King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

2017

Action / Adventure / Drama / Fantasy

462
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 28%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 73%
IMDb Rating 6.9 10 121692

Synopsis


Uploaded By: FREEMAN
Downloaded 1,439,452 times
August 02, 2017 at 04:38 PM

Director

Cast

Charlie Hunnam as Arthur
Jude Law as Vortigern
Guy Ritchie as Inn Owner
3D 720p 1080p
1.93 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 6 min
P/S 12 / 55
932.25 MB
1280*720
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 6 min
P/S 241 / 1,959
1.92 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 6 min
P/S 253 / 1,615

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by francislogullo 10 / 10

Exciting and Entertaining from start to finish

The true test of a fantastic movie is when you get immersed in it. When the show grabs your attention at the onset and keeps you interested the entire time. Your mind doesn't wander about anything else but whats happening on the silver screen. And that is precisely what this movie does. Loved the beginning with the fantasy action. Immediately developed a dislike for the villain well played by Law. Charlie Hunnam had the presence and moxie to carry the lead role for the first time. Most characters were very well developed and the story line was tight. Really enjoyed the soundtrack too. Entertainment at its finest.

Don't let the critics on Rotten Tomatoes fool you. The critic score was 27%, but the audience gave it a 77 %. Sadly the critics only want to give a movie a great rating when there's an oppressed group wronged, and this movie is not that.

Here's to hoping there's a King Arthur II - Knights of the Round Table

Reviewed by M_Exchange 2 / 10

Absolutely god awful

I made it through twenty minutes. It has possibly the worst video editing that I've ever seen in a film in my life. I didn't even know what I was watching sometimes during those twenty minutes. They cut from one meaningless thing to another like it was vital to a story element when, in fact, it was just a supposedly cool "Suicide Squad" style sequence. It also had two video montages during those twenty minutes, which was intolerable, partly because they were done in the same frantic and headache-inducing manner that the regular cuts were shot in.

There was a battle in which the evil mages that were seizing power were apparently casting spells from the tops of gigantic elephants, but we never saw them actually wielding magic. We just saw people being blown back by explosions. In the meantime, they just showed the mages' glowing eyes. So when Eric Bana's character beheaded the main mage (which ALSO wasn't even shown) it makes it all the more meaningless.

At one point, in one of the worst examples of foreshadowing (if it can even be called such) that I've ever seen in a film, someone reminds a group that Jude Law's character studied with the evil mages. His response: "What are you implying?" Smash cut to Jude performing an evil ritual whereby he became the new king. Aaaaaaand someone please kill me.

When it finally got around to Charlie Humman taking over the main rebel role, I couldn't have cared less. As other people have noted, he is dead-faced and expressionless. I couldn't have cared less if he regained his family's power.

I'm going to go with two stars just because the tentacled demon creature with three women that Jude worships was one creepy positive in this dumpster fire.

Reviewed by maggimar 1 / 10

Predictable Guy Ritchie...

OK I'm just gonna say it. This contains "spoilers" but honestly.. there just isn't much to spoil in the first place. But here we go...

-------------------------------------------------------'

First of all lets talk about the first 10 minutes of the movie and the trailer. To be honest i loved the first minutes of the movie but that's just because most of the cool things you see in the trailer happen in the first 10 minutes. The movie starts off by giving you the impression that this movie is gonna have a huge war in it with mystical creatures (in this scenario it was elephants the size of Manhattan skyscrapers) and thousands of soldiers fighting and warlocks and a bunch of cool s#!t like that. But after those first 10 minutes the typical Guy Richie comes in and everything is downhill from there...

Now we all know the movies the director is famous for.. snatch, lock stock, Sherlock Holmes. These movies are fast paced with fun dialogue and fantastic storytelling that suits those movies just fine. With this movie it just somehow doesn't fit. When you think about King Arthur u think about noblemen and heroics and fighting for the little man. Now there are some moments in the movie where Arthur shows he cares about someone other than himself and has a chance to me humble but then it gets ruined because Guy Ritchie needs his characters to be funny and "know it all-y" (not a word I know but..).

Not lets talk about the other characters. After seeing the movie I don't actually know the name of any other character other than Arthur. Because you just didn't give a s#!t. If every character that had been introduced (even though there where practically no introductions for any of them) had been killed at some point in the movie I wouldn't have cared because you never got a chance to get to know them at all. Not that these characters were interesting at all to begin with. Very flat and boring characters. Bad acting and very bat material.

Which brings me to the script. The script itself was very bad as well. An example. One of Arthurs friends is laying on the floor in a building. The guys son comes in and pretends to work there. The king puts a knife to the throat of Arthurs friend. Arthur comes in and puts a knife to the throat of one of the soldiers in the kings army. Arthur is standing in the doorway and the kid is there with him. Arthur has a knife to the soldiers throat because the king has a knife to his friends throat. The king then slits his friends throat... and Arthur lets the soldier go? Why? It makes now sense at all. Another thing, every single "action" scene in this movie, and there are very few of those, are cut short by editing or just plain and simple very bad directing by Guy Ritchie. The camera angle and everything is just s#!t almost every single time. Everything interesting in this movie is cut short because of s#!tty directing.

There is a moment in the movie where Arthur has to go to the shadow lands, or some s#!t like that (i don't remember the name), to... well i don't know why exactly it was but i recall it being about him connecting better to the sword or something. Anyway he goes to she shadow lands and its like a big deal that he is going there because its supposedly very dangerous. He goes there and the director gives us about a minute to see all the amazing creatures Arthur fought, now mind you.. we don't actually see him fighting any of them, he just shows us clips and cuts and then in one minute hes back from the dreadful shadow lands and we saw nothing of it and he is no closer to the sword than he was when he went in there...

I can write for another hour but in conclusion the best thing about the movie is Eric Bana and he dies after 5 minutes so...

Worst movie iv'e seen of the year.

ps. And you can't have a king Arthur film without Merlin.. I mean what is that?

Read more IMDb reviews

448 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment