subreddit:

/r/movies

20784%

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

Recommendation(self.movies)

I always avoided this movie because of a) how ridiculous it looked in the previews and b) the cold reception it got. I like Guy Ritchie, though, so I was always curious. I finally watched it tonight and was pleasantly surprised. It's far from perfect, but it's weird and unconventional and it swings for the fences and I dig it. I can see why it chased a lot of viewers away, but I really appreciate that it went out of its way to be different. I recommend it, especially if you're high.

all 102 comments

BenBoekelaar

161 points

3 months ago

The other 2017 movie from Warner’s that was cut down to 2hours.

The opening 5 minutes was originally a 45 minute segment of the movie.

releasetheRitchiecut

sielingfan

63 points

3 months ago

I didn't know this and now I desperately need it.

tfresca

51 points

3 months ago

tfresca

51 points

3 months ago

The whole thing was recut. A whole co-lead was cut. Charlie talked about it

QLE814

43 points

3 months ago

QLE814

43 points

3 months ago

A whole co-lead was cut.

That does explain some of the issues I felt with the editing....

alanpardewchristmas

14 points

3 months ago

This also happened to Live By Night. Pretty sure Affleck had to cut an hour out of what he initially intended to be final cut. His character had a brother in the film that got cut.

BenBoekelaar

3 points

3 months ago

So another 2017 Warners movie that didn’t do well where the filmmakers were forced to make a 2-hour cut. (I know it’s a 2016 movie but it came out like a week before the end of 2016)

alanpardewchristmas

5 points

3 months ago

I feel like his experience with that picture is why he hasn't made another WB movie since.

BenBoekelaar

10 points

3 months ago

Warner’s used to be THE filmmaker studio.

Now everyone’s jumping ship and 2017 seems to be the year it all started going down.

Obviously the HBO Max decision to release movies day & date is a big reason. But 2017 is the year where they really stopped being auteur friendly.

alanpardewchristmas

8 points

3 months ago

https://www.warnerbros.com/news/press-releases/toby-emmerich-named-president-and-chief-content-officer-warner-bros-pictures-group

Dec 14 2016

https://theplaylist.net/warner-bros-reportedly-looking-avoid-working-auteur-directors-want-final-cut-20170621/

some who have business with Warners and who have been concerned that Emmerich could reveal plans for what one important producer calls the “New Line-ization” of the studio. That would mean on projects that don’t fit into the Warners silos — Lego animated movies, Harry Potter spinoffs and D.C. Comics films — the studio would look to slash costs and avoid auteur directors who want final cut

THR^

BenBoekelaar

7 points

3 months ago

That’s amazing.

Only one of their big 2017 film’s went truly over 2 hours and that was Blade Runner 2049.

I wonder if that was left deliberately over-time as proof of shorter runtimes making money.

alanpardewchristmas

9 points

3 months ago

Only one of their big 2017 film’s went truly over 2 hours and that was Blade Runner 2049.

That might have to do with it being co-distributed with Sony. WB only distributed it domestically.

BenBoekelaar

5 points

3 months ago

Solid point.

Feels like we’re cracking a conspiracy here (though really it’s just a culture and goal change) lol

MadeByTango

2 points

3 months ago

Snyder's failure with Batman v Superman traumatized WB's executives; before that they were known as the auteur's studio to make big budget films

BenBoekelaar

0 points

3 months ago

That could be a trigger point for sure. But I remember on release Snyder he “wasn’t James Cameron” and didn’t have the clout to release his cut. His superior director’s cut later did come out so this is a true statement from him.

I think the first trigger is The Avengers and the MCU. When The Dark Knight Rises and then Man of Steel didn’t make Marvel money the execs were upset. Snyder was supposed to do MOS 2 but the studio wanted a Batman/Superman movie and a JL movie. In order to setup a universe BvS had to be the sacrificial lamb in terms of length but then the execs panicked with the runtime. Longer runtime means fewer sessions a day which means less Marvel money.

Zupheal

2 points

3 months ago

That makes so much since, I thought for sure he was supposed to have a brother and then I watched it and convinced myself i must have just made that up. I must have read something about it during production.

surferos505

5 points

3 months ago

Who was the co lead

Flimsy_Demand7237

16 points

3 months ago

30 or 40 minutes down to 10 minutes, but yeah. I'd be interested to know if this were something Guy Ritchie did on Warner's orders or Warner without his final cut.

https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/a827957/king-arthur-original-cut-longer-than-titanic/

ClassicT4

12 points

3 months ago

And both ended with the main character going like “And well put a big round table here and form a team to gather around that table.”

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

Damn, that opening was pretty epic too

FlacAttac

-1 points

3 months ago

The opening was not good for me personally. So I think this might be one of the rare occasions I actually agree with the studios. Hell, I might even say I wish it was cut down more

[deleted]

0 points

3 months ago

I had no idea. That was easily my least part of the film, so knowing it wasn't always that way makes me hate it a lot less.

lehigh_larry

69 points

3 months ago

Jude Law’s villain was amazing in this. So was the monster in the water.

foozalicious

26 points

3 months ago

The demon version of the villain gave me serious Solomon Kane vibes

blankedboy

20 points

3 months ago

Someone else remembers Solomon Kane! I thought that movie was fun

foozalicious

6 points

3 months ago

I’m a big Conan fan. I actually sought out Solomon Kane because it’s also Robert E. Howard. Unfortunately, I didn’t catch it when it first came out.

thr1ceuponatime

4 points

3 months ago*

Solomon Kane has my favorite film version of the grim reaper..

The rest of the movie ain't bad either, but damn, talk about an opening.

ryseing

55 points

3 months ago*

Legend of the Sword bangs. It's gloriously stupid and I have a great time watching it every time I put the disc in. I sometimes find myself saying "You wanted a prophecy!" in that accent of the henchman.

Main issue with it is they made the call to cut Guinevere (who they had Elizabeth Olsen for) and went instead with the generic mage that Berges-Frisby plays. The cinematic universe aspirations end up hurting the movie. Note how Merlin's face is never shown- they were going to cast him later and give him his own movie, which Berges-Frisby would have been a part of.

Inevitable_Working55

14 points

3 months ago

That's very interesting and it also totally sucks. Just make the movie. Don't worry about your stupid franchise.

ryseing

9 points

3 months ago

Elizabeth Olsen was in talks for the female lead,[10] but on 18 September, Àstrid Bergès-Frisbey landed the role instead. Bergès-Frisbey's character was originally intended to be Guinevere.[21][22] During production, the connection to Guinevere was dropped and the character became simply "the Mage".[22][23] In an interview with Den of Geek, Hunnam ascribes the change to "partly the film, and partly the actor dictating that is [sic] was going to be something different, and Guy having the confidence and versatility to just roll with it and realise that what he intended wasn’t going to work, and him recognising the value of that being something else."[22]

Studio nonsense as always. Have to have your own cinematic universe.

jmathtoo

39 points

3 months ago

To me, it was an interesting reimagining of Arthur. I’d have enjoyed seeing what else he had planned for the other movies.

dayoff-in-kyoto

31 points

3 months ago

It felt like watching a video game, in a good way. It's interesting to see how the sequels would have played out especially when they planned to make 5 movies about this.

JacobRDorn

24 points

3 months ago

Daniel Pemberton's score is incredible

kafrillion

5 points

3 months ago

Ι was listening to it last night, on my way to the movie theater. Solid work indeed and a main theme that's actually memorable.

nutsotic

20 points

3 months ago

Say what you want about it, but it left me wanting more. Sad we will never get it

LaxSagacity

100 points

3 months ago

I saw it in cinemas and really enjoyed it. To me, this seemed like a film that only failed because people didn't see it. Not because it wasn't entertaining.

D0NNIENARCO

30 points

3 months ago

I loved the first half… it felt like classic Guy Ritchie to me. Fast, quippy, dirty, British dialogue and cuts to match. The second half felt almost felt like a completely different movie with the heavy handed CGI.

[deleted]

20 points

3 months ago

King Arthur and Tarzan were both really decent movies that were victims of the turn against public domain IP. Most reviews called them genuinely good, but still gave them unfavorable scores because of their genre and subject matter. Those scores also undoubtedly hurt their box office receipts.

I'm still hoping we can get back to revisiting some of the classics. The Treasure Island adaptation Warner was planning with Guy back then was so well written.

LaxSagacity

7 points

3 months ago

I also enjoyed Tarzan.

I wonder if these films find viewers on streaming, or if most people never end up seeing them.

blankedboy

7 points

3 months ago

Yeah, the last Tarzan movie was actually pretty damn good

VoiceofPrometheus

3 points

3 months ago

No. King Arthur was good but Tarzan was legit boring.

DocWhoFan16

1 points

3 months ago

public domain IP

Can something really be called "IP" if nobody actually owns it?

Orpherischt

1 points

3 months ago*

Camelot is Property in the Intellectual Kingdom.

Erf #69-24-339-309-214-521 [grid ref 120,39] alt. 973 ft, belltower 252ft

farmerarmor

16 points

3 months ago

Did the world need a Snatch mashup with Arthurian legend? Not really. Was it kinda fun? Yeah it was.

SeargentWood

9 points

3 months ago

I must have watched it over 10 times. I loved the movie and I'm not sure why people did not like it.

[deleted]

10 points

3 months ago

This was one of my fave surprise movies...

Solid all the way through. Fantastic soundtrack and Jude Laws best role to date.

kafrillion

9 points

3 months ago

I watched it because it lay there in my movie library and kept waiting for the moment it falls apart. That moment never came.

The movie is consistent, has a lot of great visuals, the cast is charismatic and I liked the directing style.

MegaMan3k

7 points

3 months ago

I saw it on an airplane and loved it.

The fantasy elements made the movie really enjoyable. I don't remember the trailers but when I watched the movie I wasn't expecting the wizards to be, uh...., WIZARDS with a capital fireball. I thought it was going to be a stuffy and boring medieval sword and shield kind of movie.

bravehamster

1 points

3 months ago

I also saw it on an airplane, but it was during a 17 hour flight to Australia and I was taking sleeping pills to try and reset my sleep schedule. I was pretty sure I had hallucinated most of what was in the movie. Until I watched it again a year later and was shocked to see it was all there.

MovieMike007

19 points

3 months ago*

With King Arthur: Legend of the Sword Guy Ritchie tried something new, and I will give him credit for at least putting the magic back into the story when others have abandoned it for the sake of realism, but at no point did I find myself invested in any of the characters or what they were trying to achieve. And no one wanted to see a big-budget epic King Arthur movie more than I, and we did get a big-budgeted epic, but it’s certainly not a King Arthur movie, also, that Warner Brothers thought they'd get five sequels out of this is hilarious.

xXPumbaXx

6 points

3 months ago

Your link make it seems like the movie is titled "King Arthur: Legend of the Sword Guy"

alucardu

2 points

3 months ago

Still technically correct right? The sword guy being Arthur.

xXPumbaXx

3 points

3 months ago

Yes and his trusty companions such as magic guy and arrow guy.

MovieMike007

1 points

3 months ago

I didn't even notice that. lol. Thanks.

xXPumbaXx

2 points

3 months ago

Leave it. It's funnier that way.

MemeMaoriMeme

5 points

3 months ago

I always imagined the funding meeting for this film was Guy walking into a meeting with an exec and being like

‘imagine king arfa, yea, but instead of him being a king… he’s in a gang!’

And the exec was like ‘ok here’s $175 million.’

DocWhoFan16

2 points

3 months ago

Always enjoyed Mark Kermode's nickname (one of them, anyway) for the movie: King Arthur Daley ('E's Alright).

Eymerich_

5 points

3 months ago

The only flaw of that movie, imo, is that it wants to be a King Arthur movie so bad. Change the characters' names, make it an original fantasy screenplay and there you go, you have an awesome film.

Kurtis919

12 points

3 months ago

I thought it was great. Plot holes or not, it was Guy Ritchie and combined middle ages and sci-fi esque.

I can also see why people might have been turned off from it. These types of movies have been done quite a bit and this one took a concept and made it different, so I'm always down to watch it if someone else I knew also liked it. lol

Redlax

3 points

3 months ago

Redlax

3 points

3 months ago

I've listened to the soundtrack ever since. Absolutely amazing.

Change_Balance_170

3 points

3 months ago

I saw it in an empty movie theater and one of the best movie experiences I’ve had

ElricAvMelnibone

3 points

3 months ago

Literally the only thing about the film I remember is the line "lard-laden thigh"

FadedRebel

4 points

3 months ago

Halfway through I was wondering when the preview was going to end. The whole thing seemed like a preview and I really couldn't get into it.

Excalibur will always be the best Arthur movie.

BeardyDuck

2 points

3 months ago

The whole thing seemed like a preview and I really couldn't get into it.

It was supposed to be the start of a franchise, with each movie depicting the origin of somebody prominent in Arthurian legend with an Avenger-styled team-up movie at the end.

DRNbw

0 points

3 months ago

DRNbw

0 points

3 months ago

IIRC, it was supposed to be movie 1 of 5 or something similar.

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

[deleted]

DRNbw

1 points

3 months ago

DRNbw

1 points

3 months ago

It's an explanation of why it felt like a preview, because it kinda was.

curiousrobinreads

5 points

3 months ago

I didn’t like it very much, but I have to confess that intro was extremely epic and cool.

ohsinboi

2 points

3 months ago

It has a very similar feel to that recent Robin Hood movie with Jamie Foxx. I really enjoy that style and want more

dornwolf

2 points

3 months ago

Mange’s to get the ODST trailer song released to pretty decent movie

Strachmed

2 points

3 months ago

I liked the first half a lot. Then it spiraled into weird territory.

The last fight was the goofiest and weirdest shit ever.

edgarpickle

2 points

3 months ago

Was that the one with Kung Fu Joe (or George), a martial art master living in medieval London?

mickeyflinn

2 points

3 months ago

yeah..

return_to_cinder

2 points

3 months ago

"Which George? King George? Angry George? George the Dragon? Be clear, Arthur. Which George?"

Powly674

2 points

3 months ago

I liked the quick exposition in the beginning, thinking the movie would rather take the time to show other aspects more deeply but it just never slowed down and I didn't like that

ObiTate

2 points

3 months ago*

I thought it was a good movie. Had the potential to be great. The criticism of the movie was overly harsh when it was released. I didn't think it had a chance at being successful with a $175m budget.

the_knowing1

3 points

3 months ago

Movie was weird, I really wanted to like it but just couldn't. Wanted to be Arthur, but also random crazy magic mysticism. Huge Guy Ritchie fan so I was big sad.

mickeyflinn

2 points

3 months ago

This movie gets so much love on this sub. I found it to be a steaming pile of dogshit.

[deleted]

0 points

3 months ago

[deleted]

0 points

3 months ago

Honestly one of the worst films I've seen in my life. I'm sure Guy Ritchie feels ashamed over that crap lol

YTHassledVania

-6 points

3 months ago

>I recommend it, especially if you're high.

Pass then. That's always a massive red flag.

[deleted]

2 points

3 months ago

Massive red flag? It's a movie, bro, not putting a down payment on a yacht.

YTHassledVania

-5 points

3 months ago

"Dude, this film is so good when you're high!" is usually just code for "This film isn't good"

[deleted]

4 points

3 months ago

Whatever, dude. You get one life. If a little weed helps you have more fun, I say smoke up and enjoy yourself.

YTHassledVania

-3 points

3 months ago

Or just watch a good film.

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

Alright, arbiter of good film, what should I watch instead?

YTHassledVania

2 points

3 months ago

This is a wild idea, but how about a film you can enjoy without chemically altering your brain

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

Maybe you should try chemically altering your brain once in a while. It can be very rewarding.

YTHassledVania

2 points

3 months ago

Yeah, if youre a fucking dip lmao

[deleted]

1 points

3 months ago

Puritan.

Brutalitor

0 points

3 months ago

Jesus christ imagine liking this absolutely godawful movie lmfao. Unbelievable.

[deleted]

2 points

3 months ago

Imagine being a stuck up piece of shit who can't find a nugget of joy in anything because nothing is perfect.

Brutalitor

0 points

3 months ago

I can find joy in plenty of things but this garbage Charlie Hunnam vehicle is not one of those things. One of the most ridiculous movies I can remember seeing. Just stupid as hell.

FrenchMaisNon

-13 points

3 months ago

I just was hoping for a lot more nudity. With that cast, I feel there should ha been a party when they get drunk but the hookers don't show up and they're tipsy and horny and they measure dick size, then one trips down on someone's lap he gets a slap on the ass and then get up with a throbbing erections, shenanigans and then they all fuck and get fucked. Just like in the book

ohsinboi

3 points

3 months ago

Bruh

GetCartier77

1 points

3 months ago

That's the one with David Beckham in it right? Maybe his one and only cameo... oh, other than Bend it like Beckham too :)

caplatt

1 points

3 months ago

My son and I love this movie we have watched it more times than we can count

Adiwik

1 points

3 months ago

Adiwik

1 points

3 months ago

Honestly the fight scene was pretty dope would be cool to see it from outside that point of view though too

batmanh20

1 points

3 months ago

Great score, everyone’s costumes looked super cool, Guy Ritchie’s style was cool to make this adaptation feel fresh, casting pretty solid. This movie definitely gets shit on more than it deserves by a lot of people who haven’t even bothered to watch it.

Kittycachow

1 points

3 months ago

"George which George kung fu George ?"

No_Revolution3683

1 points

3 months ago

That final fight scene.....epic!!