Helmets, Ice, and Keira Knightley

The movie King Arthur gave great insight into the story of King Arthur; however, some components of the movie seemed to be historically inaccurate.  First, throughout the film, the Knights do not wear helmets. It is strange that the Knights wear full body armor but no helmets even during the battle scenes. I image that a Knight would want to wear a helmet since the head is one of the most vulnerable parts of the body. Only during the final battle at the end of the movie do that Knights wear helmets. Second, the scene where one of the Knights breaks the thick ice on top of a lake with an ax so that the Saxons fall in seems impossible. Although the weight from the Knights and the Saxons walking across the lake may have weakened the ice a single person with an ax could not cause a massive break in the ice that all of the Saxons would fall into because the ice was too thick. Finally, Keira Knightley's outfits throughout the movie do not fit the period in which the movie takes place. I image that women during that period wore many layers of clothing that included corsets, petticoats, and tunics especially since the story takes place during the winter. However, Keir Knightley wears an ill-fitting dress that lacked layers and is reveling. The outfit she wears during the final battle is the most ridiculous because it barely covers her private parts. In an actual battle, Keir Knightley could have died because a sword could easily puncture her exposed skin. Overall, I gained some background information about King Arthur from the movie, but I wish that it was more historically accurate.