Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

King ArthurFollow

#1 Jul 10 2004 at 11:46 AM Rating: Decent
Don't waste your money. Rent the sword in the stone instead.

Absolutely horrid is about the best praise I can give to the film. I was suprised Hans Zimmer did the score.
#2 Jul 10 2004 at 5:12 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,978 posts
Especially the armor, who is their source? Come on, a British King using some Roman Imperial Armor???? It is definitley a theft of your money!
#3 Jul 12 2004 at 10:29 AM Rating: Decent
Yep. Saw it yesterday and it sucks. I sure am glad I didn't pay for that.

Too bad too. I thought there were some good character and story concepts but, because it was all so poorly written and broadly portrayed, you never really get a sense of who the people on the screen are. So when something does happen to one of the main characters, it doesn't really have any kind of impact. I think there was a great deal of potential for this version of the story but unfortunately the whole thing was just poorly executed.
#4 Jul 12 2004 at 10:32 AM Rating: Excellent
**
407 posts
Don't want to. Not going to. This thread does nothing but enhance that feeling. ^_^
#5 Jul 12 2004 at 10:40 AM Rating: Default
I think this was just another way for Keira Knightley to show off her stomach...and God bless that!!!
#6 Jul 12 2004 at 10:51 AM Rating: Decent
Imaginary Friend
*****
16,112 posts
When I heard K.K. was in it, I had a brief inkling to see it.
____________________________
With the receiver in my hand..
#7 Jul 12 2004 at 1:32 PM Rating: Decent
Keira is pretty hot, but she doesn't even look that good in the movie. I mean, there are a few minutes at the end where she's in this medieval leather bondage getup, but that's about the best of it. For the most part they have her looking emaciated with a gross, sickly complexion.

Edited, Mon Jul 12 14:35:04 2004 by OnePrime
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 295 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (295)