King Arthur
EDITORS
LEAD EDITOR:
Scooby
Send me news!
E-mail me!
ASSISTING:
No one yet!
(Wanna help out?)
GOT INFO?
REGISTERIT'S FREE!
Register Now!
RECEIVE custom news
TRACK your favorites
BUILD your fan profile
POST messages
LOGIN | SIGN UP TODAY
THIS WEEK
? Nothing Scheduled
MORE
NEXT WEEK
Brothers(12/04)
The Lovely Bones(12/11)
The Princess and the Frog(12/11)
MORE
King Arthur
New Post Chat - Coming Soon! Submit Info Write Review Track This
BOARD
Home
  King Arthur Forum
NEW POST
REPLY
Who's Here? None in this thread. 55 users total online. Moderators: Nobody yet!.
Arthur 2004 historical.....not!
falcoperegrinus
Member

Tampa,FL
POSTS: 1
MEMBER SINCE: 2004-03-21 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
POSTED Sunday , March 21, 2004 02:55:17 PM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
I just viewed the trailer and while it looks like a fun movie in and of itself, from what i've seen its historical basis is off.

1. Armor of that period was of the cheap kind because the roman empire as a whole was in decline. The famous lorica segmata (Plate armor) that you see so much of was simply not in use at that time. Leather armor was in limited use because it was simply not as effective as metal. Lorica hamata and lorica plumata (scale and chain mail were the main forms of armor, with scale taking presidence because it was so much cheaper to make and easy to repair. (Whole towns had to make chain mail).
2. The roman identiy was blurred at this time. most romans went back to italy after the saxon mercenary uprisings (which led to the invasions that arthur fought off).
3. Celtic, pict, welsh, scots were all supposidy united along with remaining romans and their celtic allies (known as romano-britons). It is hard for me to believe that a pure blood roman could unite the very peoples that they brought the anglo-saxon mercenaries in to get rid of in the first place.
4. not even the sword depicted is correct. Swords with cross guards like the one pictured is more accurate for 14th medieval europe than 6th c britain. Arthur if he was a romano britian would most likely have been using a spatha (late roman cavalry sword).
5. there was no merlin, guineveire, knights of the round table or even excaliber (which has its basis in the myths from brittany) in the historical record. All those things were added in the 14thc in morte arthur.

Yes i know this is just a movie and is suppose to be fun, just don't advertise it's histroically correct if it is as off as this one is. I just hoped it is a good action movie to watch at least.

oh well ....they can never seem to get these "historically accurate" movies to live up to it. (Don't even get me started on Joan of Arc).
One that did come close: Braveheart (although kilts were not used at that time and the battles potrayed were way off - stirling happened at a bridge)

Edit Edit  Reply w/quote Reply w/quote
PyroGurl
Member

Aggieland/ATX
POSTS: 10649
MEMBER SINCE: 2003-05-17 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:19:26 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
I know exactly what you mean by all that stuff because we're studying it in English right now, but they make it inaccurate because then people wouldn't really think of it as an Arthur story. You know? When someone mentions Arthur, people usually think of Camelot, etc.. You don't really want to change what everyone thinks. And no offense or anything, but not many people really care about all the historical stuff.



Pyromaniac X-Chick
Member #14 of the Pervy Hobbit Fanciers Guild
Member #2 of the Pervy Elf Fanciers Guild
Noosemaker of the Institution
edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
Silvrswt
Member

Mobile,AL
POSTS: 2
MEMBER SINCE: 2004-07-01 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Thursday, July 01, 2004 02:44:02 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
I couldn't agree more with everything that is being said (disregarding the first reply). I have just created a post about little anachronisms thta I have noticed. It's irritating to see a movie propogated as "the real story" and so blatantley mis managed.

edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
PyroGurl
Member

Aggieland/ATX
POSTS: 10649
MEMBER SINCE: 2003-05-17 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Saturday, July 03, 2004 12:44:23 PM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
Silvrswt said:

I couldn't agree more with everything that is being said (disregarding the first reply). I have just created a post about little anachronisms thta I have noticed. It's irritating to see a movie propogated as "the real story" and so blatantley mis managed.


You can't just say this is not a real story though. No one really knows the real story. This movie is just based on what some people think that happened. Don't tear apart the movie if you don't know what happened. It's just a movie. For people's enjoyment.



Pyromaniac X-Chick
Member #14 of the Pervy Hobbit Fanciers Guild
Member #2 of the Pervy Elf Fanciers Guild
Noosemaker of the Institution
edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
Crimson Canadian
Member

Airdrie,ab
POSTS: 427
MEMBER SINCE: 2004-02-26 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Monday , July 05, 2004 01:52:29 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
I agree with Pyrogurl, it is a just a movie who's purpose is for entertainment rather than being a historical documentary.



edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
zoodlepuff
Member

G-Town,in
POSTS: 8
MEMBER SINCE: 2004-09-16 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Monday , January 03, 2005 03:39:08 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
besides, how can it REALLY be fully correct? i mean, its not like anyone really knows exactly what happened...arthur may not have even existed! there are hundreds of different stories on king arthur, but they are just stories, STORIEs...myths...they are not real, and it doesnt have to be. it would have been nice if they had tried to strive for the real thing, but how can you blame them if they failed? i mean, could YOU have made a better movie? if all it took to make a good movie was being historically correct, then i would be a brilliant fil maker. the problem is that you need mor ethan that, and i think that the peopel who made king arthur realised that.

" Sometimes the truth just aint enough, or it's too much in times like this. Lets throw the truth away, we'll find it in this kiss "
edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
NightWolverin
e007
Member

Bangkok
POSTS: 17727
MEMBER SINCE: 2003-08-11 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Monday , January 03, 2005 05:32:32 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
I absolutely hate documentaries! I just hate 'em! Well ... except for animals, birds, fishes and insect, by the way.

NightWolverine007

The Howling X-Stud
edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
Jonesmikeman
Member

CYMRU/WALES!!!
POSTS: 10810
MEMBER SINCE: 2004-09-21 		READ MY PROFILE
ADD TO FRIENDS
VOTE FOR ME
E-MAIL ME
REPLIED Monday , January 03, 2005 06:14:36 AM Delete post? (Moderator ONLY)
Take it from someone who lives in the UK,

There is evidence of Arthur and his knights' existence but nothing had been 100% yet.

The Doctor: Even the monsters under your bed have nightmares...
Reinette: What do monsters have nightmares about?
The Doctor: Me!
100% Welsh Spider-Man and Dr Who fan.
"He looks like a man... But he's a legend... And he's called 'The Doctor'."
edit Edit reply w/quote Reply w/Quote
NEW POST REPLY
CountingDown.com © 1998-2006. All Rights Reserved.
BACK TO TOP Learn more about us. Read our terms & conditions, and our privacy policy.
Want to contact us? Click here. Lost? Try the site map.