King Arthur: Legend of the Sword Review

     Guy Ritchie is known for greatly directed action spectacles. With a filmography such as Snatch, Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, and the recent Sherlock Holmes movies, Ritchie has created his unique style incorporating witty dialogue and incredibly exciting fight scenes. King Arthur: Legend of the Sword is the newest film from Ritchie with Charlie Hunnam helming the title character. While there are some exciting aspects within this film, there are some really big drawbacks that become more and more evident with the passing of time from when I watched it.

     The plot for this movie isn't the most original. It's ultimately a revenge story in which Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) must seek the throne of Camelot after he finds out that his uncle, Vortigern (Jude Law), had killed his parents and taken the throne for himself. Arthur is the true heir and must learn to wield the mighty sword of Excalibur if he hopes to become king. It's very much like every other King Arthur movie's story.

     My biggest question going in was how would Ritchie's style translate with the King Arthur story. When I think of epic, Arthurian movie, Guy Ritchie is the first name on my list. That being said, some of directorial choices translate very well with this story. The most evident one is the action choreography and visual effects. The release for this film was pushed back almost a year and the visual effects greatly paid off from it. There are segments where the effects are not necessarily perfect but for the most part it was greatly done, especially with how much this movie required.

     The pacing of this movie is incredibly quick which translates to a lot of action set pieces. The majority of them were highly entertaining and you could definitely tell as to why Warner Brothers hired Ritchie to direct this movie. They practically made the Excalibur it's own character and there is some very good swordplay. The biggest hinderance within the action though is the shaky cam. There is a particular scene (which was in the trailers so it's not a spoiler) where Arthur and his gang are running through the streets of a bustling city. There was lots of shaky cam and POV shots here that will most likely just be daunting for audiences. 

     Seeing as this film only made 15 million domestically on a estimated 175 million budget, I think it's a valid point to state Charlie Hunnam is not really the guy that should be leading a movie. While he was great in the very little I've scene of Sons of Anarchy, studios must be very cautious with the box office draw from this film and Pacific Rim. He's not a guy that puts butts in seats. You could have placed a ton of actors in this role that would be good for marketing and utilized much better then Hunnam on screen. The standout performance however goes to Jude Law as the evil king, Vortigern. There's a particular scene in which his character explains the intoxication of power that will really give audiences a great understanding of the mindset that he has.

     While there are entertaining aspects, this film ultimately falls flat with formulaic story beats and not a lot of positive take aways. This lost Warner Brothers A LOT of money so we won't be seeing any sequel probably ever again to this film. I can't recommend going to see this in theaters but it wouldn't be a bad cable watch on a Saturday afternoon.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10