More than just a fling?

“But then, to my utter astonishment, what Will ended up saying to me instead was, ‘It doesn’t explain what’s going on between me and you.” (Page 116)

This scene, the two are trying to explain this odd connection between them and begin exploring what they’re actually suppose to be doing. Knowing that the Lady of Shalott and King Arthur never meet (according to legend,) this is a question I found myself asking too! Why is there a dramatic connection between Ellie and Will? 

Infant Grown Man

On pg. 328 when Merlin's mother was weeping to him about how she was doomed to die was very powerful and I felt truly saddened by her ordeal... until Merlin, WHO IS ONLY 9 MONTHS OLD, had this to say to reassure his mother. "Dear mother, do not be afraid; you will never die on my account." 

Merlin's mom reaction: 

Who Would Win: A Hollywood Film vs One Historically Uninformed College Kid

I had several questions while watching the 2004 film King Arthur. About twenty minutes into the film, I thought, "Wait a minute, didn't the Roman empire fall by now? Didn't the so-called Dark Ages happen after the Roman empire fall?" Either way, they’re there, and as far as I know, their soldiers are dressed as they would have been historically. I have no clue how they did with the Saxons on the historical accuracy front, but for practical reasons I wonder about the Saxons’ loose hair. It makes them look cool, but if they’re constantly itching for a fight, shouldn’t they tie it back or cut it short? Then there are the Woads. Are the Woads the same as the Celts? If so, then as far as I know, the film’s depiction is historically accurate (blue body paint, questionable leather armor, both men and women in combat), though I still wonder how they managed not to get stabbed more often without a lot of protection during battle.

Regarding Arthur and his knights, I was surprised they let Guinevere be one of their archers. They’re Roman-trained, so shouldn’t they balk at women who want to fight? “A woman? Fighting alongside us? Does she think we’re Woads?” Speaking of Guin, when she first showed up in her archery outfit, I thought, “elf.” That flowing dress/robe could get caught on something, and I don’t know where or how she got all that fabric. Wouldn’t it have been expensive to get that much? Either way, said fabric looks too light for winter. Later she adds a cloak, but she still could be warmer, and maybe have armor. At least she eventually ties her hair back for battle. Also, I doubt hygiene, nutrition, and cosmetics back then were advanced enough to make anyone as pretty as Guinevere and Alecto.

Another question: did Briton brides dress like that? The white dress and veil are traditional for us today, but was it for them? Or are those traditions more recent and from elsewhere? Also, again: where and how did they get all that fabric?

"Go all out. It's my wedding." -Guinevere, probably

Image from Harvey Furnishing's web site.

Quest 1: King Arthur's Failed Quest for Identity

King Arthur (2004) is in a word— confused. Filmmakers have every right to take creative liberties with their storylines, costuming, and language; however, Anronie Fuqua takes artistic rewrite to an extreme. The movie opens in the same manner as almost every historical documentary does, pertinent information to orient the audience is (way too quickly) displayed on the screen along with some visually appealing maps. Rather than providing any historical credibility, this merely makes King Arthur look like a sad wannabe History Channel failure.

Going into my viewing, I knew Kira Knightley’s clothes would be interesting, but my expectations were beyond exceeded. The first outfit Guinevere, Knightley’s character, models appears as if it was stolen off the set of Pride and Prejudice (2005) with the sleeves being altered to look period-appropriate. Throw on a belt and magically the dress is no longer Regency Era but rather ready for King Arthur. Things progressed to get even better when Knightley swaps her blue dress for a war uniform: making Knightley into a female version of a 300 Spartan. Despite being released 3 years prior to 300, several tropes are similar between the film, but in King Arthur they feel out of place. Knightley’s clothing isn't the only element of the movie that is reminiscent of the 2007 war drama, Arthur’s knights also appear as if they should be fighting in that different war and era. The mentality of the war Arthur and the knights must fight follows a similar ideology of 300: 8 knights against an army of 200.

 

The language is one of the aspects of the movie I had the most questions about, particularly the humor and grammar. Sadly, I have yet to study Middle English, but some of the contractions such as “you’re” and “isn't” felt inaccurate. Certain jokes were definitely written for a modern audience’s entertainment, rather than to add historical authority. Quips like Knightley's “don't worry I won't let them rape you” in retort to a sly comment by Lancelot is an example of more modern, confident teasing. 

Overall, King Arthur felt as if it was not rooted in any one identity but in a mix of different tropes and themes.