King Arthur: Jerry Bruckheimer corrects historians

Is that the one where King Arthur fights crime with the help of a talking car? :wink:

I’d be surprised if this new movie is as bad as First Knight. That movie was a steaming pile with partially digested grass and a swarm of flies. Besides, this one has Merlin as a screaming loony. I always knew Merlin was a screaming loony when Arthur wasn’t around.

Excaliber was a fairly decent movie. It taught me that wearing platemail during love making was their version of safe sex. Now I don’t go anywhere without my codpiece.


King Arthur to young Thomas Malory:

– T.H. White

(Total hijack)

Everything I know about the Real Arthur comes from Rosemary Sutcliff’s book The Lantern Bearers, (very excellent book) and I can’t remember whether it was Ambrosius or Artos who became the foundation for the Arthurian legend. Ambrosius became high king, but Artos had the name…

Gildas, the only historian who wrote about Britain who would have lived during the time of Arthur, mentioned non names but refers (very negatively) to a chariot driving warlord who most believe is Arthur. Gildas called him “the Bear”, which in most Brittanic Celt dialects was “Arto”.
Ambrosius Aurelianus probably existed in some capacity a generation before the one we generally ascribe to Arthur. Geoffrey Ashe for a time believed in the historicity of Arthur as a Celtic warlord (who was as Roman as he remembered how to be) in the late fifth/early sixth century, then identified him and Ambrosius as the same person for a while, and now identifies Arthur with Riothamus (a complete about-face from his earlier views) and Ambrosius as a later (not earlier) figure.

The best web site on Arthurian history and legend is the Camelot Project at the University of Rochester (NY). It contains reproductions of a lot of the primary sources and medeival/Victorian poems.

Yeah, I kinda lost respect for Ashe when he went that route. He made a powerful case in his earlier books that Arthur was, by definition, the Celtic warleader who won the victory at Badon, basically because no other warleader was given credit for it and if Arthur didn’t fight that battle, then who did? Then he comes up with this Riothamus shit and now we are left with that very question: if Arthur (or Riothamus) didn’t win the Battle of Mount Badon, then WHO DID? And why was that person forgotten?
Frankly, having examined the evidence, I am more inclined to believe Ashe’s earlier theory of Arthur as a sort of ad hoc Comes Brittaniorum than this new Arthur-as-Riothamus thing.

Right…this seals it. Forget Godwin’s Law, I now propose Briston’s Law: “As an online discussion about King Arthur grows longer, the probability of someone making Monty Python and the Holy Grail jokes approaches one.”

To be honest, I could care less if Jerry says the movie is based on the life and times of Bill Clinton. If the movie entertains me for two hours I’m not going to care. THis movie will be big, pretty, and full of 'splosions with a plot with many holes and historical inacuracies and that’s okay. It is directed by Antoine Fuqua who did an admirable job on Training Day and the writers have a decent enough resume as well (off the top of my head, Gladiator).

Although this movie may entertain, I do happen to agree that if you’re getting your history lessons from a movie, you’re in trouble.

Quoth C K Dexter Haven:

Why, oh why, didn’t I notice that before? The boy’s name is Thomas… Of course that’s Malory! Especially with all of the other references to Mort d’Arthur throughout White’s work.

Merlin’s Shop of Mystical Wonders?

Frankly, I’d be disappointed in my fellow denizens of the 'Net if it took more than a few posts to get to the Holy Grail jokes!

Thank you, I had successfully blotted that one from my memory until now. That movie was a world of pain!

So, how come no one’s mentioned Disney’s Sword in the Stone? :smiley:

What about the ninjas? There are ninjas in the movie, right? And the

What about the ninjas? There are ninjas in the movie, right? And the Scarlet Pimpernel? Right? :slight_smile:

That was funny.

But now I have a strange desire to change my name to little jerry.

Saw the preview for this again last night (it was before Hellboy).

I can’t decide whether or not the big orange gasoline-explosion fireballs will finally supplant Kevin Costner’s halfhearted pseudo-dialect in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves for top spot on the list of most irritating anachronisms in Big Hollywood Medieval Type Flicks. Depends on how many of them there are in the actual movie, I guess; if they did only a couple so they could stick them in the preview, that’s one thing, but if they’re all the way through the flick, the way Costner is, by necessity, a constant presence in Robin Hood, then we may have a new winner.

Oh, and whoever designed Keira Knightley’s costume is clearly familiar with the various skins SCA types have created for their Sims characters. :wink:

Sir, you owe me one keyboard.

(Ahh, the flying kitty of fury.)

reads all preceding posts…

Bloody peasants!