Change Your Image
andre-171
Reviews
King Arthur (2004)
King Arthur, although not historically correct, is still very enjoyable.
If you liked "Gladiator", "Troy" or "Kingdom of Heaven", you will probably like King Arthur. These are not the knights of "A Knights Tale". The story is set in a slightly earlier period (2AD) than to when the legendary Arthur was thought to have lived (4 - 6AD). Basically it's about a half Britton, half Roman (Arthur), his "knights", his "Lady" and a quest.
To me it was an enjoyable movie. The acting was good, sometimes even great. The battle scenes are big, well done and believable. This could very well have been the legend of Arthur and is believable even though historically not accurate.
The film's marketing department claims it is "The Untold True Story That Inspired the Legend". If you are looking for a film about the "historical" Arthur, then this is not it. In fact there is no "true" account of King Arthur. There are only bits and pieces, legends, folklore, stories, clues, deductions and tales spanning centuries on which our modern day romantic hero King Arthur is based.
Also, like most Hollywood productions, there are a lot of "mistakes" in the film. Its seems as though the filmmakers took all the references and tried to concoct one "true" account.
If you were disappointed with "King Arthur" for being historically inaccurate then you will also be disappointed by Gladiator, Troy, Alexander and Kingdom of Heaven which are also historically inaccurate in depicting a certain time period. Nonetheless they are thoroughly enjoyable movies.
The nice thing about watching this on DVD is you get to see the "Making of .." part and hear all the commentary as well. Most of the time the film maker will tell you where they got their information, how they deviated from the "truth" and why. After all this is about entertainment and someone else's impression of the truth or what could have been believable. Unless it is made for the history channel, it does not have to have a scrap of evidence to it.
I watched this and was entertained by the action scenes and to see King Arthur depicted slightly different, and more believable to me, than any other film done about King Arthur.
Habitat (1997)
If you are not looking for Star Wars on Elm Street this is for you
Based on the promotional picture with the tag line "Welcome to a living Hell" you might be led to believe this is a horror. Don't be fooled. Habitat is a science fiction/thriller movie and much more like an Outer Limits story than a Dead Zone one. The story is one we have heard before: "We are killing Mother Earth". Hank Symes (Tcheky Karyo) has radical plans to put an end to this destruction. His plans "accidentily" include his family. This was not a box office hit. It is not a faced paced action movie like Running Man or Total Recall. It is a movie trying to highlight an underlying issue. It is very enjoyable. The acting is mostly solid with very good performances by the older performers. The story moves along quite well and the special effect are believable with some "Hollow Man"-like tricks. Habitat does contain some nude scenes, mostly topless, and some swearing. This is mostly not out of place or out of character but does limit the audience the movie's message could have reached. The movie carries a message that we all should start taking notice of. Overall an enjoyable movie for me and that is why a 7 out of 10.