Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Grimerlana Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

cricketbat This film is an interesting take on the legend of King Arthur, but it just feels generic after a while. Also, I don't think this history is any more "authentic" than any other version of the story, contrary to what they claim.

UofSciFi *** This review may contain spoilers ***I was expecting to see a really good (big budget) reworking of a classic tale about King Arthur and the nights of the round table, and Merlin the Magician, Exacilur,Camelot,Sir Lancalot having an affair with Queen Genevier and Sir Galahad's quest for the Holy Grail........This was not the King Arthur I thought I was going to see....**************possible spoiler ************* In fact Arthur isn't even a King, He is a Roman commander (yes you heard me correct) and he leads his knights into the Saxon northern occupied territory of Britain to retrieve a family of High Roman Pedigree - none of which resembles the King Arthur story I was familiar with It's not a bad movie - I just think they should've called something other than KING ARTHUR - the studio that made this film should've used all original characters in this film, because the title and the use of the Arturian characters give one a false impression of what this movie is about.However this film has a battle scene on a frozen lake (and of course the ice cracks) --this is perhaps the best mid-eval/fantasy battle scene I have ever seen (that scene is worth watching the movie for) Its a good movie but I still only gave it 4 stars out of 10 because the studio should've never linked this movie to the King Arthur legend because this film has nothing to do with it! ! ! ! !

tyydaymon ABSOLUTELY epic. Incedable sword fights, Colossal battles, mammoth Cinematography, with intriguing dialog. Costumes draw you in by caching your eye. What is said matters. Character's depth and evolution touches your heart. Some slow parts great film without the "It" factor. A picture that other films will be measured by! One of my much watch picks.

flavjohk There are many types of filmgoers. There are those choosing the cinema as a safe bet for a date, to film buffs who just enjoy everything about the movie experience. My least favorite people are the avant garde psudo-sophisticates who drain the life out of everything like some vampire of joy. They don't like certain films because it makes them feel superior to say so. These are the same viewers who feel the need to prove just how smart they are by posting flaming reviews. Asshats often feel obliged to set fire to the actors, plot, music, or in the case of King Arthur historical inaccuracies. Then these self-appointed grand marshals of film post their bile on line. If you look at their reviews their hate extends to movies you probably liked. I suppose indie films are more to their liking because only someone who trashes mainstream movies can run with this crowd.It would be difficult to tell the actual story of Arthur because that individual, if such a person existed, is lost in antiquity. This film just has a different take on a legendary character. There are references to actual historical figures, but is it necessary to have the dates just right to move the story along? Probably not, unless you are a Middle Age historian. If Merlin had appeared in a Land Rover there would be room for complaint. I don't recall anyone complaining about Tarantino's history butchering Inglorious Bastards.Merlin turns out to be a leader of people more closely resembling Picts than Britons but the key take away is that he is not the mythical wizard many people expect. This Merlin is more like a mystical druid. At first I was not crazy about this character but I appreciated the fresh take of dispensing with magic altogether.Guinevere and Lancelot have a different chemistry than the myth. The Knights of the Round Table definitely have a band of brothers vibe going on because Arthur is just one of the boys. I thought it was a nice touch that the true Romans had Italian accents and the invading Saxons had German and Swedish accents.Clive Owen's performance was called wooden but he used the same style of acting in Sin City. I liked him in both roles. Owen strikes a noble figure as King Arthur. As a leader, it is obvious why he commands the loyalty of his fellow knights.This is Antoine Fuqua's first venture into a historically driven epic. Fuqua did an amazing job. I am only sorry that more people did not appreciate his treatment of subject matter or the characters. The film overall was worth the admission. The visuals are excellent. The locations are eye catching and the frenzied battles are well choreographed. It is a movie worth watching more than once. If it's the job of film and actors to entertain, then this movie delivers. Those who say it was the worst movie they ever saw better be careful in the rain, they may drown with their noses turned up so far.