Guy Ritchie's 'King Arthur' (2016)

Film already has Idris Elba cast (rumored to be Merlin the Wizard)

Charlie Hunnam is the frontrunner to play Arthur and Elizabeth Olsen is the frontrunner for Guinevere. This would be quite possibly one of my favorite casts of all time if they both got those roles..

Here's the link that mentions Charlie and Elizabeth
https://variety.com/2014/film/news/charlie-hunnam-to-play-king-arthur-for-guy-ritchie-1201292511/

hunnipot85 said:

Charlie Hunnam is the frontrunner to play Arthur and Elizabeth Olsen is the frontrunner for Guinevere.

Click to expand...

Done and done. Bye-bye, movie.

For me, my go to Arthur movie is Excalibur. Not even talking about the cast, just the idea of Guy Ritchie helming this already makes me not want to see it.

Certain Directors have a prevailing style present throughout their films, and Ritchie's style does not feel like it fits the subject matter.

My go to Arthur movie is Sword in the Stone. And then, Monty Python's Holy Grail.

karamazov80 said:

My go to Arthur movie is Sword in the Stone. And then, Monty Python's Holy Grail.

Click to expand...

What are you doing now?

Averting our eyes, oh Lord.

Well, don't. It's just like those miserable psalms, they're so depressing. Now knock it off!






It's been so long, I need to watch this again.

Excalibur is for me the best.. In my top ten all time. The quotes by Merlin as well as a few other cast members were so memorable. Scenery, the style and music were top notch. Plus it was great seeing quite a few up and coming younger stars in this film. No Arthur film IMHO will ever top it

Yeah, Excalibur is in a league of its own.
Having said that, I've nothing against a Guy Ritchie-helmed Arthurian movie. I enjoy most of his films, especially the Sherlock Holmes films. And Snatch is an all time favourite.

Yes this won't touch Excalibur...but have a go Richie.

Is Excalibur the one with all the British Shakespearean actors chewing the scenery? That one's fun just for how big all the performances are. It's like no one realizes they are in front of a camera and not on a stage playing to the back row of a theater.

Exactly!
The acting is mostly over-the-top theatrical, but for some reason it works wonderfully with the source material.

TheObsoleteMan said:

Is Excalibur the one with all the British Shakespearean actors chewing the scenery? That one's fun just for how big all the performances are. It's like no one realizes they are in front of a camera and not on a stage playing to the back row of a theater.

Click to expand...

abake said:

Exactly!
The acting is mostly over-the-top theatrical, but for some reason it works wonderfully with the source material.

Click to expand...

John Boorman will help do that to ya... Loved that film

Excalibur is fantastic. Nicol Williamson put a different spin on Merlin, and it was a great performance. Those "British Shakespearean actors" included Gabriel Byrne, Liam Neeson, Patrick Stewart, and Helen Mirren!

It was an awesome cast!
One of the reasons I love Troy is the chance to see Arthur again (Nigel Terry). In fact, I think it was the first time I saw him again in a movie after Excalibur.

Nigel Terry isn't in movies nearly enough. He was great as the whinny son of Peter O'Toole and Katherine Hepburn in The Lion in Winter. He was also on some British/European television series called Covington Cross were Cherie Lunghi (Guenevere in Excalibur) played his love interest. Never got a chance to see it, but it sounded interesting. I have always loved the legend of King Arthur and any movie/tv show/book that retells that story has to be really, REALLY bad for me not to enjoy it. I'll even watch stinkers like Sword of the Valiant several times.

I hope Guy Ritchie's 'King Arthur' follows some of the ideas from the 2004 film, directed by Antoine Fuqua .. a film I liked because it was set in the correct historical period for the origins of the Arthurian legends, but sadly completely undermined, by the catastrophic decision to cast Clive 'Cannot Act' Owen in the lead role.

I agree, Excalibur still rocks as the best 'Arthurian' film to date (despite being set in the 'wrong' historical period ie. the 15th Century, when Malory's 'Le Morte d'Arthur' was printed).. all copies of the execrable 'First Knight' should of course, be burnt on sight.

Actually, I think an Arthurian movie shouldn't be too based on historical veracity. It's a fantasy, that's what makes Boorman's movie so good, it just embraces the legend, the fantasy, instead of trying to ground it in any epoch or reality.

I take the point you are making, I just like the 'Dark Ages' setting.. what I would really like to see is an Arthurian film set in that era, that ramps up the fantasy content, beyond the 'Excalibur' version.

This is... weird. Dunno how I feel about it so far.

RIDDICK said:

This is... weird. Dunno how I feel about it so far.

Click to expand...

Same here. Not sure I like the directing in this if the trailer is any indication.