Have finally managed to watch King Arthur. It was okay, despite the lack of any non-superficial research. Why were the people North of Hadrian's Wall speaking Gaelic? The Gaels, the Scotii, weren't there in strength until a couple of hundred years later! At that point we'd be talking Picts. There was confusion as to what language people were speaking (okay... the Woads spoke Gaelic, the priests prayed in Latin, the Saxons were presumably speaking one of the Saxon dialects even if it did sound like English with a German or American accent depending on the speaker - fair enough, they're talking amongst themselves... but what language were the knights speaking? Latin presumably, but then why was the priest singled out as speaking a special language?), and apparent non-acquaintance with a dictionary by the person who wrote the script. Dude, 'decimated' does not mean what you think it does. When you're describing a slaughter, a term that means that ninety percent of the people got away is not the term to use. Annihilation, sure. Massacre, sure. But not decimation. Also, why was Lancelot in it? He was a late French addition to the legends - you can tell by the way his name doesn't fit in with any of the other characters. Arddu, Gwynhwyfar, Bedwr, Bors, Gawain, Balyn, Balan... Lancelot. One of these things is not like the others.
*end persnicketiness*
Aside from that, there was a lot of highly enjoyable shiny stuff and pretty people. Particularly Ioan Gruffudd. I also liked the mentions of Pelagius and Bishop Germanus; that shows that _some_ effort at research was done, and it did go a bit deeper than "I remember this from high school, kinda."
Or maybe the writers have read Jack Whyte... except Whyte did his research.
Oh well. Good action film, as an action film, but forgettable; at least, to me.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
