When I watch a movie, a good movie, I usually comment on the word "good" and it's over. Only when I see a bad movie will I be picky. I can't wait to grab the director's ear and teach it earnestly. This movie, as the word "general", also has something to say.
Old-fashioned stories. The old routine of the lion king, the uncle kills the father to seize power, the child starts from the bottom, fights with the uncle, and wins the story. I remember a lot of this set of movies, and the ones close to it are matadors, etc. There is nothing new. After reading the beginning, you can know the process and the end, and there is no decryption-style joy.
There are too many supporting characters, and it seems that they have given some character characterization, but the number is insufficient, the plot is simple, the length is too short, and the makeup is similar. The mess is about the same, leaving no impression.
The two-line parallel flashback, with narration, was abrupt and trivial, and there were too many flashbacks. Arthur recalled that his father was killed too many times.
There is neither strategy nor tactics, and the seizure of power is a fake at the beginning, but there is no such thing.
Fighting beasts for hegemony, where are the beasts?
The coronation of the king is much worse than the Lord of the Rings.
Just say that. The film passed, Samsung.
View more about King Arthur: Legend of the Sword reviews
