King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

The trailers for the new King Arthur were rather mediocre and few people were really looking forward to it, but I was all the more surprised by the positive reviews and reception. Guy Ritchie has a very distinctive style of directing and stands out very much above the rest, especially the editing is delivered very effectively and originally. Charlie Hunnam is likeable and fits the role like a glove, Jude Law is also an unusual and interesting role as the villain. There is not that much action, but when it comes to it it is quite good, especially the finale is decently paced. The soundtrack is also nice and the gritty visuals perfectly illustrate the atmosphere. Not a big hit, but an entertaining flick and definitely the best thing to come out of the fantasy genre in a while. 75% (06/17/2017)

I have to give it to Guy Ritchie – his movies have style. Whatever he films ends up fantastic. But I can’t shake the feeling that some of the scenes tend to go over the top. The beginning was amazing. The very first scene was gripping, it tells Arthur’s story since early childhood until the age where the rest of the story begins. It’s original, quick, entertaining… for about an hour. Then the ideas thin out and the whole thing gets repetitive. That’s when it loses its magic and becomes a classic Guy Ritchie movie. I can’t say he’s not being inventive, but my initial excitement has quickly grown cold. And even though I admire the effort to shoot a King Arthur fantasy from a different angle, I still couldn’t piece the story together and all I could do was to watch some CGI hocus pocus. (08/02/2018)

The new King Arthur may have some charisma and flair, but he has absolutely no style or refinement. You'll want to talk about this story with your mates in some seedy "pub" on the outskirts of London, that's about as much character as this film gets. A muddle of rock hits, confusing editing, dull PG13 CGI action scenes and a boring 130 minutes. Ritchie may be his own man again, with a distinctive and very bold style, but this legend doesn't need to be made any other way. (05/12/2017)

A great fantasy blast that honors the Arthurian legend, but at the same time does absolutely whatever it wants with it. It adds monsters, it shows Arthur as a gangster from London (Londinia, in fact), thanks to Ritchie's direction and Pemberton's great music, it's extremely polished and stylish, and thanks to the actors it's likeable as hell... And above all, it is also quite funny, which the trailers unfortunately concealed, God knows why. Don't say you expected an ordinary film from Guy Ritchie. (05/15/2017)

This dark fantasy fairytale is told through the eyes of a talented directorial freak who became a loose cannon. It’s not easy to accept the rules of his game, but when you do, you’re in for a deliciously anarchic experience that is noisy, testosterone-packed and furious. It took me until the second half to get used to this, but I greatly enjoyed the climax. That’s why I am going to watch it again, ready for what’s to come and in the right “setting”. Pros: Charlie Hunnam is good, but Jude Law is the king of this move! Guy Ritchie fulfills his childhood dream in his own way, with both courage and rashness (take it or leave it). The soundtrack is brutally effective – the most action-packed scene, involving a chase through the city, is reminiscent (even in context of the story) of Zimmer's “Mombasa” from Inception. Paradoxically, I also liked all the slower, fluid, epically shot scenes. Cons: The movie is often unnecessarily fast in telling a story that is supposed to be a drama of Shakespearian proportions. This leaves no room to fully immerse oneself in it and the experience is similar to watching an attractive music video. There are too many shortcuts in some scenes that might otherwise have had a huge impact on the story. Weaker CGI, as the budget didn’t cover ILM in this already very risky production. (05/11/2017)