King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

no

it literally had no fucking advertisements

>>84565654

Why did this movie have a better looking Ares than Wonder Woman

Was nuts when that last fight turned into straight up King's field, shame the camera work wasn't better

>>84565654

i would worry less about being a pleb for liking it and more about possibly being schizophrenic or having some other severe mental illness.

>>84565654
If you're a pleb, then so am I. I fucking loved this movie. Everything's just so visceral.

I loved the reworking of the characters. Eric Bana's Uther as "Arthur 1.0" was great and the Darklands stuff was well done and fascinating. It breaks my heart a little thinking that we'll never see this world again.

>>84565654
I was also a big fan, genuinely fun flick with funny writing, good action scenes and a cool world. Would've been nice if Arthur spent more time in that Dark World place (sequel pls) as that was pretty entertaining. The chase scene with Ritchie's whole schtick was neat too.

Also I laughed at David Beckham's part and didn't have any ill feelings about it

>>84565654
It was interesting, but the attempt at banter was just cringeworthy. Maybe it's because I'm British that I notice it more, but a lot of the dialogue was so fucking bad.

>>84565803
I liked how it was implied that Arthur was going to be a "king" and protector for anyone he looked at as his "people."

File: 4221396001_5428737842001_5428732544001-vs.jpg (28KB, 680x475px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 680x475px

OP here, the reason I asked if I was a pleb is that while I was looking for a pic of it I saw a rating that only said it was 3 and a half stars. I think it deserves more than that.
>>84565803
I recognise Beckham in that scene, cool

Typical ritchie movie but so much fun. The cgi was a bit jarring but everything about the world, the characters and the story just works. Gutted we won't see a sequel, same with man from uncle

People are too dependant on reviews these days. It really is problematic when critics exist solely to promote a political agenda.

>>84566122
>I recognise Beckham in that scene, cool

you recognized a famous person, well done

>>84566292
I meant to say that I didn't recognise him

>>84566123
We're actually getting a Man from U.N.C.L.E. sequel.

>>84566654

Don't tease me motherfucker, I know I heard something about a possibility, but unless you can 100% confirm that I'll just kill myself right now

>you will never enjoy another man's lunch while listening to good music as your Russian partner desperately tries not to die.

;___;

>>84565654
It was a bit of a mess at times, like somebody smashed together a fun guy ritchie movie about a streetwise King Arthur with a generic fantasy epic meant to set up sequels. The parts in London or about London (like when they were planning the assassination) were great, but most of the fantasy stuff fell flat (except for the beginning with the giant elephants, which was really great).

>>84565962
>I liked how it was implied that Arthur was going to be a "king"

You mean from the fucking title of the movie

>>84566759
*also the dialogue sometimes didn't work. Like you could tell they were trying to be witty, but really they were just saying normal things at a fast pace, then making smug faces at each other.

>>84566654
I have my doubts, "being written" can mean a lot of things. Hopefully it goes through and king arthur 2 gets greenlit as well

I went and got food like 7 times during so I kinda missed most of it oh well

isn't this the same dude from sons of anarchy

>>84566817
>I went and got food like 7 times

Why couldn't your friends go for their own food?

>>84565654
> am i a pleb?

everyone is. The question is if you can be more

File: TQfmuGu.png (61KB, 1228x1502px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1228x1502px

>>84566826

>>84566825

No anon, it couldn't possibly be him, neither could you search the internet to confirm such a thing.

A shame we will never EVER know YOU BIG DUMB TURKEY

>>84565654
Why don't people like guy ritchie movies? They are the epitome of fun and style. Are his movies too white or something?

>>84566842

4chan is the only search enginue i use. tell me or else i will leave a bad review for this website.

>>84566867
Some of them are good but he has a bad habit of inserting forced "witty" banter that isn't actually witty. When it's good it's great, when it's bad it's unbearable. Rarely much middle ground.

>>84566867

I don't think this was so much about Ritchie himself and more about how medieval fantasy movies just can't work unless you have a really REALLY big star front and center, and that ain't Charlie Hunnam, people want either contemporary stuff or sci-fi, and the latter can crash and burn just as easily.

also I hear Swept Away isn't that great.

>>84566759
>You mean from the fucking title of the movie

A king regardless of circumstance, witless. Even when his "people" consisted of nothing but low-lifes and prostitues, he still saw it as his duty to protect them.

>>84565654
nope. It was great. I liked the sword scenes especially.

it was pretty good in having a consistent pace and cant find the word for it, not theme or mood, but the way it kept rolling with the punches and didnt bog down on melodrama

>>84566654
Yes. And rocknrolla 2, shure.

>>84568611

>And rocknrolla 2, shure.

Why would you pierce my vulnerable heart this way

i wanted to watch it because of guy ritchie when the trailers came out but the reviews put me off
just saw it after this thread and am bummed that it flopped

>>84565654
It was great when it was great, which was like 90% of the film
But the opening battle and final sword fight were both shit

>>84566923
>how medieval fantasy movies just can't work unless you have a really REALLY big star front and center
Oh yeah, like Lord of The Rings with... Elijah Wood?

>>84569858

Meant to say nowadays, and look how poorly the Hobbit movies did in comparison to LOTR

>>84569858

Elijah Wood is with no debate a more famous actor before LOTR than Charlie Hunnam ever will be