1. Welcome to the new boards! Details here!

Movie Discussion Club

Discussion in 'Kent UK' started by Lord-Tice, Dec 6, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. AmberStarbright

    AmberStarbright Jedi Knight star 7

    Dec 20, 2002
    It's supposed to be the story or that is how it is advertised. But personally I think they should have just made up a story and not say it's an Arthur story because it's not accurate.

    From what I remember Guinevere and Lancelot have an affair once she marries Arthur. The wedding is at the end of the movie and shall we say poor Lancelot isn't going to be having an affair with anyone let alone Guinevere.

    Really the only things I remember it having in common with the legend is the names and that's it.
  2. SithLordDarthRichie

    SithLordDarthRichie CR Emeritus: London star 8

    Oct 3, 2003
    They didn't even have a magic sword :_|
  3. Lord-Tice

    Lord-Tice Jedi Knight star 5

    Aug 20, 2001
    Nonono, Lancelot is darkhaired.

    hehe, you're much better qualified then me to answer that, so I must have been confused with someone else ;)

    Rumour has it that a director's cut will be released later when the DVD is due. Essientially this film is a studio film who wanted a PG13 summer release, rather then a higher rated winter release which it was originally scheduled watch this space ;)

    I can certainly see you enjoying this film Pash, but it could have been much, much more. It just seemed to concentrate on Arthur, which is fair enough, but at times it just called out to provide us with more insight into the other characters.

    I still haven't seen Troy yet, but I also like Eric Banna. Rumour has it he might be the next Bond :cool:

    Okay, I'm going to get all technical now :p :

    There was a good documentary on lastnight that tried to find out who the real King Arthur was, and basically it came to the same conclusion as the film, i.e he was a half Roman/Britain warrior who faught the Saxons during the 5-6th Century. It wasn't until the 10-11th Century that the first accounts of Arthur were written, which were by a Welsh Historian (I think) who wrote them purely as propaganda material. But during the crusades, the stories spread into mainland Europe and were, I mean adapted by two French poets who used them to write romance stories (and decided to set them in France too). But thankfully Thomas Malory took them back and wrote Le Morte D'Arthur which is were all the legends come from. So sadly, it would be fair to assume the likes of Guinevere, Lancelot, Galahad etc never existed anyway.

    I definitely prefer the legends to the reality, but it is quite nice to have this alternative version of events.
  4. SithLordDarthRichie

    SithLordDarthRichie CR Emeritus: London star 8

    Oct 3, 2003
    They could've mentioned the fact that Monks found his body in the 10th century and buried it somewhere else and refuse to tell us where.

    So now theres a plaque up instead.

    (selfish Monks wrecking things for everyone)
  5. SithLord-Mixo

    SithLord-Mixo Jedi Knight star 5

    Apr 21, 2002
    not enough blood for my likings
  6. SithLordDarthRichie

    SithLordDarthRichie CR Emeritus: London star 8

    Oct 3, 2003
    That too
    Which, considering the Romans were in it, is quite odd.
  7. Yoshee

    Yoshee RSA FFUK/EUROPE, CR Emeritus: London star 6 Staff Member Manager

    Aug 3, 2002
    I've actually got to the point where I refuse to watch this film now.
  8. Enji

    Enji Jedi Master star 6

    May 14, 2002
    I'll probably watch it on video later... don't want to pay the outrageous ticket fees for the cinema for this film.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.