King Aurthur?

The Black Flag Cafe is the place travelers come to share stories and advice. Moderated by Robert Young Pelton the author of The World's Most Dangerous Places.

Moderator: coldharvest

Will you see King Aurthur?

Yes it's about time someone made a documentary
3
20%
No, It's clearly anti-bush
3
20%
Can't, I'm waiting for the elevator repairman
9
60%
 
Total votes : 15

King Aurthur?

Postby The.Duke » Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:36 am

Legendary 'King Arthur' this is not

By Mike Clark, USA TODAY
Given that it has been 45 years or so since even Robert Goulet donned Camelot armor, you'd think there couldn't be a fresh variation left when it comes to those Arthur-Guinevere-Lancelot dynamics. Well, leave it to the producer who helped dream up Johnny Depp as a pirate to order a round table's worth of pizzas.

Image

For better or worse, but surely satisfying novelty needs, Jerry Bruckheimer's King Arthur (* * ½ out of four) is set much earlier than usual and against the crumbling Roman Empire, which may even (or not) be historically legitimate. In any event, we're in a new screen era when a smarmy Italian bishop feeds Arthur (Clive Owen) a line you don't often hear in these movies: "The pope has taken a special interest in you." (Related video: Watch a clip from King Arthur)

As subservient Brits, Arthur's remaining men have survived 15 years of combat attrition and are rockin' to wench. But no. A stranded Roman family is about to be pillaged by scruffy Saxons, necessitating a rescue. And you can imagine Arthur's irk when he comes to find that the clan's chief rescue target isn't remotely worthy of the effort — even if one torture victim he discovers in an adjacent dungeon is (Keira Knightley's Guinevere).

There's a built-in dilemma for anyone who tries to assign merit or non to this high-priced throwaway: The sillier it gets, the more mild fun it becomes (even if you don't respect yourself the next morning). Guinevere's cramped-cell time has so gnarled her fingers that their joints look ready for witch's casting if and whenever Bruckheimer decides to film Hansel and Gretel. Yet let Arthur give them a few well-placed pulls and twists, and here she is a reel or two later hitting bull's-eye Saxon targets with precision, bending that bow like Beckham.

Owen, Knightley and Stellan Skarsgaard (who better as a goldilocked Saxon heavy?) all do more for the movie's same old flaming weaponry than the weaponry does for them. There's a Lancelot here, too — Ioan Gruffudd, an anti-marquee moniker if ever there was one — but the traditional romantic triangle isn't much of a factor. The movie never seems to quite know what's on its mind, though individual scenes (a cool battle on the ice) have their moments. The director is Antoine Fuqua of Training Day, which at times describes his epic-fashioning chores here. (Opens nationwide today. Rated PG-13 for intense battle sequences, a scene of sensuality, wild hardcore fuck scenes, some language)
The.Duke
The.Duke
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:04 am
Location: United States

Re: King Aurthur?

Postby Texas Carnie Roadshow » Wed Jul 07, 2004 3:20 am

The.Duke wrote: Rated PG-13 for intense battle sequences, a scene of sensuality, wild hardcore fuck scenes, some language


Now I don't get out to the movies much, but maybe I will for this.
When life itself seems lunatic, who knows where madness lies? To surrender dreams - -this may be madness; to seek treasure where there is only trash. Too much sanity may be madness! But maddest of all - -to see life as it is and not as it should be.
User avatar
Texas Carnie Roadshow
Rainbow Fucking Randolph
 
Posts: 3294
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 9:59 pm
Location: A bar in illinois with unprotected wifi

Postby Lunatock » Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:24 pm

Eh, think I'll hold out for Aliens vs Predator when it comes out in August.
So I'll meet up with that Russian, that Brazillian, the rest of the team from Brooklyn..and we'll start shooting.
User avatar
Lunatock
Obarrg
 
Posts: 2013
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:06 pm
Location: Yugofukyurselv

Postby ReptilianKittenEater » Wed Jul 07, 2004 9:41 pm

I find Arthur interesting and Excalibur a great movie, but Bruckheimer doing an historically acccurate movie? Isn't he behind "Pearl Harbour' (I only saw the trailer)? What are kids doing playing baseball at high noon, with jap planes flying over, when that attack started before 7 AM?

Historically accurate for morons, I suspect
User avatar
ReptilianKittenEater
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2875
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:18 am
Location: St. Catharines, ON, Canada

Postby Skirita » Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:21 am

"Historically accurate"?

There is no verifiable historical basis for the Arthurian legend. End of story.

"Excalibur" is a great flick but a travesty to the public perception of medieval armed combat. Dark Age knights scaling walls clad in high Renaissance full-plate armor, slow motion fight scenes, etc.

And the concept of chivalry is very, very French. That is, totally fucking gay.

I'm an Irish mythology man myself. Female pissing contests that end in the winner being publicly skinned. Fergus being asked by the leprechaun queen why, when he inserts his legendary member into her diminutive figure, he puts his hand on her head (to make sure it doesn't pop out the top, of course). A ten-year-old boy that single-handedly defends Ulster from an invading army while the other men suffer crippling mock menstrual pains (a curse, naturally). Good stuff.
User avatar
Skirita
Malus In Se
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:45 am

Postby ReptilianKittenEater » Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:52 am

Excalibur is not historically accurate but it is more faithful to the literary sorce "The death of King Aurthur" written at the close of the middle ages in the late 15th century, when there were romantic notions of fuedalism
User avatar
ReptilianKittenEater
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2875
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:18 am
Location: St. Catharines, ON, Canada

Postby Skirita » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:32 am

There is a reason "Le Morte d'Arthur" was published with a French title.

All Thomas Malory did was rehash Chretien de Troyes' earlier prose. And Chretien was a Frenchman!
User avatar
Skirita
Malus In Se
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:45 am

Postby Mimirswell » Thu Jul 08, 2004 3:08 am

490-500 -- the 10 years in which most historians can agree that the battle of Mt. Badon occured during. 493 is the most likely of the ten.

540 -- Gildas writes De Excidio Conquestu Britanniae -- which describes the events that lead up to and included the battle of Mt. Badon between Ambrosius and the Saxons (has no mention of Arthur). His writing is still within living memory of the battle.

731 -- Bedes writes Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum -- Vortigern saga and the battle of Mt. Badon (also no mention of Arthur)

830 -- Nennius writes Historia Brittonum -- first major mentioning of Arthur, describes him as Dux Bellorum of the Bretons leading 12 victorious battles against the Saxons.

955 -- Unknown welsh author writes Annales Cambriae (Welsh Annals) which is a compilation of Celtic mythology. Has Arthur winning Mt. Badon in 519 and dying in 539.

1125 -- William of Marsbury writes Gesta Regum Anglorum in which Arthur helps Ambrosius defeat the Angles at Mt. Badon

1135 -- Geoffrey of Monmouth writes Historia Regum Brittaniae which features roughly 60 pages of King Arthur.

1180 -- Chretien de Troys writes a series of 5 poems that add to the mythos Morgan as Arthur's half-sister, Lancelot's Adultery, and Camelot.

1470 -- Sir Thomas Malory writes Le Morte D'arthur

That's a rough timeline of the Arthur Mythos. The reason "Le Morte d'Arthur" was published with a French Title has much more due to the Norman influence on the English culture than any other factor.

Also, Thomas Malory did much more than rehash Chretien de Troyes' earlier poems.
Mimirswell
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:47 am

Postby Skirita » Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:26 am

1135 -- Geoffrey of Monmouth writes Historia Regum Brittaniae which features roughly 60 pages of King Arthur.


Is this the same reputable source whose Historia lays down a direct lineage from the Fall of Troy to Arthur? The same Geoffrey whose ancient Albion was teeming with dragons and giants? You know, the one who plagiarized Nennius...

And is that the same Nennius who also traces the "history" of Britain to Brutus, a Roman consul matrilineally descended from the Trojans and patrilineally descended from Noah? The same Nennius who writes that Ireland was a desert before it was invaded by Scots from Spain who were themselves descended from the Egyptians, who, by the way, ended up in Spain when they became lost after pursuing the Israelites across the Red Sea?

If your idea of "historical basis" is the possibility of the existence of a chieftain named "Arthur" based entirely on his cameos in the extremely dubious writings of a few Welsh monks, then yes, there is plenty of "evidence." I on the other hand have higher standards.

The reason "Le Morte d'Arthur" was published with a French Title has much more due to the Norman influence on the English culture than any other factor.


Which is precisely why the later Norman-influenced Arthurian romances cannot be regarded as "literary sources" for the Arthurian cycles, much less history.

Also, Thomas Malory did much more than rehash Chretien de Troyes' earlier poems.


Correction: poems. I read them in prose translation. Let's just say "romances" and call it even.
User avatar
Skirita
Malus In Se
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:45 am

Postby Mimirswell » Thu Jul 08, 2004 4:39 am

As I recall I said:

That's a rough timeline of the Arthur Mythos.


What I don't recall is defending said Mythos as history.


As to my intent, which you clearly misread, was merely a retort to your statement that Mallory's work was a "rehash [of] Chretien de Troyes' earlier prose. And Chretien was a Frenchman!" which is an incorrect inference.

As to my historical opinion.

At some point, the Bretons halted the Saxon/Angle/Juttes assimilation of Britain between the years of 490 and 500 for a period of roughly 50-65 years. This battle was fought near the Roman city of Bath and was won by a Romanized Breton whose name was likely Ambrosius. This battle was passed down in tradition primarily orally (and of course by Nennius) and was later merged with Celtic Mythos and Arthur.
Mimirswell
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:47 am

Postby Skirita » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:27 pm

Fair enough. You're right; I misread you.

It just irritates me beyond belief when people cite Nennius, Geoffrey, etc. as irrefutable proof. The New Age crowd are particularly guilty in that respect.

I agree that there was probably some local chieftain at the root of the Arthurian legends, but by the time Malory penned his version the tales had shed every last bit of historical accuracy.

Good to know there is at least one other medievalist here. Carry on.
User avatar
Skirita
Malus In Se
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:45 am

Hm m

Postby ROB » Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:39 pm

Aren't medievalists just the ones who got lazy in Latin class? ;)
User avatar
ROB
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 5203
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:49 am

Postby ReptilianKittenEater » Fri Jul 09, 2004 2:32 am

was Jean Chretien around in 1180?
User avatar
ReptilianKittenEater
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 2875
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:18 am
Location: St. Catharines, ON, Canada

!!!

Postby kilroy » Fri Jul 09, 2004 4:50 am

Eh, think I'll hold out for Aliens vs Predator when it comes out in August.


fuck yeah! that's one movie i will definitely own no matter how bad it objectively sucks. you know, they made a rts video game based on that idea pretty recently, and it's really neat as hell. you can play as aliens, predators, or marines. yeah, it's silly, but i'll never get sick of it.
when they ask how you feeling
you tell em you feeling like something important died screaming
you tell em you feeling like something even more important arrived breathing
something you should probably try feeding
User avatar
kilroy
BFCus Regularus
 
Posts: 5691
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:34 am
Location: Alabambam

Postby Skirita » Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:01 pm

Aren't medievalists just the ones who got lazy in Latin class? ;)


Quite the opposite. The ones who got lazy in Latin class were called "Italian majors"...
User avatar
Skirita
Malus In Se
 
Posts: 1205
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:45 am

Next

Return to Black Flag Cafe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron