Bruckenheimer to do King Arthur

[John Crichton]

I once again tap IMDB for info.

I have NO clue if any of these actors are actually signed on to play these roles but it looks pretty decent so far. No big action stars which is usually good for these kinds of things.

David Franzoni (II) written by
John Lee Hancock written by

Cast (in credits order)
Clive Owen .... King Arthur
Stephen Dillane .... Merlin
Keira Knightley .... Guinevere
Ioan Gruffudd .... Lancelot
Stellan Skarsgård .... Cedric
Ray Winstone .... Bors
Hugh Dancy .... Galahad
Ray Stevenson .... Dagonet
Til Schweiger .... Cynric
Charlie Creed-Miles .... Ganis
Joel Edgerton .... Gawain
Ken Stott .... Marcus Honorius
Ivano Marescotti .... Bishop Germanius
Pat Kinevane .... Horton
Valeria Cavalli .... Fulcinia
rest of cast listed alphabetically
Mads Mikkelsen .... Tristan

Produced by
Jerry Bruckheimer .... producer
Ned Dowd .... executive producer
David Franzoni (II) .... executive producer
Bruce Moriarty .... associate producer
Chad Oman .... executive producer
Mike Stenson .... executive producer

There are some question marks in there for some of the folks working on this film but I'd say they have a pretty good receipe there. Not a dream-team per se, but if they are going for realistic/gritty they have the pieces set up. Just look at some of the other work the actors have done. I'm looking forward to this even more now...

 

[S'mon]

A 'historical'-esque Arthurian movie that focussed on Arthur's struggle with the invading Saxons could be good. Given how desperate the Britons were for the Roman legions to return & save them from the Saxons, having the Romans as the baddies in a King Arthur film really is a travesty - like having the French make a movie where they join with the Germans in 1940 to throw off the yoke of their American oppressors. It's at that level of yuckiness.

 

[Purkle-chan]

The folks who'd like to see a more historical take on Arthur - as a Roman, even - might like to know that it's already been done.

Jack Whyte wrote The Camulod Chronicles ( The Skystone, The Singing Sword, The Eagle's Brood, The Saxon Shore, and others). Pretty much no magic whatsoever.

In a sort of similar fashion there's Bernard Cornwell's Arthur trilogy, written in his usual historical style. Worth looking at for those who prefer a historical version rather than a fantasy version of the tales. Though there are a few bits that could be taken as magical.

As far as this film goes, I'll do what I usually do, wait and see. Possibly go and see it when it comes out, possibly not.

 

[2d6]

from the article:

So don't think Camelot or Excalibur. Think kind of more Gladiator. So it's going to be fascinating."

isn't that what kinda made Arthurian Legend fascinating?

2d6

 

[shilsen]

Originally posted by shilsen

Anachronisms

Originally posted by Rune

Funny. Dictionary.com totally freaked out when I tried to type that word in.

Really? This is what I got:

1. The representation of someone as existing or something as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order.

2. One that is out of its proper or chronological order, especially a person or practice that belongs to an earlier time: “A new age had plainly dawned, an age that made the institution of a segregated picnic seem an anachronism” (Henry Louis Gates, Jr.).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[French anachronisme, from New Latin anachronismus, from Late Greek anakhronismos, from anakhronizesthai, to be an anachronism : Greek ana-, ana- + Greek khronizein, to take time (from khronos, time).]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Pants]

What types of movies would you rather see in 2005- Fast and the Furious 4, Charlies Angles 4: Ohh my gawd another Wrinkle, Happy Days the Movie, Friends 2 The Movie again, Star Wars Episode 3 Return of the Mullet.

Don't forget Survivor 2: I Know Who You Voted Off Last Summer

 

[Jamdin]

Excalibur wasn't dark enough?

 

[Olive]

It's at that level of yuckiness.

That's, um, kinda extreme. And really, that kind of detail isn't going to bother most people who see it. Including me, and I'm doing an MA in History...

 

[Celtavian]

re

The guy who is writing this film is the same guy who wrote/produced Gladiator.

Thanks for bringing that up. Maybe it will have a chance of being good. I enjoyed Gladiator. That movie definitely had some strong performances, especially Joaquin Phoenix. He is an extraordinary actor and Russell Crow isn't half-bad either.

 

[John Crichton]

Re: re

Thanks for bringing that up. Maybe it will have a chance of being good. I enjoyed Gladiator. That movie definitely had some strong performances, especially Joaquin Phoenix. He is an extraordinary actor and Russell Crow isn't half-bad either.

No problem, it is one of the things that is keeping my hopes up for it as well. I REALLY want to see them do this movie right. Oh, and as for the producer of Gladiator being the same, he was just one of the producers but it still counts.