'King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" directed buy Guy Ritchie.


This was simply a bad idea from the start. First of all, we already have THE definitive film on the Arthurian legends which just happens to be "Excalibur" by John Boorman and secondly, there really is no current day mainstream audience for this to be released in movie theaters. This SHOULD have been either a cable tv mini-series or a tv movie.


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...-limps-14m-debut-behind-statched-1003531

Seems to be the old adage "If you make it they will come "Again Hollywood trying to spoon feed us what they say we should want... I agree better made for TV and I don't know who they think it would appeal to ?

I've not seen the film but based on what I've read from interviews and reviews from critics, it seems that Guy Richie tried to do the same "modernizing technique" to the Arthurian legends that he did with Sherlock Holmes. The Sherlock Holmes movies were big successes but a LOT of that had to do with the fact that its main star was Robert Downey Jr.

I actually saw this on Thursday and liked it quite a bit.

But it didn't receive a lot of advertisement around here, and I can see how it seems too similar to the whole lot of other recent medieval themed movies to carve a niche.

Has there ever been a hit from Guy Ritchie...

The two Sherlock Holmes films were big box offIce hits. "Snatched" and "Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" did pretty well too.

I've seen the previews several times and thought it would make for a better video game than a movie - just the vibe it put off.

Agreed 100%. John Booman's classic, Excalibur, is standard all other Arthur legend movies will be compared with.

I thought you were going to say Snatched, the new movie with Amy Schumer and Wanda Sykes.

can't say I've seen any of them

My mistake. His film was "Snatch" not "Snatched".

I would had been more surprised if this had not bombed. However, you have to take into account that some idiot had it opening the week after Guardians of the Galaxy 2 comes out.

Which brings an interesting case for later in the summer.

With so many sequels and franchises having a movie this summer, there will be little left for any stand alone movie, and even worse for indies and independent productions.

Agreed.

King Arthur is box office poison, and pretty much always has been.

The same with pirate movies, with the exception of a couple Pirates of the Carribean. Think about it - other than that series, can you name another pirate movie that actually made money at the box office?

Nope. There's a very concrete reason why that genre died out in Hollywood after the 1960's and wasn't revived until the first Pirates film in 2003.

I'm sure some of us remember the infamous box office bomb "Cutthroat Island" from 1995 that caused the studio to go out of business.

But, but, but... The Pirate Movie had Kristy McNichol looking all tasty!

"...Give me a happy ending....all of the time. We'll kiss and make up and everything will be alright."

There, no it's stuck in your head. You're welcome.

I actually had passes to go to a free advanced screening of "King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" and opted to see "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2" instead.

v6,
boNes

We went and saw Get Out last weekend, cinema was absolutely packed. King Arthur got a lot of advertising here on billboards and bus stops but i don't anyone who has, or will be seeing it. Covenant is next on our list.

1991 - Hook - $300+ Million

...but that was rather a Peter Pan spin-off than an outright Pirate movie.

Man oh man I'd love a full fledged King Arthur movie or mini-series filmed with the same heart and vision of Excalibur. I wish Excalibur's director would have been afforded the production monies back then that certain shows today get now. I don't know much about the director or creative minds behind the development of Excalibur but those folks deserved the big budget these half-hearted Arthur movies have garnered. Some I still enjoyed but they were nowhere near the caliber of Excalibur the movie. Those folks treated the story and legend with care and handled it as though it were almost holy. They did a wonderful job weaving together the archaic of the time and place with the supernatural elements while still keeping it all feeling grounded in reality. I was only allowed to see parts as a kid but it will always be ingrained in my mind those knights battling it out in full armor in the rain and mud with splashes of red blood and sounds of metal on metal. The excellent use of classical pieces of music too were well done. The King Arthur mythology is very colorful and full of allegory. I can see a BBC type of production pulling that off but it has to have the right people in the right places leading the way.

Uh, Snatch?