A good movie

I just watched a pretty damn good movie - "King Arthur", made in 2004. It's a completely different telling of the story: much more realistic, but told in such a way that you can see how the legends grew out of it later. My Dad's an archaeologist and he watched it with me, he was delighted with how realistic it was, and the fights (swords a-plenty) are great.

Really? You guys are on your own there... That film was one of the few films I'd like to see put on trial... right up there with First Knight.

Sure they "tried" to be "accurate", but in the end they just did more of the Hollywood crap: Dual sword wielding, setting fields of oil on fire, siege weapons vs infantry, swords worn on back, martyrdom of a main character, mix-match armor and weapons, and a whole list of other issues;

Roman legions withdrawing from Britain in 467 AD vs, in reality, it was completed in 410 AD, Pelagius wasn't executed for heresy in Rome as the film indicates, The Saxons are shown attacking Hadrian's Wall from the north. By 467 the Saxons were already occupying parts of Britain far south of the wall, and never invaded Scotland, Historically, Sarmatians were armored in the manner of cataphracts (full-length coats of scale armor); the film's Sarmatians are armoured with a mishmash of pseudo-Roman, Turkish, Mongol, and Hunnic designs.

The Saxons historically used bows (to a limited extent) and spears instead of crossbows during the period, Similarly, the Woads use a trebuchet-like weapon to hurl flaming missiles at the Saxons, though the trebuchet was not re-introduced to Britain until the siege of Dover in 1216, Blue fabric dye was not founded in Europe until the 13th century, Arthur refers to his fellow soldiers as Knights. The concept of Knights did not come about until the Middle Ages, One of the knights is showing with a falconry-trained Harris hawk (an American species), long before America was known of in Britain.

Elements of the film's promotion have likewise been criticized as historically unsound. Its tagline "The True Story Behind the Legend" has been criticized as false. A trailer for the film claims that historians now agree that Arthur was a real person because of recent archaeological findings; however, historians do not. There is no consensus amongst historians on Arthur's historicity and no recent archaeological find proves Arthur's existence;

Just some observations other have noted. I was really hoping for a decent film, but left soured.

Gunderman, I wonder if you didn't enjoyed that film that much mostly because the fact you watched it with your dad and he somehow made a better film out of it with his knowledge.

I didn't ejoyed that film, let me tell you. Maybe if I had watched it with my dad I would, you know

I am curious, what does your father think about the movie "Conan the barbarian"? It would be nice if you could tell us what things he as an archeologist has to say about it.

I remember being all excited about this movie and when I finally watched it, I was wondering when the hell it would end. I can understand where the makers of this film were coming from, but I feel that King Arthur ultimately belongs in the fantasy realm. In the end, I found this movie to be very uninteresting and you'd have to pay me to sit through it once more...

But taste can not be accounted for, so I don't fault you for liking this movie.

I didn't say it was PERFECT! What I liked was it cold and wet and drab and it felt like it was filmed in a real place with real people. And if you pretend that it is a documentary, then you can see how the legends grew out of it - like "Oh, he pulled the sword out of a rock - it was magic!" - no, it was just a grave mound he pulled the sword out of, but the story grew, and in the re-telling Arthur became more and more powerful and magical, until we now have the movie "Excalibur", which I love.

The best thing about the Arthur legend is how Excalibur was thrown back into the lake when Arthur died, but some day in the future when England is in trouble, the sword will rise from the waters and Arthur will return to save the country. That's great.

I don't think my Dad has seen "Conan" - I'll try to get him to watch it wjen I go over there next time.

Gunderman wrote:

I don't think my Dad has seen "Conan" - I'll try to get him to watch it wjen I go over there next time.

Do it. I think he will like it.