CONTESTS   |   SEARCH   |   SUBMIT   |   POSTERS   |   STORE   |   LINKS   |   EXTRA

 

 

 

 

 

King Arthur  (2004)

 

Starring: Clive Owen, Keira Knightley, Ioan Gruffudd
Director: Antoine Fuqua

Rating: PG-13

Distributor: Touchstone

Release Date: 07.07.04

Review Posted: 07.08.04

Spoilers: Minor

 

By Sara M. Fetters

 

"King Arthur" Loses His Majesty

 

Not that I really want to admit this, but I’m a total computer video game junkie. I can sit and play for hours, wasting precious time I could be using to do something constructive like, say, washing dishes or writing better reviews.

 

At the moment, my current game of choice is Age of Empires, specifically The Conquerors expansion disc for the second chapter of the popular series. One part history lesson crossed with equal doses of Sim City, Civilization and War Craft, this game is one of the very best I’ve ever played. To say I love it, to say that I am unquestionably addicted to playing it, would unfortunately be an understatement. Frankly, I’ve turned into a geek and don’t let the flashy spike heels and ruby red nail polish fool you to thinking otherwise.

 

Typically, I tend to play the Britons. They are assuredly my civilization of choice. Not because they have the most advanced weapons (they don’t) or the best armies (although they’re pretty darn good), but because I can imagine they are Arthur’s legions and I am the one leading them to victory.

 

That’s right, I’m an Arthur junkie. From Mallory’s La Morte de Arthur to Disney’s song-filled “The Sword in the Stone,” I just eat this stuff up. Heck, John Boorman’s “Excalibur” is one of my favorite films of all time, while Sean Connery taking on the mantle of the once and future king in “First Knight” gets me week in the knees just thinking about it. (Granted the movie stinks, Richard Gere and Julia Ormand maybe the worst Lancelot and Guinevere this side of a bush-league dinner theater production of their tale.) Maybe I never grew out of my fairy princess phase, maybe I just like a good tragic love story, either way Arthurian legends truly make me weak in the knees and I almost feel like swooning just thinking about it.

 

What does any of this have to do with uber-producer Jerry Bruckheimer’s “King Arthur” hitting theaters today? Well, simply put, there is more emotional heft to be found in one of my late-evening games of Age of Empires then there is in all 120-plus minutes of this movie’s running time. It is a chaotic and undisciplined mess, “Training Day” director Antoine Fuqua completely incapable of delivering anything more than a somewhat diverting scene or two. For me, this is the single most disappointing film of the summer, and with misfires like “Van Helsing” and “The Day After Tomorrow” already littering the landscape that really is saying something.

 

This version of the ageless story, written by “Gladiator” scribe David Franzoni, dispenses with the magic, the mysticism and – bizarrely – the famous love triangle to instead put forth a gritty, supposedly based-on-fact version. Arthur (Clive Owen) is no longer the son of Üther Pendragon, instead he’s a half Roman-half Brit general who has spent the past fifteen years leading a ragtag group of indentured Samatian Knights. In that time, Arthur has earned their trust and loyalty and, in turn, through their courage, honor and bravery they have earned the same from him.

 

On the day of their freedom, Arthur and his men are given new orders by a weasel-faced Roman Bishop to journey outside of Haradrian’s Wall and save a young aristocrat from certain death at the hands of invading Saxons. For some inexplicable reason, this boy is important to the Pope, and the Bishop is under strict orders to not allow either Arthur or his men go free until this last – very likely suicide – mission is complete.

 

Long story short, Arthur starts to question his loyalty to Rome during this mission. Not only does he save the young Roman, he also picks up a ragtag group of serfs and peasants, amongst them a ravishing Woad named Guinevere (Keira Knightley) whose mighty handy with a bow. Turns out, she just happens to be the daughter of the Woad leader, a mongrel of a man named Merlin (Stephen Dillane), and he just happens to think Arthur is the right man to unite the people of Britain and lead them to victory over the invading Saxons.

 

What can I say – this movie bites. What’s most frustrating, really, is that all the pieces are in place for some rousing entertainment. Owen is the perfect choice for Arthur. Regal, smashingly sexy, authoritative; Like Merlin, I really did believe this was just the man to be king. For anyone who’s followed this remarkable actor over the years – from “Croupier” to “Gosford Park” to “The Bourne Identity” – it isn’t a surprise he’s a smashing choice to play maybe the most iconic character in British history.

 

What is surprising that he’s not enough to make me care more about the film than I do. As good as Owen is, when he finally puts down his sword and engages in some nubile coupling with Guinevere I could have really cared less. Fuqua directs like he hasn’t a clue as to how to stage an epic of this type. Scenes either go on for an eternity or they’re inexplicably cut short for no apparent reason other than the scene was on the verge of making sense. The battle sequences are truly horrific. Cluttered, edited as if by a jackhammer and scored with composer Hans Zimmer’s first completely horrific piece of music, it is impossible to tell what is going on let alone get emotionally involved in the action. It is a waste of time, talent and money, and just when you think it can’t possibly fall any more to pieces it suddenly does.

 

But, like I said, the actors really do give it their best shot. Knightley is a fetching Guinevere, while Dillane makes the very most of his limited screen time. As the Arthur’s knights, both Joel Edgerton and Hugh Dancy steal the show as, respectively, Gawain and Galahad, while Ray Winstone seems to be the only one in the entire picture truly having a good time as the good-naturedly violent knight Bors. Best of all is veteran Swedish actor Stellan Skarsgård as Cerdic, the vile, devilishly evil leader of the Saxon army. He’s so good at being bad I almost wished the movie was about him, Cerdic rise and fall far more interesting than anything else going on in the picture. Only Ioan Gruffudd as Lancelot disappoints, his take on the character nothing more than whiny waste of energy that’s too silly to be believed.

 

As bad as it all is, there is magnificent sequence that almost makes “King Arthur” worthwhile. As Arthur and his knights are fleeing back towards to wall, the seven of them – with Guinevere helping – decide to make a stand against a contingent of the Saxon army on top of a sheet of ice. The resulting melee is blisteringly beautiful menagerie of cascading arrows and cracking ice. It is a breathtakingly exciting sequence, the bluish tint of Slawomir Idziak’s cinematography simply breathtaking.

 

If only the rest of the movie could achieve anything close to the majesty of this one sequence, “King Arthur” would not feel so dreadful. Yet nothing else in Fuqua’s picture comes close to this sequence, scene after scene ending in a thud so loud it’s almost sure to empty the theater. Maybe I’m too close to the material, maybe I wanted more from Bruckheimer and Fuqua than they could ever be expected to deliver. Maybe so, but be that as it may this time the Arthurian legend doesn’t just lose its magic, it loses its majesty.

 

Film Rating: ê1/2  (out of 5)

 

Home | Back to Top

 

 

:: Merchandise

 

KING ARTHUR

Buy the Poster

 

FILM SCORE

By Hans Zimmer

Buy the CD!

 

PAPERBACK

By Frank Thompson

Buy the Book!