King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

[kyle]

Originally Posted by mpengle

I just checked Bull Moose right now for this and it shows available in store only.... Sigh

Th problem is that in the US it's a Warner Archive title and in the U.K. It's just a general release.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mpengle]

Originally Posted by kyle

Th problem is that in the US it's a Warner Archive title and in the U.K. It's just a general release.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Your reply makes no sense to me... Bull Moose ships other Archive titles, why would this one be different?

[ScarredLungs]

Recently I have been around a handful of people, all of which enjoyed this movie. I thought it was random how often this movie has come up over the past week.

I am becoming more interested to see how this turned out.

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by hariseldon

Irrelevant on several fronts -- King Arthur isn't an Archive release to begin with. It's a standard Warner title.

Correct, King Arthur Legend of Sword 3D is a regular Warner release. It just has a high retail price.

[Shallow_]

Originally Posted by Blu-RayFanatic

why don't these studios get it? If we have upgraded our TVs (or projectors) to 4K because we are major cinema lvers why do we have to CHOOSE between 3D and 4K??? Put these in the same release? it would probably even be cheaper for the studio as then they would produce only 2 bluray versions versus 3 (4k, 3D and regular blu). I just don't get it.

Probably because if they had both in one package and charged a fair price for it, even more ppl then already do would bit.h about the price, plus you would have all the 3d only and 4k only buyes complaining that they are 'forced' to buy something they dont want, AND pay extra for it..

I think it would suffice with one version including all formas

[kyle]

This site used to list the 3D as a Warner Arvice release—looks like they've changed that. All I was saying was that would explain the high MSRP and tiny discount. I have no explanation then why it's not the typical $28 or so. I'll likely just order the 3D/4K combo from France if I have to spend that much.

[sandman slim]

Free to a good home:

B26K9Y4QMH9T

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by sandman slim

Free to a good home:

B26K9Y4QMH9T

Thank you! Leaving feedback

[imsounoriginal]

Review is up, it is not kind to the movie lol -- https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/King-...179503/#Review

[wormraper]

I actually really liked it. As long as you don't go in expecting a traditional King Arthur story it's a lot of fun IMO

[Sindur]

sounds like the reviewer wasn't even interested in this movie to begin with..I guess he must have been the only person available to review it

[levcore]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Review is up, it is not kind to the movie lol -- https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/King-...179503/#Review

1.5 out of 5 is absolutely insane for this movie. It's a fantastic movie, I cant believe that rating.

[cgpublic]

From the blu-ray.com review:

"Every so often, Ritchie and Wigram throw in a reminder of the authentic Arthurian legend so memorably depicted in John Boorman's Excalibur, as if to remind themselves and the audience that they're supposed to be retelling a classic."

When a reviewer takes exception to the approach by a director, i.e., Guy Ritchie stylizing King Arthur to match his style, and not adapting his style to the correct style, tone or approach as perceived by the reviewer, you have a conflict.

Which is fine. If you are a fan of John Boorman's Excalibur and expect a similar style, tone or approach because you believe that's the only way to tell the tale, you're probably going to be disappointed. If you are a fan of Guy Richie's films and related style, perhaps, or perhaps not. Personally, I'm not a big fan of Excalibur, so the review is diminished somewhat by the admission. Not a bad film, not a great film, and certainly not interested in re-make/re-boot.

Reviewers find it easy to take shots at Ritchie because he does put himself before the subject. We get it. I haven't seen King Arthur, but I have an open mind and will take it as comes, or not, once the price drops.

[rickah88]

While I very much appreciate the reviewers of this site, as they all do a great job...I'm also very appreciative of the fact that long ago I made the decision to be my own reviewer.

[Raikou87]

I just received my 2 copies from Best Buy and neither had the slip. I usually order more than one of an item when it comes to BBY because they tend to ship in cheap, thin cardboard mailers that end up damaging the slips. Anyone else order 3D and had the slip? Where did you order from? $37.99 and no slip? Come on, really?

[animefan77]

I thought this movie was very enjoyable, fun movie.

Will definitely get the 3D version when it gets cheaper. Would have bought it if it was $30 with tax, but not paying $40 for single movie (if it was packaged with 4k like the Kong, I might have bought it)

But seriously, who goes to Guy Ritchie movie and expect movie like John Boorman's Excalibur(which I love). I like that its trying something different. If I want to see another Excalibur movie, ill just rewatch the Excalibur.

Good movie, good 3D. I'll definitely buy once its on sale.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by levcore

1.5 out of 5 is absolutely insane for this movie. It's a fantastic movie, I cant believe that rating.

"King Arthur's ramshackle mythology is so poorly explained that it's frequently unclear who Arthur's real enemy is."

I thought it was pretty obvious from the start of the movie that his enemy is Jude Law....

Originally Posted by Raikou87

I just received my 2 copies from Best Buy and neither had the slip. I usually order more than one of an item when it comes to BBY because they tend to ship in cheap, thin cardboard mailers that end up damaging the slips. Anyone else order 3D and had the slip? Where did you order from? $37.99 and no slip? Come on, really?

Warners isn't doing slips for 3D Blus anymore. Kong 3D didn't have one, and neither will Wonder Woman 3D.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

"King Arthur's ramshackle mythology is so poorly explained that it's frequently unclear who Arthur's real enemy is."

I thought it was pretty obvious from the start of the movie that his enemy is Jude Law....



Warners isn't doing slips for 3D Blus anymore. Kong 3D didn't have one, and neither will Wonder Woman 3D.

It's reviewer herd mentality. If something flopped then it must be bad is the thinking. That and a clear bias against the movie from the off.

[BLMN]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

Warners isn't doing slips for 3D Blus anymore. Kong 3D didn't have one, and neither will Wonder Woman 3D.

its all about cutting the expenses and maximizing the profit with 3D.

[imsounoriginal]

Originally Posted by levcore

It's reviewer herd mentality. If something flopped then it must be bad is the thinking. That and a clear bias against the movie from the off.

Yeah I'm not saying it's a misunderstood masterpiece or anything, but it's a perfectly adequate fantasy-action flick. If you want muddled storytelling with terribly defined characters and actual confusion as to who the villain of the movie is, check out Suicide Squad lol