Guy Ritchie's King Arthur

JP Liz V1

http://www.rte.ie/ten/news/2015/0311/686159-aidan-gillen/

Aidan Gillen has been cast opposite Charlie Hunnam, Jude Law, Eric Bana, Astrid Bergès-Frisbey and Djimon Hounsou in director Guy Ritchie's King Arthur.
Hunnam is in the title role, with Gillen as Goosefat Bill, Bergès-Frisbey as Guinevere, Hounsou as Bedivere, Law as Vortigern and Bana as King Uther Pendragon.
Filming has begun at Warner Bros Studios in Leavesden in the UK, with location shooting to take place in Wales and Scotland.
The film is due for release on July 22, 2016

No Merlin or Morgana cast yet (Gary Oldman has been rumoured for Merlin)


I am looking forward to seeing what Ritchie's take on this tale will be

Skerries

Oy! Lancelot, get yer mitts off my missus you MUPPET!

Guy:Incognito

Is this not already filming? Kurt Sutter retweeted Richies pic of Charlie Hunnam as Arthur in a forest the other day.

EDIT. So it has, from the article.

Would they not want to hurry up and get the parts cast so?

Ipso

The blurb about Arthur being streetwise makes me cringe.

gandalf

Vinny Jones as Merlin I reckon

JP Liz V1

David Beckham has joined now too

EoinMcLovin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4luDtkC3Oy0

Film is called King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. Didn't create new thread as this one already existed even though last post was over a year ago

Slydice

That's some cast!

Mr E

Looks like typical Guy Ritchie - style over substance.

Out next March.

Slydice

Mr E wrote: »

Looks like typical Guy Ritchie - style over substance.

Out next March.

Yeah my first reaction was that the effects looked a bit odd, cheap in some places, not in others. Then so many in the cast was what caught my attention.

Agent Coulson

To be released March 2017

ricero

Looks like scutter

Also Starring LeVar Burton

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUYuqXSaPgE

Arghus

That trailer Does.Not.Look.Good. Highly reminiscent of Game of Thrones, but without the wit, ultraviolence and bewbs: sure, what good is that?

You know nothing Guy Ritchie.

Of course the actual finished film could be better than what is promised there - a long way and much post production is yet to come - but something about King Arthur sporting an oh so current undercut fills me with foreboding for the whole project.

Corholio

I think it looks kind of interesting actually. Looks like there is a bit of quirkiness there that I like in Ritchie's films even the ones that didnt fare so well over their complete running time. I don't really get the Game of Thrones feel about it either to be honest, I think every medieval or medieval-fantasy film is forever doomed to be compared to GOT, even in just look, regardless of content.

The dialogue at the start is like 'Lock Stock and the Round Table' :pac:

Brian?

ricero wrote: »

Looks like scutter

Guy Ritchie is directing. That's pretty much a guarantee its muck.

Agent Coulson

bnt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIM4-HLtUM0

bnt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SX9y5JPuRHY

Looks a bit OTT to me ...

Sad Professor

For some reason I could have swore Guy Ritchie already made a King Arthur movie.

DVD-Lots

Love the Zep song in it but jeezus it looks like Michael Bay and James Wan had an over 9,000 level child that wants all of the monies. Oh and that's a BIG Oliphant? Meh but will watch to see if it is as bad as that Last Airbender thingy......coz Arthur is now an Airbender yeah? Ammirite?

JP Liz V1

Sad Professor wrote: »

For some reason I could have swore Guy Ritchie already made a King Arthur movie.

The Clive Owen one was done by Antoine Fuqua and I think that was the one last one done

razorblunt

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

The Clive Owen one was done by Antoine Fuqua and I think that was the one last one done

I really enjoy the Fuqua / Owen version, I'll always watch it when it's on (doesn't seem to be often nowadays). Great cast too, Owen, Skarsgaard, Edgerton, Mikkelson, Stevenson, Winsome.

bnt

The first reviews are out. Ow.

Ipso

How many sequels were they planning for this again?

Slydice

The impression I've gotten from reviews is that it's a bog standard King Arthur film. Nothing majorly new except Guy Ritchie adding his way of doing special effects and all that.

Jesus what an absolutely horrible looking film. An American cast as Englands most famous King, still talking in an American accent, with gelled back hair. Loads of explosions before gunpowder was even invented, and teleporting sword fights.

What a great thing for film the Chinese market is. We'll have Jesus driving muscle cars soon.

As for Guy Ritchie he was on Rogans podcast the other day. Interesting guy, but he's phoning it in for cash now. Making films for his kids to enjoy. He said as much himself. Madonna must have sucked the life out of him

Teyla Emmagan

Charlie Humman is English.

Teyla Emmagan

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Charlie Humman is English.

Ha! He sounded like Jax Teller in the bit of dialogue in the trailer!

PTH2009

David Beckham is in this

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/12/david-beckham-guy-ritchie-theresa-may-labour-noma-tottenham-hotspur

xper

Deleted User wrote: »

What a great thing for film the Chinese market is. We'll have Jesus driving muscle cars soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkZ4Ui8izKk

Edit: Of course, that skit was made before Gibson actually announced a sequel to Passion of the Christ

JP Liz V1

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Charlie Humman is English.

He has lost his Geordie accent a reunion for him and Aidan Gillen in this after Queer as Folk

Teyla Emmagan

JP Liz V1 wrote:

He has lost his Geordie accent a reunion for him and Aidan Gillen in this after Queer as Folk

Queer as Folk was great! He was good in that. He seems to have lost the ability to do more than about 3 facial expressions since though (mad Jax, sad Jax, nothing going on behind the eyes Jax).

silverharp

how much was filmed in Ireland?

Agent Coulson

It's bombed in the States with an $14m opening day.

Dr Crayfish

Everything about this film looks so bad. 90s freeze frames ffs. How does this clown keep getting work? Saw him on Graham Norton last night, charmless and gormless. Hopefully this is the final nail in his coffin now that he doesn't have Chris Evans telling us all how amazing his films are constantly.

constitutionus

its getting trashed big time but ya know what ?

the only thing the world needs LESS of than another robin hood film is another bleeding king arthur flim so if all richie did was dress up a mental fantasy flim with the bare bones of the king arthur mythos then im down for it.

apparently according to the youtube reviewers its the closest we'll get to a he man film anytime soon.

Outlaw Pete

Seen this today, my fellow patrons appeared to love it... I hated it.

Massive try hard factor with soooo many scenes.. but they pretty much all just fall flat on their face as there's no quality of script to back any of it up.

I cringed through so much of it tbh.

RobbingBandit

I thought it was good much better than I expected, Jude Law is a slimy git villain, Conor McGregor as King Arthur was a bold move by Guy Ritchie, what'd you mean that wasn't Conor McGregor but he had the coat and everything, David Beckham was surprisingly good in his few scenes, the movie was what it was a cringe fest with quite a few laughs and a few sobs thrown in, I'll pick it up when it's out to download in a few months. Worth a watch but very long at 126 minutes bring a cushion.

Wibbs

King Arthur is a poison chalice as a film subject since Monty Python tackled it. And I'm only sorta joking. It should be a tale that lights up the screen, big or small, but its day is gone IMH. I'm surprised the studios are still willing to throw money at it TBH.

razorblunt

The Clive Owen, Antoine Fuqua was always a guilty pleasure of mine. I've seen Movie Sins on the film and I can't unsee that now!

I'll catch this one but I'll wait for download I think.

RockSalto

I don't get the hype with Guy Ritchie. He's a complete bluffer. His films are just awful.

I was disappointed to find out he was directing Sherlock Holmes at the time and wasn't surprised by what was served up. Had so much potential.

King Arthur looks quite laughable.

pixelburp

Wibbs wrote: »

King Arthur is a poison chalice as a film subject since Monty Python tackled it. And I'm only sorta joking. It should be a tale that lights up the screen, big or small, but its day is gone IMH. I'm surprised the studios are still willing to throw money at it TBH.

I think Arthur/Camelot and that whole mythos is a tale still worth telling, but a summer rollercoaster-blockbuster just ain't the right fight; TV in many ways has become the home of the more 'thoughtful' epic, so to speak, no doubt largely due to the success of the ubiquitous Game of Thrones.

Plus, maybe King Arthur being a flop (so far anyway) might finally be the sign for Hollywood to stop taking these public domain tales and amping them up into brainless action films.

constitutionus

dont hold your breath.

youve yet to see micheal bays take on the material next month !

pajo1981

Designed to appeal to chavs/skangs so?

pixelburp

constitutionus wrote: »

dont hold your breath.

youve yet to see micheal bays take on the material next month !

Hmmm that's true, but sure only China watches those bloody things at this stage so shouldn't matter too much

conorhal

Wibbs wrote: »

King Arthur is a poison chalice as a film subject since Monty Python tackled it. And I'm only sorta joking. It should be a tale that lights up the screen, big or small, but its day is gone IMH. I'm surprised the studios are still willing to throw money at it TBH.

The main problem with Arthurian legend is the fact that nobody's tried to make a film of it with the exception of John Boorman back in the 80's.
I really don't understand why film makers insist on 'reimaginings' that have nothing to do with King Arthur, could anybody call this or Antoine Fuqua's effort even passingly related to King Arthur? Even First Knight ditched everything but the character names.
So the real problem as I see it is not, that it's day is gone, but rather that it's never actually been translated to screen, sure Monty Python's Holy Grail contains more actual Arthurian legend then any of those films.
I suspect the producers of all the previous fare are afraid the' supernatural element' won't connect to the audience or they can't figure out how to sell it, so they try to minimize it down to nothing.
I'm unsure why though, there's a generation that grew up on Harry Potter and Game of Thrones that would have no problem with the fanasy element of myth and ledgend.

Ipso

conorhal wrote: »

The main problem with Arthurian legend is the fact that nobody's tried to make a film of it with the exception of John Boorman back in the 80's.
I really don't understand why film makers insist on 'reimaginings' that have nothing to do with King Arthur, could anybody call this or Antoine Fuqua's effort even passingly related to King Arthur? Even First Knight ditched everything but the character names.
So the real problem as I see it is not, that it's day is gone, but rather that it's never actually been translated to screen, sure Monty Python's Holy Grail contains more actual Arthurian legend then any of those films.
I suspect the producers of all the previous fare are afraid the' supernatural element' won't connect to the audience or they can't figure out how to sell it, so they try to minimize it down to nothing.
I'm unsure why though, there's a generation that grew up on Harry Potter and Game of Thrones that would have no problem with the fanasy element of myth and ledgend.

Regarding the Clive Owen movie, there is an idea that Arthur was based on a Roman general. So it's more of basing it on a different origin story than re-imagining.

Sad Professor

To a certain extent it's the John Carter problem as well. The mythos has been excessively mined already, which makes a new film difficult to market unless it has a unique spin on the legend.

longshanks

Can people stop saying mythos?

ancapailldorcha

I've got a real itch to go to the cinema but this looks dreadful.