![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alfvaenWell, we ended up not seeing any of the three movies I had been thinking of. You see, we went to the White Spot for my birthday dinner, and they had a "dinner & a movie" deal, but only for Cineplex Odeon. "The Terminal" was the only one of the three that was playing there, and it was on at 6:30; we didn't manage to make it. So we went to "King Arthur" at 7:00 instead.
I had been mildly curious about it, but it obviously wasn't at the top of my list. I was pleasantly surprised, though. It made some attempt at historical accuracy, as much as it can when the whole subject is open for speculation. It was hard to believe that the original Knights of the Round Table were mostly impressed Sarmatians, horsemen from the other end of Europe, but apparently there is some historical evidence for it. (See, for example, this article, "Sarmatian-Magyar connection and the Holy Grail", which I found by a quick Google search for "Sarmatian knight".)
I wasn't sure about the British natives("woads", they called them in the movie)learning how to use trebuchets to fire flaming ammunition--maybe they just didn't show us the accidents where they set themselves on fire? Or Keira Knightley as Guinevere dressed in that bizarre leather outfit. But for all I know those are all historical too. In any case, while it certainly has its share of battle scenes, it also has quite well-written dialogue. While most of the characters(even the Sarmatians)speak with British accents, I was amused to note that the Romans themselves were given Italian accents. And there was a great battle scene on a frozen lake. And, most importantly, only the barest hints of the hoary old L-G-A love triangle.
All in all, it seems sort of like the British version of one of those American pseudo-historical patriotic epics. But aside from that there's no comparison between that and "The Patriot". It's interesting to think that the "Matter of Britain", the whole tale of King Arthur and the Knights, would have that kind of resonance. I mean, they don't make epic movies and miniseries about the English Civil War, do they? Or the War of the Roses? Okay, maybe they do, and we just don't see them... But those don't possess the same resonance as King Arthur, because those are about two sides, probably both just as objectionable, whereas King Arthur is more about order vs. chaos.
In other birthday news... Though Nicole did get me the expected gift(for both of us)of a season on DVD, it wasn't Buffy Season 5, but Angel Season 1. So that sould be interesting...there had been a few Angel crossovers with Buffy Season 4, and apparently a few the other way as well. I'd been reading bits of some Angel episode summaries, and it sounded intriguing. It will be sad to leave the ol' Buffy crew behind for a while, though.
We watched the last Season 4 episode, "Restless", after coming home from the movie. That was a hoot--I loved the surreal dream scenes, especially the weird guy with the cheese who inexplcably showed up in everyone's dream. (Maybe Joss explains that one in the episode commentary.) It was an odd choice for a season-ender, but in the "Season 4 summary" they said that they didn't want to end on the same action-packed two-parter as they had in the last two seasons. Knowing a little bit about the origins of Buffy's "sister" Dawn, I was wondering if that would happen at the end of the season or not--apparently not, despite the few tantalizing references to "little sister" in earlier dream sequences, and to "dawn" in this one.
But I guess soon we'll get to find out what Angel, Cordelia, and Wesley have been up to instead. At this point I'm beginning to trust Joss won't let us down. (This is probably the state of mind where most people started watching "Firefly"...)
I had been mildly curious about it, but it obviously wasn't at the top of my list. I was pleasantly surprised, though. It made some attempt at historical accuracy, as much as it can when the whole subject is open for speculation. It was hard to believe that the original Knights of the Round Table were mostly impressed Sarmatians, horsemen from the other end of Europe, but apparently there is some historical evidence for it. (See, for example, this article, "Sarmatian-Magyar connection and the Holy Grail", which I found by a quick Google search for "Sarmatian knight".)
I wasn't sure about the British natives("woads", they called them in the movie)learning how to use trebuchets to fire flaming ammunition--maybe they just didn't show us the accidents where they set themselves on fire? Or Keira Knightley as Guinevere dressed in that bizarre leather outfit. But for all I know those are all historical too. In any case, while it certainly has its share of battle scenes, it also has quite well-written dialogue. While most of the characters(even the Sarmatians)speak with British accents, I was amused to note that the Romans themselves were given Italian accents. And there was a great battle scene on a frozen lake. And, most importantly, only the barest hints of the hoary old L-G-A love triangle.
All in all, it seems sort of like the British version of one of those American pseudo-historical patriotic epics. But aside from that there's no comparison between that and "The Patriot". It's interesting to think that the "Matter of Britain", the whole tale of King Arthur and the Knights, would have that kind of resonance. I mean, they don't make epic movies and miniseries about the English Civil War, do they? Or the War of the Roses? Okay, maybe they do, and we just don't see them... But those don't possess the same resonance as King Arthur, because those are about two sides, probably both just as objectionable, whereas King Arthur is more about order vs. chaos.
In other birthday news... Though Nicole did get me the expected gift(for both of us)of a season on DVD, it wasn't Buffy Season 5, but Angel Season 1. So that sould be interesting...there had been a few Angel crossovers with Buffy Season 4, and apparently a few the other way as well. I'd been reading bits of some Angel episode summaries, and it sounded intriguing. It will be sad to leave the ol' Buffy crew behind for a while, though.
We watched the last Season 4 episode, "Restless", after coming home from the movie. That was a hoot--I loved the surreal dream scenes, especially the weird guy with the cheese who inexplcably showed up in everyone's dream. (Maybe Joss explains that one in the episode commentary.) It was an odd choice for a season-ender, but in the "Season 4 summary" they said that they didn't want to end on the same action-packed two-parter as they had in the last two seasons. Knowing a little bit about the origins of Buffy's "sister" Dawn, I was wondering if that would happen at the end of the season or not--apparently not, despite the few tantalizing references to "little sister" in earlier dream sequences, and to "dawn" in this one.
But I guess soon we'll get to find out what Angel, Cordelia, and Wesley have been up to instead. At this point I'm beginning to trust Joss won't let us down. (This is probably the state of mind where most people started watching "Firefly"...)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-15 07:51 am (UTC)[Smacking forehead]
Now there's an idea: a big-budget film about the English Civil War emphasizing what a lousy cure for decadence fundamentalism really is. With Oliver Cromwell's battles in Ireland as a metaphor for the war in Iraq. OooOOoo.
no subject
Date: 2004-07-15 02:49 pm (UTC)This is probably more than you wanted to know. Sorry. [Insert Chevyn quote about "tentmakers" here.]