Main > The Library
Arn: Tempelriddaren
Sir Wolf:
awesome! i wanna see it too!
Sir William:
It is definitely worth watching...if for nothing else, the battle scenes were well done...from small skirmishes to full-scale. I am looking into gettin the books but they're kinda pricey right now.
I just noticed something...there IS a second movie that's already out, in Swedish, called Arn: the Kingdom at Road's End; now, it is said that Arn was in fact 2 movies, consolidated for the international market (as such, it seems a lot was cut) but for the native market, it was released as 2 full length features; each a little over 2 hours long.
I guess I should not complain, why shouldn't they get the full ride but can't we get it eventually? The last one was released 2 years ago! Yea, I'm bitchin a little bit! lol
Sir Edward:
--- Quote from: Paladin on 2010-10-26, 19:45:50 ---I think we're of the same mind about Excalibur; for my part I hope they don't bother trying to get historical or find some nugget from the past to tie it in like they did with King Arthur (which I did love, even with the mishmash of arms and armor from differing periods and regions- I took that to mean they'd ranged far and wide in the service of Rome and adopted clothing, armor and weapon styles that suited their individual tastes); let it be the high fantasy like it was in the 80s...to me, that's what it is, so why not go with it?
--- End quote ---
I agree, I'd like to see it kept as high fantasy, though grounded with realism. It's when they go off the deep-end with either the magical aspects or forcing it into a period that it doesn't work well with that I have a problem.
The movie "King Arthur" was OK in its own right, I thought, but I got really frustrated with it because it felt like they were forcing it to be something it wasn't. It wasn't an Arthurian movie at all. It just had the names. One of the worst examples of this is the movie title itself, since Arthur is never a king in the movie. While supposedly the stories are set after the fall of the Roman Empire, they've always been written in the context of medieval feudal society with knights and kings. The movie sets it in a time when the notion of knighthood as we know it didn't exist yet.
Since the stories have always been anachronistic, even when they were first written down, it's a bit silly to force it into a time and context that doesn't fit the characters. So by ignoring all the character names I was still able to appreciate the movie, but as an Arthurian story I felt like they brought together the proverbial square peg and round hole.
Sir James A:
This movie is "Arn: The Knight Templar" in english, right? It's on my "to watch" list. I just saw the 2009 Robin Hood, and it was garbage. Robin Hood: Men In Tights seemed leaps and bounds better.
Sir Edward:
Yep, that's the one. The English version of the disc was just released recently, but it's just the menus, credits, titling, etc that are in English. The movie has a few scenes in English, but most is subtitled.
I haven't seen the new Robin Hood yet. Someone was telling me they were pleasantly surprised by it. I'll keep an open mind until I see it. :)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version