‘King Arthur’ much better than its fate

Arthur gets a wonderful visual analogue for his hero’s journey through Excalibur. The political power he rejects is reflected in the extreme physical power the sword grants, and his relationship to his own ambitions is mirrored by his relationship to the sword throughout the film. Photos courtesy Warner Bros.

8/10 King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is careening toward a disastrous reception, and that’s a shame, because it’s awesome.

After betraying his brother, Uther (Eric Bana), King Vortigern (Jude Law) rules England with an iron fist. His cruel kingship is challenged when Arthur (Charlie Hunnam), a London brothel bastard, draws the sword Excalibur from its stone, a devastatingly powerful enchanted blade that only answers to the king of England. Arthur rejects the crown, wanting only to return to the slums, but is pushed by Sir Bedivere (Djimon Hounsou) to help overthrow the evil king, who’s already gone to the trouble of burning Arthur’s old home anyway.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword weaves a strange and compelling spell. To describe the movie in one word, it’s ominous. There’s a keen sense of impending doom from the first scene onward, one that coexists with writer/director/producer Guy Ritchie’s signature light-heartedness. Though it has plenty of action, this isn’t an action movie — it’s a well-disguised thriller, designed to keep viewers on the edge of their seats through moodiness and anticipation.

The movie is buoyed by strong performances, particularly Law’s nuanced one as the villain.

A big part of this effect is the movie’s magic, which is god damn scary. King Arthur’s sorcery isn’t about wands or skybeams, it’s animal attacks and nightmarish visions and blood sacrifices. It’s the kind of vile witchcraft that makes you recoil from its practitioners, that it would make sense to burn someone at the stake for.

The tone is further set by grim gaelic music, a subdued black and orange color palette and subtle, so-real-you-could-touch-them special effects. The DC movies are constantly derided for their lack of color, but where those movies shoot color and suck it out in post-production, King Arthur does it right by maintaining high enough contrast to still create compelling images. It gets a little hard to see at some points, though.

With so much of the movie’s malevolence tied up in its visual style and subject matter, the fast-paced editing and light dialogue is doing something completely different. Legend of the Sword may be about kingdoms and Faustian magic, but it also manages to be just as much about fast-talking British punks in the same vein as Ritchie classics like Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.

Part of the movie’s problem was its awful, forgettable advertisements that focused on 300-style ramping action, a camera trick most everyone’s tired of at this point. That’s not representative at all of the movie — most action is shot conventionally, with ramping and wild camera swings only coming into play with Excalibur. Instead of being a tired life support system for boring action, the camera jazz is a visualization of the sword warping reality around its wielder.

Sadly, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is a Warner Bros. project, and as such, its release has been an embarrassing parade of poor decisions — or would be embarrassing if enough people knew or cared it was coming out. It was moved away from three different release dates for reasons of varying validity — its last switch was to avoid competition from Life, late March’s already-forgotten Alien ripoff that pulled just $30 million domestic — before eventually landing on Mother’s Day weekend as, I guess they thought it would be counterprogramming? Whatever the logic was, it and Snatched will both get eaten up by Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 in its second weekend.

Under these conditions, this $175 million movie is headed toward a brutal $25 million opening weekend. And while the girls’ night out angle of Snatched will bring in a niche audience for several weeks, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is swimming with the big fish as a through-and-through blockbuster, facing another big-ticket competitor every week — and it doesn’t help that it’s getting absolutely thrashed on Rotten Tomatoes.

It’s not a masterpiece, and it’s not even something I’d recommend for everyone — if either fire-and-brimstone medieval movies or pop-crime dramas aren’t your thing, there may be better options — but it’ll grab your attention and not let go for two hours. That deserves way more than mid-twenties on both Rotten Tomatoes and the box office.

Leopold Knopp is a journalism student at the University of North Texas. If you liked this post, you can donate to Reel Entropy here. Like Reel Entropy on Facebook and reach out to me at reelentropy@gmail.com.

This entry was posted in Entropy and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to ‘King Arthur’ much better than its fate

  1. Pingback: Guy Ritchie must be stopped | Reel Entropy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s