King Arthur Review

King Arthur was a box office bomb with some narrative inefficiencies but I thought it had enough charm and grace to overcome its flaws. I believe the biggest turn off for audiences was the desaturated color pallet, it made the aesthetics of the film look ugly. But once you get past that it tells a really engaging story about a young orphan who becomes King of England.

Arthur begins as an orphan after his father Uther Pendragon was murdered by his usurping brother, Vortigern. Arthur was saved by his mother before she died, and was raised by prostitutes at a brothel, and he learns to be savvy and streetwise and make money by running scams. Changing Arthurs origin so drastically was a good choice, because it gave him an interesting personality and outlook on life. At the end he reveals to his nemesis Vortigen that his tough upbringing forged him into a man who is ready for leadership and knows how to win the struggle to survive. This made the character fit into Guy Ritchies wheelhouse, because he has an affinity for hoodlum characters from Lock, stock to Snatch.

Arthur pulls the famous sword from the stone and reveals himself to Vortigern, who has him captured and is about to execute him when hes rescued by a mage and her fellow conspirators.

Arthur doesn't rely on Merlin to advise him, he relies on his streetgang friends. They are all loyal to him because he looks out for his friends, causing him to form a tight knit inner circle. They attempt to assassinate Vortigen but only succeed in arousing his ire. He kills one of Arthurs friends in retaliation, before capturing the rest and holding them hostage to be rescued at the end.

The plots feel pretty gauzy, and structurally the story is deficient because several of the plots are redundant, meaning you could dispense with them and not affect the outcome of the story at all. If they'd have come up with a better plotline, that reinforced each juncture and didn't seem superfluous the story would have been much better. This results in a story that doesn't build and build, it merely wanders in a haphazard way from disconnected plot point to plot point.

However, the strong suite of the film is Arthur himself. Charlie Hunam is amply charming and debonair as the titular king. His irreverent wit really makes the film sparkle, and is vastly more interesting than the usual bland, everyman hero who normally fronts such a film like the 2004 King Arthur. The battles were also shot with consummate skill and verve, especially the hyper dramatic final battle which featured Richies trademark speed ramping to glorious effect. Its a shame audiences didn't give the film a chance because it could have been the start of a really interesting series.

Rating: 7/10