The Knights of the Round Table return to the small screen with the DVD King Arthur: The Directors Cut. When the theatrical cut was released earlier in the summer of this year it was dubbed by many critics as being inaccurate, and nothing like the traditional tales of King Arthur and his knights. But hang on isn't this meant to be a different take on King Arthur tale, a King Arthur story that is not based on the myth, but on facts and the 'truth behind the legend'. None the less I enjoyed this film immensely. Film The story of King Arthur is set with a back drop of history on the Knights of the Round Table. The Knights originated from Sarmatians who were captured and kept by the Romans because of their bravery in battle. The first group of Sarmatian knights were sent to Britain to lead and protect the country. Over 200 years the different generations of King Arthur and his Knights come to the rescue.
descendents to the Sarmatians took there fathers places to become guardians of Britain and its Roman establishments. When the time had come a new generation of guardians were summoned to their duties. They were Artorious Castus (which translated means Arthur) and his loyal Knights. After 15 years of service to Rome, Arthur and his Knights were ready to be given their freedom after taking what they thought had been their last mission. But to their worse fears they were given one final assignment, which was there most dangerous yet. That mission was to secure the safety and survival of a Roman prophet child from the north from the oncoming Saxon tide which was to try and take the country with brute force. This final mission and the Saxon invasion would eventually bring Arthur to use his power and leadership to unite a whole nation. This take of King Arthur is definitely the most different version so far seen on film, and arguably the most interesting. Antoine Fuqua has definitely done a good job. Its simple story is most effective. For the most part of King Arthur the cast were ok. Special mention to Ray Winston who portrays the role of Bors with a passion. He brings to life a character who is yet vicious and brutal on the battlefield, but at home is a caring father and husband to his wife, but in a more real way. Also the character of Lancelot is played perfectly by Ioan Gruggudd. A character that follows his leader Arthur to whatever end, even if he does not agree on the cause. One the most interesting scenes is near the beginning where Lancelot tries to question Arthur’s faith in God. Lancelot’s loyalty and friendship with Arthur would eventually lead to his death. Other cast members that were notable were Clive Owen who plays Arthur, though sometimes his acting seemed to be very wooden. Stellen Skarsgard who plays as Cerdic the evil conquering leader of the Saxon army also has a notable performance; he looks like he could be a member of some underground Scandinavian heavy metal band. Yet even so Keira Knightly who plays Guinevere is quite terrible in her role, her accent seemed to prim and proper for a native Woad of Britain. Also i think she should stick with being a damsel in distress not a warrior princess, she just doesn’t suit that type of role.Arthur (Clive Owen), and Guinivere (Keira Knightley).
The fighting and battle scenes which have been revamped to look more bloody and brutal for the directors cut were quite exciting to watch, nothing new but still good. The battles in this film had a similar feel to them as the battles in Gladiator. Ity gritty, all out, every man for himself style fighting in very dull weather conditions. Hans Zimmer’s score to King Arthur is top notch. I believe without this score the film would of been quite underwhelming. This is Hans Zimmer’s best score since Gladiator.Extra Footage Ray Winston as Bors.
King Arthur: Directors Cut includes more than 15 minutes of extra footage. Some of the scenes added in the directors cut help make King Arthur make more sense. Seen as I have only seen the theatrical cut once i found it quite hard to spot the new scenes. At the beginning of the film there is a scene with Arthur as a young child talking to his mother at the side of a lake. In that scene also Arthur is told by a Roman of importance that he will one day command a group of knights to help protect the country of Britain, and that he will return to Rome when his task is complete. In this scene he is first introduced to his knights. The Ambush scene at the beginning of the film seemed to be extended with new shots of heads flying around and lots more blood and gore. In the final battle there seemed to be a few new shots added, like when Guinevere and some other Woad women take down one of the Saxon commanders by stabbing him to death, plus loads more scenes of blood. Also there were more scenes involving Lancelot and Guinevere showing the growing relationship between those two characters, which was only breifly touched on in the theatrical cut. There could of been more new scenes in the film, but i just didn’t notice them. I don’t have a photographic memory of the theatrical cut to be the best judge of whats new in this cut.Special Features Alternate Ending - The Scene starts with a longer version of Arthur on the battlefield after the battle talking to his knights about that he should of shared Lancelot’s same fate. Then when he says that Merlin comes up to them and tells them "No fate is shared". This then cuts to an extended version of the funeral scene which did not include the voiceover from the theatrical edition. In this scene it includes a scene with a boy trying to get a sword out of a burial mound of one of the knights, but is unable. Arthur walks up to the boy and tells him, "One Day you will be stronger, and you will come back for it". The scene then finishes with the main King Arthur theme playing and shows ArthurStill from the alternate ending.
looking up towards the sky while standing by Guinevere and the young boy. (This Scene can also be watched with director commentary) I personally preferred the original ending. The original ending finishes the film showing you that Guinevere and Arthur get married and Arthur becomes King. The Alternate version tells you nothing at all. It still a nice little extra to include on the DVD. Blood on the Land: Forging King Arthur - This short 15 minutes documentary about the making of King Arthur, which includes interviews with the cast and crew of the film. Quite an interesting documentary, but could of been longer. Producer's Photo Gallery - A small gallery showing production photos from King Arthur. Trailer to National Treasure - Check out the trailer here and judge for yourself, lol. I think the film looks quite bad.Overall
King Arthur is an exciting, emotional, and interesting film. The film is flawed in many ways, but those flaws do not stop this from being a good film. In comparison to other film from its genre, i would say it is better than Troy, but still short of being as powerful as Ridley Scott’s Gladiator. If this film is the truth about King Arthur or not, it still makes solid and interesting entertainment. If you are going to buy one of the King Arthur films, buy the directors cut. It additional scenes help create more character development moments with such characters as Arthur and Lancelot. Also its new intense bloody scenes help to show the audience how gory and horrible Dark Age warfare was.
Your Talkback on this Story