Fan videos can make something so bad, so much better

Fan videos can make something so bad, so much better
Okay finally finished wacthing this film last night and sorry to say that as a film it did not improve. This maybe my own fault as I did watch fan videos first so knew what was going to happen to Lancelot, if I had the surprise factor I'm pretty sure I would have screamed "Nooooooooo!!!!" As I did when I sawt PotC: AWE, which was not worth 3 hours of anyones life and then they killed Norrington. But anyway King Arthur, and it was the directors cut that I watched. But just to get this bit out of the way, before I go into the film itself. I think we all agree that Ioan looked hot in this film, but sadly not enough of him, although it now has one of my all time favourite lines of his. Lancelot to Guinevere : I don't believe in heaven, I've been living in this hell. But if you represent what heaven is, then take me there. Smooth, don't you agree? And said in a lovely deep voice. Now the film. These are the things that I liked about this film. The mood and atmosphere of the film. Lancelot - Ioan played him so well with that charm but a bit of the darkside and the hint of his interest in Guinevere, and that she was the battle he choose to die for. Lancelot and Guinevere the hint of something there and Keria and Ioan seemed to have so much more and better chemistry than Keria and Clive Owen did. The rest of the knights. I think that scene near the beginning when they're talking about what they will do when they return home and the scene of them sitting out side drinking before they learn of the other mission was a very good starting point of there friendship and relationships. Also Ray Winestone, legend. I mean in the big fight scene the guy gets a spear in the back, but he just keeps on going. Well I guess you can't kill off the guy who has 11 brats, that would be too sad. I also liked the bit with the knight that didn't say much and the little kid. A very nice story that managed to be told in a film that seemed to have no real direction, or in fact story. And this leads on to what I didn't like. Basically that is the rest of the film. To me Clive Owen seemed wooden through out. The supposidly close relationship that Arthur and Lancelot had didn't come through. The film didn't seem to have a plot it was just, come up with something so we can have a massive fight scene at the end. Which for a person who doesn't enjoy alot of gore and didn't fully watch the battle scene in Gladiator, didn't seem to mind them cutting of heads and such. It is meant to be winter but there were leaves on the trees and when they come back to the wall it looks like a sunny day, when in the previous scene they were on an forzen lake. I know it's Scotland but come on. Also they allow the Saxons to come through the gate to there side of the wall, which brings up another point. Unless the electric garage door was invented in the 5th Century, who is opening and closing the gate? I think that is pretty much all I have to say on it, but from now on I will be watching King Arthur in Lancelot related fan videos only.

Unless the electric garage door was invented in the 5th Century, who is opening and closing the gate? :rotf: One of the extra's I presume. They don't get credit for anything anyway :cool: To me Clive Owen seemed wooden through out Previous to discovering Ioan, I remember hiring the movie and being so disappointed by it. One of the reasons was that nowhere in the movie does Arthur really 'get' me. It wasn't like for instance Braveheart, where I felt SO caught up in the battle that I wanted to join it :???: , if you know what I mean. I don't understand why anyone would bother to follow Arthur. When in the end the knights showed up at Arthur's side, I felt, it said more about the knights than about Arthur. There must have been something, or the knights wouldn't have followed him, I presume, but whatever it was, I didn't catch it. After having seen the movie I was more impressed by Guinevere and Lancelot than Arthur. :oops:

Re: Fan videos can make something so bad, so much better
The mood and atmosphere of the film. This is what I most like about the film too. Lancelot - Ioan played him so well with that charm but a bit of the darkside and the hint of his interest in Guinevere, and that she was the battle he choose to die for. Lancelot and Guinevere the hint of something there and Keria and Ioan seemed to have so much more and better chemistry than Keria and Clive Owen did. I totally agree that there was more chemistry between Lance and Guin than Arthur and Guin, but I think that this was intentional. To me, Guin's attraction to Arthur is strategic - her attraction to Lance it is sexual. Arthur is a man with a shell that's hard to crack - as are all the knights. But Arthur has the added weight of leadership bestowed on him from an early age. Managemant has to maintain a certain distance, in order to be able to manage successfully. To me Clive Owen seemed wooden through out. The supposidly close relationship that Arthur and Lancelot had didn't come through. I don't agree. I think it is Arthur that is wooden, not Clive. In this version, Lance and Arthur were quietly mutually supportive and characteristically found it hard to say what they were feeling. Hence the power of Lancelot's scene at the end, when he tries to persuade Arthur to reconsider fighting. The film didn't seem to have a plot it was just, come up with something so we can have a massive fight scene at the end. The plot centres around the dying Roman Empire and although the basic story is simple, it is ironic, too - a bunch of Sarmation knights risking their hard-earned freedom to escort to safety, a boy who is to be a leader of a religion they themselves do not adhere to. The historical fact of the Battle of Baden Hill is undoubtedly where the film's writer started from, but I think the plot takes us there nicely. It is meant to be winter but there were leaves on the trees and when they come back to the wall it looks like a sunny day, when in the previous scene they were on an forzen lake. I know it's Scotland but come on. You're right - there are some bloopers! The film was shot in Ireland in summer (it's meant to be Northumberland) but I think the CGI of the ice scenes is pretty spectacular. There are flaws in this film, but it still holds up for me.

Though the tale narrated is very different from the Arthurian legends we all know and many grew to love and in spite of some bloopers (such as the one you mention about going from green fields and woods in one scene to snow and a frozen lake in another, though the main action is supposed to take place in a relatively short period of time), I still love King Arthur and its atmosphere. I agree with Stevie that it was intentional the chemistry was so evident between Lancelot and Guinevere, while it seemed to lack between Arthur and Guinevere: Guinevere would have been naturally attracted by Lancelot, but strategy required her to be with Arthur. And though I liked Lancelot better than Arthur, I also think that it is Arthur that is wooden, not Clive (who is a very good actor, IMHO). Arthur's position as the leader required him to keep a distance from the others.

Though the tale narrated is very different from the Arthurian legends we all know and many grew to love and in spite of some bloopers (such as the one you mention about going from green fields and woods in one scene to snow and a frozen lake in another, though the main action is supposed to take place in a relatively short period of time), I still love King Arthur and its atmosphere. I agree with Stevie that it was intentional the chemistry was so evident between Lancelot and Guinevere, while it seemed to lack between Arthur and Guinevere: Guinevere would have been naturally attracted by Lancelot, but strategy required her to be with Arthur. And though I liked Lancelot better than Arthur, I also think that it is Arthur that is wooden, not Clive (who is a very good actor, IMHO). Arthur's position as the leader required him to keep a distance from the others. That is an interest note about Guinevere and Arthur and she would chose him because she needed him or to use him. And yes Arthur does have to keep some sort of distance as he is the leader, but I never got the sense of why people would follow him, that he could connect with people.

And yes Arthur does have to keep some sort of distance as he is the leader, but I never got the sense of why people would follow him, that he could connect with people. I wouldn't forget that these men spent 15 years together and friendship were formed, so the knights going back to help Arthur fighting that final battle against the Saxons may have had to do with friendship among other things.

In all honesty, i love "King Arthur" (director's cut) now,but at first view ( theatrical version) i didn't follow it. my advice Queen-of-Mey, watch it a couple of times again. it grows on you once you get over the "This is not the version I know". And I ADORE :love: Ioan's narration in the opening and the ending. I could listen to that voice all day! Susie D

I felt very much the way Susie said. I knew who Ioan was going into it and that was my main reason for seeing it. I'd also seen Clive Owen in a few movies and thought he would make a good Arthur and then at first viewing I was disappointed by his portrayal. I felt Ioan's Lancelot was so different from HH and thought he was one of the best Lancelot's I've seen. If he had been Lancelot in First Knight, I would have understood Gwenivere choosing him over Sean Connery's Arthur. I didn't feel that way with Richard Gere. After a number of viewings, Clive's performance has grown on me and I enjoy him as Arthur. I enjoy the other knights as well. Good fodder for the only fanfiction I've written.

Well, you know how much fodder it is for me, Girls! :roll: but I have to agree on the other knights, GG. Their individual personalities are well formed and the way they interact with each other is the backbone of the film, IMO. In a way, they are an extreme version of today's soldiers - brutal when neccesary, proud of their military skill, loyal to their mates and sentimental about their homeland. Set against the violence of their times, they are probably a much more accurate picture of how Arthur and his nights would have been, if he actually existed.

I agree with that, Stevie, the brotherhood of the knights really is the basis of the picture for me. I've watched the film a number of times since I've owned it, and now it's almost like a comfortable pair of shoes with me. ------------------------------- SusieD, you're right about Ioan's narration at beginning and end, almost like telling a tale to a group of schoolboys, eagerly awaiting what will come next! :knight 2

This may not be the correct place to post this,but I noticed that "King Arthur" is being shown Thursday,(July 24th) on my local FOX Network station at 7 pm. :Knight Now,I don't know if that's true for stations everywhere,or if just a local thing. Might want to check your local listing and see if it's coming up where you live. :duel Some of you who haven't seen it yet---here may be a good chance! :ninja: Mmmmmm,all that n-i-c-c-c-c-e soft,black,leather,....and stuff.......shouldn't go to waste-----knowwhatImean???!!! :knight 2

I'll try to watch for it, Ship. Thanks. Yeah! Can't get enough of that black leather.

View Full Version: Fan videos can make something so bad, so much better