This movie has a heroic style that Hollywood movies can't get rid of. It reminds me of "The Patriot", the same genre, under the banner of "freedom", a few justices finally defeated most injustices. Because "freedom is invincible", it is clearly an interpretation of why the Statue of Liberty is standing in the United States and not in Iraq.
Heroism is not bad. The legendary story of King Arthur's accomplishment, the hardship and extraordinary perseverance that you can't imagine, is exciting. Arthur must be a man of faith, firm-willed, and his followers—Lancelot, Tristan, Owen, etc.—have distinct personalities. But in this movie, I don't see the qualities that Arthur should have as a king. Not to see the characteristics of other knights. It seems that any person (mainly American), as long as he believes in long live freedom, can become the Arthur in the film. This belief can be said by mouth. This is my feeling, that Arthur is no different from a dogmatic priest. Arthur in the movie and Arthur in the book are both fictitious, the former can be done by anyone, but the latter is the only one.
What I think more about is that although this type of heroic story film celebrates free will, there is so much blood and killing behind this freedom. Is freedom and killing equal? Thinking of listening to the elective course of Russian literature back then, the teacher said that the humanitarian spirit of Russian literature, said that there is no such plot in Russian literature that kills for revenge. Although the wicked are evil, they will be forgiven and given new life in the end. I dare not say that Arthur is inhumane, but I think the director is inhumane. The so-called "love liberal education" should not exist in this dogmatic way.
For the sake of liberalism, the Arthur story was not only adapted, but also changed. Although Tristan died in the war, it was after Arthur became king. It seems to me that Tristan did not die on the battlefield, but died in desperate love for his lover. Except for the war, there are no such stories in the movie.
Okay, let's talk about the characters after finishing the story. Why does Tristan's swordsmanship be the same as the Japanese samurai...Halo...This may be one of the reasons why everyone remembers "Seven Samurai" after reading it. The Middle Ages was a cruel age, killing people like hemp. People look more powerful than Kong Wu, but they are understandable if they are not so handsome. However, Tristan, who was supposed to be one of the finest pieces of knights, was dressed strangely, and that look does not make you think that he has a very romantic love history (that is, he and Isolde’s That relationship). Lancelot is still a satisfactory image, at least it looks close to my imagination. I don’t remember the origin of Guinevere. I only remember that this woman was so jealous, she could be jealous of everything, it was really pitiful to Arthur.
The bridge section is also a disappointing place. One word, cliché. I remember reading a review before, summarizing the N bridge section of the Hollywood movie. It's a coincidence that there are all of them. For example, when the hero and the heroine were fooling around, something happened suddenly, and then the two came to the scene of the incident casually. There is also the ending, which is all classic routines. The part of King Arthur's sword seems to have hints, but the sword was pulled from father's grave, which is incomparable to the saying in the legend of the knight.
In general, the content of the legend of King Arthur is so rich that it must not be shown in a few hours of movies. It is impossible to describe the relationship between King Arthur and the knights through only a few wars. War and freedom are an indispensable part of the knight story, but not all. Chivalry: loyalty, guardianship, knighthood, adventure, love. This movie really reflects the loyalty, apologetics, and Xing Xia a little bit too (at least Arthur is apologizing, others just...). The most fascinating adventures and love in Cavalier literature are too thin. Can a knight who loses love still be a knight?
When only war and freedom remain in the story, the story cannot be the original story. After the romance was deleted, the story became too realistic. This is the legend that has been turned into a realistic patriotic educational film, which is not attractive at all.
View more about King Arthur reviews
