King Arthur

It's very hard to do anything with the Arthurian epic that hasn't really been done before, because these legends have been done over and over completely and again, with varying degrees of believability and storytelling, but I liked this "version"

Actually I shouldn't say "version" - because I am coming more and more to believe that movies are not so much their own genre of art form, but rather an extension of the larger tradition of storytelling.

Follow me for a moment: all the epics (Arthur, the Aenied/Odyssey, Arabian Nights, Gilgamesh, and indeed ALL mythological tales from every race that ever walked the earth) were all oral stories handed down from generation to generation, with each storyteller embellishing a little upon the story, making it their own, changing it as times changed.

Storytelling became a little more static once writing was invented - it was able to capture the culmination of millenia of storytelling. Even then, the larger tradition did not stop - what future storytellers (i.e. "writers") had then were specific texts to refer to, and stray from, depending on their audience and the point they wanted to make.

Now, in our "visual" audience, when we are moving almost completely to the visual art of storytelling (instead of the more cerebral art of reading!) we now have the images to tell these stories . . . it's an extension of the art form, for better or worse


How does that apply to this movie? Well, I'll tell you . . .

We've all grown up with the Arthurian tales, which were primarily from a French Knight who was rotting away in prison because he was a murderer and a theif, and he wrote down a load of stories that he had head (and read!) as a kid and those wound up giving us the Arthur that we know today: chivalric, magical, honest, brave true: with his Round Table and Lancelot and Holy Grail, etc.

Then, archaeological evidence helped to uncover other truths, such as the basis of King Arthur was really probably some minor celtic overlord who tried (unsuccessfully) to fight against the Saxon hordes that came rampaging and pillaging across Cornwall.

However, ALL these tales have one thing in common: Arthur, of whatever race/origin/or deeds, was born on the island of Great Britain.

THIS movie's slant is entirely different: Arthur and his knights of the Round Table were actually born on someplace near the Russian Steppes and were drafted into service of the Roman Empire because of pacts made with their fathers. They were sent to Britain to serve out their 25 years to the Roman Empire on this desolate island, and toward the end of their servitude (when this movie begins) what's left of these guys (about 5 or 6 from an original 20 or so) are all just waiting to go home. In fact, one of the startling images in the movie IS the round table, when they all take their places, and when they mention that the table used to be filled with men, and now it's just sparsely populated, the audience gets a very good example of how many of their friends have died on this (what is to them, a) godforsaken island.

Then, they have a standard plot device: their boss sends them on one last suicide mission - been done before, but not in Roman Britain, to my knowledge. They've got to go deep into "crazy hillbilly" territory, i.e. Scotland.

Kiera Knightly, as one of the Scots, by the way, is one of the best action heroines ever, hands down! (I thought she was cool in Pirates of the Carribean, but in this movie she's even cooler than Arthur or Lancelot)

Some of the rest of the story is standard fare: Arthur goes "native" and turns on the Romans in order to liberate the Celts, and the rest of his troops (what's left of 'em) finally rally around him, more out of personal loyalty rather than belief in the cause. In this aspect the film is a lot like some other "apocalypse now"-style films that we've grown up with.

Other than that - it's got some great action scenes (the frozen lake being my personal favourite) and a lot of blood flying everywhere - swordplay, arrows falling like rain, etc.

All in all, not the most original story, but then, it's not supposed to be: this is folklore of today - taking a story that we all know, that is completely part of our communal culture, and putting an interesting little spin on some of the details in order to keep our attention. This is a folk story, and fairly well told.

And in my mind, that's all any art needs to be: well-told.


VG