Saw "King Arthur" the other night. I mostly dug the trailers. I assumed it'd probably do decent enough. Apparently the plan was to make it a 6 movie shared universe thing. Now, I really love pretty much all Guy Ritchie movies... nobody does British gangster fare like him. Kind of expected to dislike the movie from all the reviews... but I didn't. It's pretty much exactly like every other Guy Ritchie movie ever, minus the moments of surprise brutality (hard to do in PG-13, not that a King Arthur movie needs to be R). Everything is moving quickly, snap snap snap, one thing quickly transitioning into the next. But what works with this style in British gangster movies or in a limited extent in his Sherlock Holmes movies, just kind of doesn't work here. It's OK that we don't intimately know every character in one of his random British gangster ensemble movies... it's sort of pivotal that we know and care about all the Knights of the Round to be. We don't. It's never not fun to watch and it's got an energy to it, but I don't know that I'd want to see it again. I wish Jude Law was a bit more raucous, a little more Dom Hemingway and a lot less nuanced/timid... I think it would have served this particular film better. I will say I liked this a great deal more than the Clive Owen/Keira Knightley "King Arthur" movie a decade ago.
Now dammit, Guy Ritchie, make "The Real RocknRolla" already.
Now dammit, Guy Ritchie, make "The Real RocknRolla" already.
Comment