• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

What do we know about King Arthur

Personally, I'd be fascinated to see Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicles (The Winter King, Enemy of God, and Excalibur) turned into films, if we are looking for a historical interpretation. The Mary Stewart Merlin books would also be good.

OTOH, I would love to see any of the works of Chretien de Troyes done as well, despite the ahistorical nature of them. ;) (Actually there has been one film done, following Perceval very closely, right up to the point that the story doesn't end; I would have prefered if Rohmer had used one of the Continuators to finish out the story)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wombat said:
{snip}"well, it's like Braveheart"; a friend of mine described Braveheart as "a very good film as long as you assume it take place in a parallel dimension where there happens to be a place called Scotland, happens to be a place called England and happen to be people named William Wallace and Edward I".
.

I agree the history of Braveheart was low, the production values were excellent. I suppose I have different expectations for movies. To me a "historical" movie gets 20% right or close to right (like the phrase "based on a true story"). To me the is battles where a character gets tired, dirty, and bloody. In First Knight, the characters always have shinning armor. Urg. Braveheart at least attempts to get the costumes look right and the peasants aren't all clean and their clothes freshly pressed.

I was thinking this movie may be along the lines of Gladiator, good, but not worth writing home about. I may purchase it simply because I enjoy low-brow swords movies that don't have godawful acting.
 


Enchantress said:
What if Guenivere and Merlin were lovers? Now THAT would make for a different path. I can see it now..... "Today on Jerry Springer: is your queen with an older man?" :eek:

ROFLMAO

That'd be a new one for Jerry........ Medieval romances.....
 



Enchantress said:
And Keira Knightly. ;)

I honestly did not who that was until I looked it up. My shallow male reaction, "Ah the good looking actress from Pirates of the Caribbean. Cool!" She can act at least.:o
 
Last edited:

Ummm.. I have a question. How can it be based on historical representation when we have no real facts that the whole camlot story happened. I mean, its just silly to me to say the "true" story of something when we have no facts and the information we do have on it is not proven, but perhaps true, and more of a legened than anything..
 

Dark Jezter said:
ROTFLMAO means 'Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off."

Oh. Well, I'm glad that I was able to make you laugh. I am sorry for the loss of your ass, but for only about $5000 you can get a new one! :p
 

ASH said:
Ummm.. I have a question. How can it be based on historical representation when we have no real facts that the whole camlot story happened. I mean, its just silly to me to say the "true" story of something when we have no facts and the information we do have on it is not proven, but perhaps true, and more of a legened than anything..

I believe it is called Marketing BS. The fact is that there was never any "King Arthur", it's derived from a bunch of different myths and legends that were then filtered through a 15th Century knight named Sir Thomas Malory who wrote the story as if it were a more or less contemporary one (to him). The whole roman background bit is a fairly recent invention/plot device (last 10-15 yrs I think) to help get around the fact that there is absolutely no evidence for anything arthurian in the time periods when it is set. So they go back a bit further to a time period for which there is little surviving evidence/records and "speculate" that he might have been a left behind roman/roman influenced chieftan.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top