders. He proposes to open the doors and let the army in. He is certain the whole army will not go and in the smoke he created, he and his 5 other riders will attack and kill them all. Then when the rest comes they will all attack and destroy the army. The last part could work, but the first part just seems stupid.

swilliky Claiming to tell the true story that inspired the legend, Antoine Fuqua put forth a gritty version of King Arthur. Narrated by Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd), the story tells of young men recruited by the Roman Empire to fight along the wall splitting Britain. Arthur (Clive Owen) leads a group of men, played by recognizable actors, as they fight barbarians alongside the Roman soldiers. These attackers are led by Merlin (Stephen Dillane). The knights Gawain (Joel Edgerton), Galahad (Hugh Dancy), Tristan (Mads Mikkelsen), Bors (Ray Winstone) and Dagonet (Ray Stevenson) all prove to be brave and brutal warriors as they fight an advancement encouraged by the impending exit of the Roman Empire from Britain.The knights do sit at a roundtable and look forward to returning home for some peace, but one last mission brings them North to fight the Saxon hordes and rescue a family. Cerdic (Stellan Skarsgård) leads the Saxons with his son Cynric (Til Schweiger). Arthur and his knights find a settlement of Christians punishing pagans. The knights free some of the tortured people and find Guinevere (Keira Knightley) trapped behind a wall being put to death. They free her and leave the priests to the Saxons. Check out more of this review and others at swilliky.com

hegedus_dani02 Due to the average IMDb rating and Metascore, I sit down with low expectations to watch Antoine Fuqua's 2004 movie, King Arthur. If you can do, watch the director's cut, because it is much better than the theatrical cut, such as in Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven. There are a lot of advantages and maybe just one, but a huge mistake of this movie. The cast is excellent. Although I personally don't like Clive Owen, but he was really good in this film, such as the supporting actors, like Keira Knightley, Ioan Groffud, Joel Edgerton, Ray Stevenson and the Danish actor Mads Mikkelsen. The music is amazing. Hans Zimmer is definitely the best composer of nowadays. The visual effects are also great. Antoine Fuqua has a quite unique directing style, but it's really matches with the story and visual style of this film. The only huge mistake of King Arthur is it's story. There are huge plot holes, which makes the characters and the battles unentertaining and useless. If the story would be just acceptable, than this film would be nearly as good as great historical movies of the 21st century, such as Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven or Wolfgang Petersen's Troy. The Director's Cut is definitely worth a watch, but sit down with low expectations, and don't except a Christopher Nolan movie-type story.7/10