MovieChat Forums > King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) Discussion > Why do people hate this film?

Why do people hate this film?

posted 7 years ago by [deleted]
24 replies | jump to latest

It was incredible. The score. Oh my goodness, the score! There are very few films where I will buy the soundtrack. This was one of them! And there was no bad acting. Jude Law was chilling as the villain, and Charlie Hunnam had fun with it. There were moments of humor, (You know I can see where we're going, right? Trees. Lots of trees.) and subtle humor (The guard pushing the other guard in anger because that guard almost pushed him over the edge of the tower.) The only "bad" thing about this was the cheap CGI at the end. What could have been an awesome finale was distracting because the CGI was so cheap, I thought I was watching a trailer for a PC game made in 2004. For some reason, every WB movie has to cheapen out on their CGI. (Wonder Woman had a similar problem at times.) There isn't really any reason to "hate" this movie. Why such backlash?

[–] Elafella (83) 6 years ago

Because bashing movies is what's in now. It's no coincidence that majority of them are either too young to even know what good and bad cinema is or folks with the movie taste of a child.

I agree that the CG filled final battle definitely hurt an overall good film, but "what was the alternative?" is why I didn't totally hate that part.

[–] filmtenk (765) 6 years ago

It’s not a great or brilliant film but it probably does not deserve all the criticism it gets. Some of the cinematography is beautiful, especially the underwater scene. It’s a fun movie not meant to be taken too seriously. I wonder if it would have benefited from a hard R rating?

[–] Elafella (83) 6 years ago

I agree one of the best things was how beautifully shot it was and that this is a fun film that suffers from others taking it too serious.

I definitely agree an R rating would have made it better.

[–] TaRaNRoD (1579) 5 years ago

"Because bashing movies is what's in now. It's no coincidence that majority of them are either too young to even know what good and bad cinema is or folks with the movie taste of a child."

Yeah well you see: the problem with this approach is that it's the other extreme. I agree that there is a lot of childish bashing going on here. On another hand, this makes it sound like people don't have the right to dislike a movie because of they do they are "too young to understand cinema ".

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

The score was cool, I agree with you there. I haven't seen many of Ritchie's movies, because I'm not impressed by what I've seen, but the score in his stupid "Sherlock Holmes" movies was also excellent.

As to why people hate this movie, well I can only speak for myself...

I dislike it because it's the product of a small modern mind, one that reduces the Arthur of legend to the kind of modernistic lowlife that seems to fascinate Ritche (but not me). It's a historical film made by a person who despises history, and since I actually LIKE history I'd be happy to see Mr. Ritche stuffed with nails, or whatever it takes to keep him from making anything set in previous centuries.

[–] Silverman (270) 6 years ago

ummm not a historical film. Good lord, man.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

That's sort of my point, it's neither a historical film about England in the Dark Ages, or a fantasy film about the Legend of Arthur the Mystical King.

It's a modern film about the mean streets, with really inappropriate production design.

[–] Elafella (83) 6 years ago

I actually liked it for the fact that it wasn't another fantasy film about Arthur, we got more than a few of those already, or a historical film that would just suck out all the fun in favor of realism.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

It's nice that somebody likes it.

I myself really hated it, of course, but then I'm someone who's read a billion versions of the Arthurian legends and histories of the Dark Ages. The film wasn't meant for people like me.

[–] Sej (17) 6 years ago

Otter, I just want to second your opinion, everything you said. I too am an Arthur buff, and I hate this movie just like you because it reduces and degrades the Arthur I love. I just rewatched this movie, and I actually think that if they had called it something else and not tried to attach it to the Arthur brand, I might have enjoyed it as a silly, trite, but somewhat fun movie.
As you say, this was not made for people like us who love both legends and history, and it is not well enough made to give anyone else reason to care.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

Well said!

And someday, someone will make a great film about the King Arthur of history and/or legend, and I hope we're both around to see it. But considering the quality of most films made about ARthur, sometimes I think the Holy Grail will be found first.

[–] Sej (17) 6 years ago

LOL, thanks for that one :) I could not agree more!

So far my favourite is Boormans Excalibur, even with its flaws.

I saw your comment about an HBO series. I have thought the same myself, the time is ripe for a version of Arthur which does not gloss over the incest and brutality esp. of Uther in the beginning.

Only thing is, everyone would say "What a GOT rip off" :)

But HBO wouldnt care; we fans would know; and if it was well made, enough people would watch it even if they think its a copy, because as you say, everyone is scrambling for the GOT replacement now.

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

That idea has a lot of potential, making an HBO series about the Arthur and giving it a lot of Dark Ages grittiness... and having the core of the show being about a king and a group of knights who rise above primitive brutality and the Roman decadence that's the only known model of civilization. I hope someone's working on the idea.

The 2004 movie with Clive Owen tried that, BTW, and it's better than most Arthur movies. Not great by any means, but definitely better than "Legend of the Sword".

[–] Sej (17) 6 years ago

Agree again, I wasnt too thrilled with the Owen one when it came, because I am futilely hoping for something that captures the spirit of Malory, but in retrospect its not that bad :)

[–] Otter (24464) 6 years ago

Yeah, it's not a terrible movie, and has some good scenes and a lovely wintry atmosphere. It just fell rather short of its potential, and has FAR too much Kiera Knightley.

[–] beith1 (364) 6 years ago

i just watched it. it was definitely a different take on the arthur saga. i liked it. it was entertaining

[–] samoanjoes (50959) 6 years ago

I liked it but I would never watch it again.

[–] Zeroangel (4) 6 years ago

Why do people hate this movie?
Well let's start with the one-dimensional characters, why is the evil king even evil?
Why do the people rebel against him?
Who is the female mage, besides Merlins protege?

Then there's the total disregard for the original stories about Arthur and Camelot. They could just as well have made the movie with another name, but they wanted to use the name recognition of Arthur and Camelot, and to hell with respect for the original stories. Which pissed me off because those are the tales about Arthur.

And what about that the story of the movie was just boring and tried to hard to be modern. If you want to make a movie about knights and magic, make a movie about knights and magic but think about how they talked and behaved in old times.

[–] [email protected] (1636) 6 months ago

What original stories?

[–] thewaitress (1616) 6 years ago

I don't know why other people didn't like it but I know why I didn't. CGI fest 2018. I'm sick of that shit. I want a story. I want drama. I want ACTING. Lines of dialogue.

[–] Neckk (342) 5 years ago

This was decent and entertaining. A modern twist to an old tale. But if one were to compare this to say, Excalibur, this film wouldn't hold a candle to it. But I will admit, I enjoy watching this over and over. The imagery, the score, cinematography, all are well done. I usually don't like Jude Law, but I don't mind watching him in this. I don't care for the lead, but the other actors more than make up for it, especially Eric Bana.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Because it's garbage.