King Arthur: Legend of the Sword May 2017 Charlie Hunnam as Arthur,  Jude Law as the bad bad uncle, Eric Bana as Uther Pendragon, filmed in the United Kingdom.  In the early 924 AD the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, united by Æthelstan became what we now know of as England. Some say that the Legend of King Arthur came from this man. Let it be known that Arthur, is a Roman name Artur in which this happened. Artur (Æthelstan) was a true legend with a sword, and vanquished many of his enemies, and was a ruthless man. On the good side he did unite the cave dwelling residents of England. Which was hard to do with Germans (original Anglo-Saxons), French, Norsemen and Vikings all trying to take control at the same time, not an easy feat for any man, then or now.

That is where the legend starts. A man good with a sword. Through the centuries many stories based on this legend have come forward, good or bad, silly or reasonable, none actually have any idea what truly transpired or how it happened. We do know of the battles, at least some of them Celts (Kelts) and others attributed everything to what we call magic. The sword of this Æthelstan actually became a legend on its own because of these battles. My favorite version of Artur is where he is a twelve year old boy (pay attention to this we will come back to the boy)  and he pulls the sword from the stone. No, it was a book and a movie, not a cartoon. I want it to be known that all those fancy castles did not come about until the English met the Romans and learned how to build that was about 300 years before Æthelstan, and as we know, their buildings didn’t last long.

 

Which brings us to this version of King Arthur. You have to put aside everything you know from previous movies and well, history too, because most of them are fairy tales, including this one. You need to see this as the author wrote it not some preconceived notion. If you do not see it with a fresh outlook you will probably not enjoy it. For instance to me, calling the thirty-six year old Charlie Hunnam, as Arthur, a boy in the movie was ridiculous, before the industrial age anyone thirty-six years old was ready to be buried, and that is a fact. So for me that distracted from the actual movie. Then he looks alot like my BFF (who lives in England) when he hasn’t shaved for a week eww.

Now then, I thought the photography was over the top, I believe the music was great, I think the directing was superb and the acting was right on. I think the editing sucked. I rate the movie 4 out of 5 and plan on having it in my collection.

Please follow and like us:

3 Thoughts on “A review of King Arthur: Legend of the Sword 2017

  1. Steven F on August 16, 2017 at 8:24 am said:

    It looks like it could be a good version of a subject that tends to generate much speculation. I agree that Charlie Hunnam is a bit old to be believable as a teenager.

  2. pauly10 on August 17, 2017 at 6:22 am said:

    That looks really good, and it is on my watch list.
    Hope the cave dwellers don’t spoil the movie though 😛

  3. Mel Leach on August 18, 2017 at 4:39 pm said:

    Great review. I like that you tell us what you really, really like and what you really, really don’t like.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.

Post Navigation