I'd have to say the movie seemed historically accurate enough to me. Costumes, scenery and everything all seemed pretty spot on to me. A couple things I certainly thought were accurate was Rome's reluctance to let Arthur and his men go, and Marius's treatment of the pagans. I may not be an expert on the period, but my knowledge from various history classes has taught me that Rome and the Church were total bastards. And they certainly weren't very accepting of others faiths. I guess the only thing I can think of that didn't seem authentic was the lack of traditional looking knights, in the full armor? I was under the impression Arthur and his men were meant to look more like that; but given that they were servants of Rome for the majority of the film I suppose that makes sense.
Also not sure how I feel about Arthur being a Roman soldier, for that matter- I guess that's probably more realistic than him being chosen by a sword in a stone to be the destined king of England and all that, but this is certainly the first time I've ever heard the notion that he fought for Rome at one point in his life. All in all it was an okay movie, probably more realistic than the typical Arthurian legend, but definitely less interesting. (Seriously, give me dragons over Romans any day.)
No comments:
Post a Comment