reviews |
|
king arthur |
score: 4
2004, 130 min
This is a step above Troy in almost every respect. Clive Owen outperforms
the entire Trojan cast by himself, and Keira Knightly has a more convincing ship-launching
face than Helen. The battles are filmed without the extreme-closeup camera-shaking
excitement-cinematography, so you can actually tell what's going on. And thinking
back on the movie afterwords you realize it is comprised almost entirely of battle
scenes. It's pretty much a sequence of battle scenes buffered by shots of Arthur
standing amid the corpses on the battlefield.
King Arthur is a list of Hollywood conventions, the characters with single
defining characteristic, etc. But the only one that bothered me was Hans Zimmer's
worthless melodramatic score.
Conventional wisdom holds that the more fog a movie has, the better it is. This
is not entirely true. The Fog was bad not because it lacked fog, but because
it was a genuinely bad movie. King Arthur has more fog than Troy,
more fog than Cold Mountain. But it isn't just a fog movie, that's just
the icing on the cake.
|
|
scale |
8: 10 best movies ever made
7: Absolute classic
6: See it a couple times, consider buying it
5: Good, entertaining and memorable
4: Adequate 1 - Entertaining
3: Adequate 2 - Entertaining but generic
2: Adequate 3 - Entertaining but generic and stupid
1: Bad, not entertaining
0: Shoot the moon. So bad it's good.
-1: Worse than that.
|
|
cast |
Clive Owen, Stephen Dillane, Keira Knightley, Hugh Dancy, Ioan
Gruffudd.
Directed by Antoine Fuqua.
reviewed by pat.
|
|
|
|
47.2% (17)
