Who's tellung the truth? The paid critiques, or the audience?

>>82759179
>left
disney paid critiques


>right
warner brothers making several bot accounts to manipulate the audience score.

That stupid limey fuck should have been making RocknRolla 2 instead of this garbage

>>82759179
the paid critics

audiences are always too dumb

Hello, yesterday I received doll$r Marvel Disney, I now have to post the following 5 times on /tv.

King Arthur was disapointingIt was a garbage movie, wow you are so reddit, shill

>>82759224
sounds about right

>>82759179
>WB movie
>audience score is twice as much the critic score
Gee why does this keep happening slash teevee slash?

>>82759179
THE audience is generally right except when the film was marketed the wrong way (the VVitch for example)

File: IMG_8227.gif (879KB, 245x230px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 245x230px

I'm telling the truth;

It features Guy Ritchie's standard for dialogue flair and weird, bullet time action sequences. All in all the chemistry in the cast works fantastically, and even though it hiccups briefly at a couple of points, the movie paces itself surprisingly well. Arthur has practically no development and his "revelation" is nonexistant, but it's aided in great fantasy visuals taken from the source material. One of the few movies that can be excused for an overuse of CGI, in no doubt because it actually has real sets and locales for the most part.

It's the Star Trek '09 of King Arthur. Expect as much attention to Arthurian legend from Ritchie as you'd expect Star Trek from J.J.

6/10, would rewatch in a heartbeat. Genuinely hope it gets a sequel with the principal cast returning.

>'King Arthur' is a flop of epic proportions after costing $175 million to make; 'Snatched' cost far less ($42 million) but will open well behind Amy Schumer's 'Trainwreck.' 'Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2' will easily trounce both new offerings.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/box-office-bomb-king-arthur-limps-14m-debut-behind-statched-1003531?utm_source=twitter


>b-but w-we w-wuz k-kangz!
historical revisionists BTFO

>>82759179
Still making this thread, eh Guy?

Your second bomb in a row

>>82759636
Yes OP is obviously Guy Ritchie.

>>82759614
>14 million opening on a friday
wew

File: 1492800025752.png (30KB, 710x577px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 710x577px

>In January 2014, Warner Bros set Guy Ritchie to direct a new multi-film version of the King Arthur legend. The first film was to be titled Knights of the Roundtable: King Arthur,[7] with Lionel Wigram as producer and Joby Harold as screenwriter.[8][9] It is the intended first installment of a planned six film series.[10]

>>82759704
he could be

>>82759583
>All in all the chemistry in the cast works fantastically
The fuck? What fucking chemistry?

>>82759179

Neither, but the box office gross won't lie, if a movie has shitty reviews but recieves good word of mouth it will still have a long box office run, we'll see in the coming week how it plays out.

>>82759179
>WB

No thanks

Ghost in shell
GotG2
King Arthur

How many more flops this summer?

>>82760019
>GotG2
already earned 3 times its budget

>>82760019

>GotG2

Eh ?

By all accounts it's a shit movie made for kids like the first one, but it's not a flop by any means, it's making about the same as the first one, at just $30 million higher budget, so it's yet another box office win for the white slave... Disney.

>>82760151

It spent $150m on marketing and has poor domestic takings. Will need to hit $800m just to break even

>>82760151
Still massively underperforming sorry. Maybe your Farscape for Chinks will do better on BluRay