naguguluhan ako sa storya. ang konti ng knights ni arthur, tapos namatay si lancelot?, magkasing tanda lang sila ng mga knights nila arthur? , oh well siguro kakapanood ko ng "first knight" (sean connery, richard gere ) :D
mababaw yung story... sabagay, yung story was supposed to be the "real" king arthur and not the king arthur of legend.
the battlescenes are not that great compared to say... LOTR 2 or LOTR3, or Gladiator (w/ Russel Crowe), or Braveheart, or the Patriot (both with Mel Gibson). mas oks pa yung battlescenes sa Joan of Arc (w/ Mila Jovovich) :D
oks lang yung chick.... pero liv tyler pa rin ako :D
By the way, could someone please refresh my memory... ano yung country na pinanggalingan nung knights?
I think its fictitious. If it is, why not embellish the story more. Besides, AFAIK, the only thing confirmed about Artorius is that he's Roman. As to his deeds and everything else, no one knows for sure.
The knights were from Sarmatia. They were sons (or grandsons) of the legendary warriors from that land. The warriors' lives were spared by the Romans since they were fascinated by their fighting skills and determination. As an agreement, their sons and the sons of their sons, will serve in the Roman Empire as knights for 15 years ... assigned to wherever.
Arthur, in the story, was a the son of a Roman (assigned in Britain) and a Briton (syempre babae).
That was the part of the story I understood until Guinevere came into the picture ... everything was a blur and I was drooling. I think I'll have to watch it again.
ako naman I liked it. maybe because i expected a really crappy movie and set my expectations really low hehehe
kulang though sa development yung friendship ni lancelot and arthur