So why was the editing so frantic?
Guy Ritchie's editing so strange and disjointed compared to his other movies. It was like he was channeling Tony Scott with some of his choices. Guy's other movies aren't this crazy with the editing. Even the “gangster” bits of the story are edited crazy. Then you have VG shots that even throw more crazy mess to the wall. All of the VG stuff is editing like a Tekken game. It is out of place.
Montages take over for storytelling in almost every way. Everything receives a montage. Can the movie just sit down and tell a story for once?
It is just too much.
Do the criminal elements work?
Actually, I like the more modern gangster elements in the movie. Arthur grows up in a brothel, just like Richard Pryor and Jame Brown, and lives a tough life fighting and training. He also steals for a living while protecting the hookers. It is a modern sensibility in an old setting. Having him be a sort of anti-hero gives the movie a fresh take on the Arthur tale. I liked seeing Arthur connected to the more darker elements of England.
Plus, Guy is loving all this English crime stuff. And, the movie works on that level. However, the gangster stuff doesn't fit in with all fantasy element. The problem is that GOT does this too, but it has time to merge the two worlds in a better manner than a 2-plus hour movie.
Given I have seen three King Arthur movies in the last ten years, this an interesting take for Arthur. It isn't handled that well though.
So is this a video game or a Game of Thrones ripoff?
It is a little bit of both. Actually, it is a lot of both. The video game aspects are where the movie completely fails. Once Arthur taps into the power of the sword, the movie does a 180 and turns into a video game. I actually thought I'd see a life-bar above Arthur's head when he grabbed the sword.
Then, the movie throws out the script and just has a VG fight scene. A giant CGI snake appears and I just shrug. The movie literally becomes a fight scene from Soul Caliber and Dark Souls. Jude Law turns into a demon and fights the dude from SOA in a CGI mess. I wanted there to be a bloody text to appear that says “Finish Him”.
So, there are giant man-eating snakes and CGI boss battles in a King Arthur movie. Plus, you can throw in a flashback during the boss battle scene.
The sad part is that this movie was supposed to be the first movie in a series of King Arthur movies. It didn't make its money back.
Random things worth noting...
-Diverse Cast: Given there are squid naked ladies and giant creatures, I have zero issues with the fact there is a diverse group of people from different lands in Arthur's party. Asians and black people are running around England, and I sort of like it. I like seeing that black and Asian people are members of the Round-Table.
-Two GOT actors: Yep look for two (now killed off) characters from Game of Thrones.
-There are a least three movies crammed into one.
-The CGI is pretty bad: It has more of a 90s look to it. Actually, Blade has better CGI.
Overall
King Arthur is too much of everything. It is that kid that had too many Monster/Rockstar drinks edited a movie. The movie is that 90's kid all grown up, but forgets it is now the 2000s. The acting is good and the criminal aspects really work. The minority-filled cast is refreshing. However, the editing and disjointed storytelling hurt the movie by a mile. It is loud and crude and full of style, but it means nothing in the end. You can't survive on style alone there has to be good storytelling and characters.
I didn't hate the movie as much as say Batman v. Superman, but clearly, this movie isn't for me. I do believe people need to see it just to see how NOT to remake an old classic. There is something there, but it is marred by poor style choices.
Grade: D+
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment