Featured Audience Ratings

• Universal D

  
  There's some blarney about "searching for historical fact" woven into the story but basically what you get is an old timey adventure/propaganda/nationalism piece about how ENGLAND! (always said in capital letters w/an exclamation in this film) rose from the ashes of… More
  There's some blarney about "searching for historical fact" woven into the story but basically what you get is an old timey adventure/propaganda/nationalism piece about how ENGLAND! (always said in capital letters w/an exclamation in this film) rose from the ashes of nations to become A LAND OF FREE MEN! (They let some women come along with 'em, too.) Ehh.

• Jeff "

  
  King Arthur is another mediocre action film by director Antoine Fuqua, who isn't that skilled as a director to begin with. I felt that the films action scenes were well done, but unfortunately that's about it going for it. The plot is under developed, and never really… More
  King Arthur is another mediocre action film by director Antoine Fuqua, who isn't that skilled as a director to begin with. I felt that the films action scenes were well done, but unfortunately that's about it going for it. The plot is under developed, and never really interesting. I think it's a great shame because King Arthur could have been quite an epic film, unfortunately, it isn't. Fuqua's direction is clumsy and unfocused, and the film suffers because of it. Under a different director, the film could have succeeded, but the film is a mediocre attempt at a historical epic, and the end result is a film that doesn't really make you satisfied. The casting choices for this film are very questionable as well. Aside from Sin City and Shoot Em' Up, I'm not a fan of Clive Owen, and in this film he's pretty bad. So is Keira Knightleey, who usually is a good choice for period pieces, but this isn't a period piece film that she should've starred in. Most of the cast are not right for the part, and Fuqua doesn't know how to craft an action epic, and the flaws are apparent on-screen. The film could have been much better; unfortunately the result is a film that is a badly acted and plot mess that will make you lose interest halfway through the end of the film. King Arthur could almost be seen as a guilty pleasure; however, I think the mediocrity of this film is too much for me to see it that way. I don't view King Arthur as an awful film, but almost. The film could have been much better with a better, much developed storyline and a better cast. Oh well, don't get overly excited before watching this film, you may end up disappointed, I was.

• Gordon A

  
  Overblown bastardisation of the King Arthur legend, knee deep in earnest hammy performances, only redeemed by some cracking battle scenes.

• Conner R

  
  I always forget how intense Clive Owen is in this movie, that alone makes it a semi-classic. He is the best Arthur, hands down. The character has never been portrayed so noble ans selfless, truly being worthy of the name King. In fact, the rest of the cast is pretty incredible and for… More
  I always forget how intense Clive Owen is in this movie, that alone makes it a semi-classic. He is the best Arthur, hands down. The character has never been portrayed so noble ans selfless, truly being worthy of the name King. In fact, the rest of the cast is pretty incredible and for the most part deliver extremely good performances. The only person lacking personality was Merlin, but that was more the character being in there for no good reason. The action is pretty brutal and well done, but I still wish this was given a bigger scale and an epic narrative. What it ends up being is one chapter in a much larger and grander King Arthur story that was never continued. For what it is though, it's very well done and everything is put together in order.

• Ross C

  
  A wasted opportunity to put the legend of King Arthur into a true historical setting rather than making a fantasy film. Lacking any depth, the story is forgone for yet another battle-athon that tries to imitate the success of the recent Lord of the Rings trilogy with large elaborate… More
  A wasted opportunity to put the legend of King Arthur into a true historical setting rather than making a fantasy film. Lacking any depth, the story is forgone for yet another battle-athon that tries to imitate the success of the recent Lord of the Rings trilogy with large elaborate battle scenes, which are every bit as boring. To make matters worse it offers some interesting historical rationalisations for the legend, which it then tears to shreds with a bunch of awful inaccuracies such as Saxons invading from north of Hadrian's Wall and a completely unnecessary Harris Hawk. The only interesting plot line is that of the teachings of Pelagius which tied into the story nicely. It may have an all star cast but given such poor dialogue they end up looking like a bunch of amateurs!

• Jennifer D

  
  If you want history, go to a museum. I've always judged films by what they present, not they represent. Besides, I liked the different approach of the story. I'm also a sucker for guy bonding stories and Keira Knightley. And on that and the bloody battle scenes, I *actually*… More
  If you want history, go to a museum. I've always judged films by what they present, not they represent. Besides, I liked the different approach of the story. I'm also a sucker for guy bonding stories and Keira Knightley. And on that and the bloody battle scenes, I *actually* liked it. So there. And Keira rocks the blue people so much better than Na'vi. And this was made 6 years before Avatar... stealing ideas much, Cameron? Plus, while the Arthurian aspect is wrong, the actual historical details of Rome's occupation of Briton is not far off. All the details with the Celts and such. AC rating: Well you can always tell when a director is a tad bitter. However, hearing all historical detail and research was perfect for me (it's why I was watching it to begin with!) He skimmed over some stuff I wished he went into, but ah well. Still worth another listen at some point.

• Anthony L

  
  Historically incorrect version of events, even though the story of Arthur is based on myth/legend etc, the history of the Saxons and the Romans is well known and ignored in this version. To it's credit it's got balls to tell an altogether different version of a much loved… More
  Historically incorrect version of events, even though the story of Arthur is based on myth/legend etc, the history of the Saxons and the Romans is well known and ignored in this version. To it's credit it's got balls to tell an altogether different version of a much loved tale but to be more than fair, it's a really dull version. This is just a poor excuse to cash in on the popularity of the epic battle movies of the last decade. Money badly spent when the best fight scenes look like nothing more than a load of fat men fighting in a garden centre that's on fire. As for the script, don't get me started....

• Jake .

  
  Very, very mixed feelings on this one. Overall, I liked it; but I really have no idea why. Clive Owen and Keira Knightley were perfect for their roles and gave good performances, but that is really the only compliment I had. The script was terrible and there was way too much junior… More
  Very, very mixed feelings on this one. Overall, I liked it; but I really have no idea why. Clive Owen and Keira Knightley were perfect for their roles and gave good performances, but that is really the only compliment I had. The script was terrible and there was way too much junior high humor for my liking. I'm also not totally sure if there was a plot in there somewhere or not. Still, its compelling and entertaining enough to watch once; but I was still disappointed. I guess I'll just go back to The Return of the King when I want to watch an epic.

• Bruce B

  
  Seldom does a Movie come along that just over powers me to stay glued to the edge of my chair, put that?s what Clive Owen and Keira Knighley did with this movie. I remember seeing it when it first came to the screen, but I didn't enjoy it as much then as I did last night, maybe… More
  Seldom does a Movie come along that just over powers me to stay glued to the edge of my chair, put that?s what Clive Owen and Keira Knighley did with this movie. I remember seeing it when it first came to the screen, but I didn't enjoy it as much then as I did last night, maybe because I saw the extended Unrated Version. I usually don't enjoy these Dark Ages, Knights, Kingdom, type movies but this one was just short of 5 stars. All the knights of the Round Table were played by Excellent actors. You could feel the tension of that era coming out of the screen. The last battle with the sounds and the special effects were outstanding, though the last battle went on a little long. Its time for another episode of chivalry era, but to be done on this level and not the level that would impress 13-14 year old girls. Well Done, worth buying, should be able to be found on any pawn shop rack for $3.00 or Wally's World for $5.00.

• Sophie B

  
  this was an ok movie. it had the great cast, great costumes and great story but somehow it was just lacking in the oompf needed for this to be a fantastic movie.

• Morgan G

  
  Utterly horrific historically and not at all true to the mythology.

• Robert C

  
  I enjoyed this (Clive Owen for Christ sake!), but was plagued the whole way through questioning the historical accuracy of the tale. On the surface it would appear to be a much more realistic look at the legend of King Arthur. But having had so many other (more traditional)… More
  I enjoyed this (Clive Owen for Christ sake!), but was plagued the whole way through questioning the historical accuracy of the tale. On the surface it would appear to be a much more realistic look at the legend of King Arthur. But having had so many other (more traditional) versions of the story embeded in our psyche over the years, might make it difficult for some to embrace this grittier (and certainly more plausible) version of the legend. It did suffer from a lack of character development. Sure these are characters that most of us are familiar with, but when you are attempting to present them all in an entirrely different light from that with which we have grown accustomed to seeng them in...a little more development of character would have really strengthened the film as a whole. While it was nice to see Keira Knightley in a more gritty role...painting her up and stripping her down does not a Celtic Woad make. Even under a layer of paint & dirt, she walks through the film looking and sounding more like a character from a Jane Austen film then a Celtc Warrioress. All and all...a really enjoyable tale.

• Al S

  
  An exhilarating, frequently thrilling and explosive action-packed adventure. Powerful, heroic, and fantastic. The best epic film I've seen since Braveheart. Made with real passion and true excellence. Spectacular and incrediable. Non-stop action and riveting drama. Stirring,… More
  An exhilarating, frequently thrilling and explosive action-packed adventure. Powerful, heroic, and fantastic. The best epic film I've seen since Braveheart. Made with real passion and true excellence. Spectacular and incrediable. Non-stop action and riveting drama. Stirring, riveting, deeply moving and breathtaking. Clive Owen gives a truly riveting and engaging performance. Ioan Gruffudd is outstanding. An amasing cast of actors all at the top of their form including Ray Winstone, Hugh Dancey, Ray Stevenson, Joel Edqerton and Mads Mikkelsen who all give exceptional and powerful performances. A fierce, bold, stylish and electrifying epic. Director, Antoine Fuqua's finest achievement as a filmmaker. A triumph. Superbly crafted and excellently told.

• Ginny  

  
  I found this quite boring really.

• E.J. B

  
  There was enough material there for the filmmakers to make a much stronger epic, they just chose to make a shoddy action picture.

• danny d

  
  this is a vastly underrated film. complex and entertaining, there was depth to the characters. despite their warrior hearts, they were human like anyone else.Tristen is a brilliant character, the battle scenes are excellent.

• Tim S

  
  I saw this out of respect for Mr. Owen.

• Daniel P

  
  An interesting movie that tried really hard to get away from the mythology and simply tell the story of the king, historically. Some great choices were made - Lancelot and Guinevere's muted romance, for example - and the thin ice scene made the movie at least worth watching.… More
  An interesting movie that tried really hard to get away from the mythology and simply tell the story of the king, historically. Some great choices were made - Lancelot and Guinevere's muted romance, for example - and the thin ice scene made the movie at least worth watching. It was visible, though, that as good as Clive Owen is, he withered a little under his direction... Fuqua makes decent movies with great vision, and gets great budgets, but some really good actors are terribly unimpressive under his (Denzel Washington's affirmative-action Oscar over Academy thorn-in-the-side Russell Crowe comes to mind, as does Bruce Willis in Tears of the Sun, though B.W. was much better). Unfortunately, by making the story as relatively unremarkable as it likely is, the film too becomes unremarkable, and the ending struck me as a "well, here's as good as anywhere sort of moment," though it too makes more sense considering the subject matter. A 3-star flick, and the extra half is for promoting historical debate and not completely copping out and going Hollywood with arguably the most mythologized history this side of the Bible.

• Jennifer X

  
  This was really boring, but Clive Owen was really hot.

• xGary X

  
  Ha ha! Once again Hollywood presents it's interpretation of "history", and once again, it's about as convincing as the manifesto of the flat earth society. Every cinematic cliche from the stories of Robin Hood and Arthurian legend is mixed with Braveheart and even… More
  Ha ha! Once again Hollywood presents it's interpretation of "history", and once again, it's about as convincing as the manifesto of the flat earth society. Every cinematic cliche from the stories of Robin Hood and Arthurian legend is mixed with Braveheart and even Gladiator, and presented as "fact", which is easily the film's biggest flaw. Every time the name Arthur or Lancelot is mentioned, it only serves to remind how absurd it all is. But expecting the worst, I watched this with my least cynical head on (luckily, otherwise I would never have made it past the first half hour)and actually rather enjoyed it. When it finally gets down to the serious business of everyone hacking each other into Mcnuggets, things definitely improve. The battle sequences are superb, both thrilling and beautifully staged and I couldn't help thinking that if it had just accepted itself as hokey fantasy (the director was obviously just trying to emulate Lord Of The Rings anyway) it would've been a lot easier to stomach. If you're the kind of person who could ignore Braveheart's shortcomings and enjoyed it for what it was, you can do the same for this. But if you expect historical accuracy (or even dialogue that doesn't make you physically cringe!) I'd look elsewhere.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings