(This review may contain spoilers).
King Arthur was one of the legends I thoroughly enjoyed reading while I was growing up, enchanted with the tales of chivalry, knights and magic. So when I saw this movie advertised, I was immediately intrigued and wanted to see it.
Almost as soon as this film started, at least when Arthur became an adult, it felt like a Middle Ages mafia movie. In spite of this and the several instances of modern-day language, I did like Arthur’s character, but I felt very few of the minor characters were really developed that much. I often found myself completely lost over who was who.
I did really like the way the story was told, even if the constant flashbacks were somewhat confusing. There were some really intense scenes, in particular the one where Arthur first comes into contact with Excalibur. And it was difficult to learn of and to see the ultimate fate of Uther.
I actually found myself feeling sympathy for the Lady of the Lake, even though she only appeared the once. It seemed like she had quite a lonely existence…at least from what I could see.
I did find the Mage an intriguing character, but I felt that she was left very much in the background. She was supposed to be the next Merlin, but there was very little detail shown about her history or even much of her personality. I felt like there was a lot left unfinished by the end of the movie.
There were some good elements of humour and I liked the relationship between Back Lack and his son. I felt the ladies in the brothel were just grouped together as one character and there was no individuality shown to them.
I also noticed that none of the characters seemed to age – barring Arthur and his cousin, who were children at the start.
I liked the acceptance and hints of magic and it was good to see a new take on the origins tale of King Arthur. But although this film was entertaining to watch and drew me in, it’s definitely vastly different to the original versions.
Ink of Blood 