Review of King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) by Ivy K — 12 Aug 2017

The abysmal reviews of this movie really weren't fair to it. The biggest flaw this movie has is that it uses the King Arthur name to throw together a bunch of unrelated people and events that have no accuracy to any of the literature or legends. If it were to just be marketed as a new fantasy without tying on to known characters and legends it would be more enjoyable and more followable. I really rather liked the fast helter-skelter pace, it just took a while to figure out what the hell was going on because there was no possible way, even if you make him a sorcerer, for Mordred to be old enough to kill Arthur's father, so it took me the entirety of the opening scene to figure out what the hell was going on just in time for it to not be going on anymore. The entire feeling of the plot felt much more Robin Hood than King Arthur. But the characters were likeable (at least the ones that were meant to be), the deaths that were supposed to hit hard landed, and Arthur was a hottie. I do think planning a 6 film franchise was wildly premature, but as a stand alone movie it was enjoyable. Once you get past that "That isn't RIGHT" thing happening in your brain about the legendary accuracy.

I'm still confused about the... River hags? I don't know of them in Arthurian lore or general folktales so they feel like an odd inclusion to a story element that could've been handled in very different ways. But maybe they were intended to be explained further in future installments that will undoubtedly never come unless this thing gets cult classic status on DVD.