just watched the 2004 version of "King Arthur", and it was a bit warm. As I don't know much about this legend, I at least know "The Holy Grail", "Sword in the Stone", "Knights of the Round Table" and Asians. The most famous love triangle in British history between Ser, Genevieve, and Lancelot, but in this film, "The Holy Grail" and "Sword in the Stone" are owed, as if it came out in the same year as the film Like "Troy", the mystery of myths and legends is taken away, so that the story is less of the "Wuji"-style weirdness and chaos, and it tries to be closer to the truth, but "Troy" at least still has the heroic and extraordinary Achilles, at least There are also Hector, who is loyal to the family and dares to take responsibility, and at least Paris and Helen, who have caused a decade of catastrophe for love. Together with the Trojan horse, this story can still be told in the absence of the gods without reducing the story itself. On the contrary, it can make the overall structure more compact and avoid the interference of forces outside the logical evolution of the drama itself. However, "King Arthur" itself is only a legendary story. So far, there is no historical evidence to prove his existence, or the virtual prototype based on historical figures cannot be verified. The director deliberately narrows the distance from reality, but it reduces the cost of making people gossip.
After the success of "Gladiator", Hollywood at the beginning of the century seems to have a wave of epic films, but after all, this is no longer the era of "Ben-Hur", and it is not enough to drive the emergence of "Spartacus". In the golden age of "Lawrence of Arabia", etc., and the earlier "Ten Commandments", "The Lord of the Rings" is an alternate history, and has Tolkien's solid literary masterpiece as a foundation, plus Peter Jackson's this. The director is very reliable, and its success does not have universal reference value.
"Troy" is actually not a good work, but the maturity of the industrial aspect can prevent it from falling below the standard at least under the perfect operation of the system. Afterwards, the "Kingdom of Heaven" that Ridley Scott attacked again and "Alexander the Great" that Oliver Stone had been preparing for many years encountered Waterloo, which directly announced the shatter of the epic retro trend in Hollywood in the early years of the new century. Among them, "King Arthur" is a typical example of mediocrity, blandness and flatness. Although it can't be said to have lost everything from the box office, Xiaobao will not directly announce the end of his directorial career, but it is like its warm overall look and feel. , neither up nor down, neither embarrassed nor embarrassed, the ultimate fate can only be buried in the pile of old papers, so that you can't bear to say bad, but it is so impersonal.
Of course, the uncertainty of the legend itself has given future generations a lot of room for deconstruction, because no one will pretend to be indifferent to argue with you that "historical facts are not like this", but the problem is that the director of the film, Anthony Fukui, seems to have " Safety Considerations", choosing the least sparking deconstruction, resulting in a lack of excitement for the entire story. In terms of perspective, the pattern is too small, so that the emotional line does not have a breaking point, and the iconic big scene of the epic film is lacking. It is like watching Wallace and Isa in "Braveheart" Princess Bella just admired each other, and then showed affection and politeness, and then simplified several battle scenes, especially the tragic sadness of Wallace being betrayed by the Scottish nobles. Although there are also speeches, Wallace's somewhat hypocritical "Freedom" is more provocative than the sum total of all Arthur's lectures in this film.
As a veteran gossip master, of course I want to see the sparks and jealousy between Arthur, Genevieve and Lancelot, but apart from the teasing of Genevieve and Lancelot's words, everything is like a touch of water As an understatement, in today's increasingly bold scale, it is absolutely boring. Arthur was completely unconvinced by the verbal confrontation between the other two. Of course, according to the plot design, they were married after Lancelot died anyway, and he always regarded Lancelot as a sibling, touching his clothes with his siblings. Naturally it doesn't matter. Even in the director's cut, the only passionate scene was aborted halfway through the Saxon invasion, much to the disappointment of the audience.
In the legend, roughly Arthur and Genevieve got married, and then Genevieve fell in love with Lancelot. Arthur was jealous and wanted to burn his wife to death. Lancelot fought for the beauty, which directly led to the Knights of the Round Table. Split, in the end Arthur died (not by Lancelot), the dynasty ended, but the lovers did not get married. Lancelot became a monk, which can be said to be a tragic ending. The reason why it is a tragedy, Precisely because in such a design, no one is wrong. And in Fukui's careful adaptation, Lancelot, who apparently had a spark for Genevieve, died "in time" in the war against the barbarian invasion, and then Arthur shouted "Why didn't I die", and was buried Brother, marry a beautiful woman, let's see, can there be a more vulgar arrangement than this.
Perhaps Fukui still has something to pursue, at least the discussion on "freedom" is commendable. Sword is also not interested, and has been talking about "freedom" from the very beginning, but this freedom does not originate from Wallace's kind of heroic heroes who serve the country and the people, but from the pursuit of individual freedom. Sublimated to collective freedom, even the freedom of life and death. The difference in the period is that according to the plot setting, the Knights of the Round Table do not belong to Britain at all. They are from the mainland, and stationing in Britain is only their responsibility to sell their freedom to Rome. Once the deadline is up, you can regain your freedom and return to your hometown. But the drama lies in Rome's hard work, the Saxons' pressing step by step, and the promotion of the tattooed people in the middle, so that the Knights of the Round Table have to complete what may be the most dangerous when they could be free. mission, but still fighting for a land and a people that doesn't belong to them.
However, this itself is also a sublimation. In the process of completing the task, in order to repel the enemy and save the lives of his companions, a warrior named Dagnett cut through the ice and forced the Saxons back, but he was shot and killed himself. , freed his companions, but his sacrifice was enough to let the soul rest in peace and find his own freedom. After obtaining the freedom granted by Rome, theoretically the remaining six warriors can complete their desire to go home, which is even equivalent to the wish of the martial arts movie "retirement from the rivers and lakes". The border was invaded, and Arthur decided to stay and fight alone, but at this time, his companions who were born and died together still returned to Arthur, as a free man, fighting for him. Until the end, he sacrificed Lancelot (or he had to die for the ending of the love triangle, anyway, he had already issued a prophecy that he would die in battle), sacrificed another companion, and with the assistance of the tattoo family (Anyway, Genevieve is already Arthur's person, and it can be regarded as a marriage), and almost wiped out all the Saxons.
"Samurai, you deserve to be free, but the home we seek is not in the distance, but in our hearts, in our actions today, if it is destiny to die in battle, then we gladly accept it, but we want history to remember , we fight as free people!" - In fact, in the whole film, Fukui just wanted to use Arthur's mouth to express his central idea, and the effect is somewhat more effective, but after all, cleverness is not big Wisdom, a series of good sentences cannot make a good chapter, and the sublimation in one sense does not mean the success of the whole work.
PS: Fortunately, this "King Arthur" was filmed six years ago, otherwise, with Avatar's current popularity, I am afraid that the shape of the tattooed "demon girl" Gina Wei can hardly escape the spoof of the "cottage Na'vi". In fact, the central position on the poster is not difficult to imagine the hype hotspot at that time. It was the popularity brought by Keira Knightley's first hit in "Pirates of the Caribbean" to drive the sales of "King Arthur". But apparently it didn't work. After the love triangle branch line was greatly weakened, such a flat-figured beauty appeared. In addition to balancing the excessive yang qi, there was only a metaphor for the drama itself and the emotional line of the film itself was not so choppy.
It's late at night, go to sleep, have a good dream.
- Star
- early morning of January 26
View more about King Arthur reviews
