King Arthur Tagged Articles at Cinematical
Bryan Singer and Warner Bros Redraw 'Excalibur' From the Stone
Filed under: Action », Classics », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Deals », Warner Brothers », DIY/Filmmaking », Newsstand », Remakes and Sequels »
It would seem the Lady in the Lake has found another group of knights to wield Excalibur -- or at least John Boorman's version of it. Variety reports that Warner Bros and Bryan Singer have finally won the rights to Boorman's Excalibur, and are set to remake the 1981 film. Singer is on board to produce, but may decide to don his directing armor, and lead the charge himself.I find this to be rather perplexing. Boorman's film was based on the "definitive" medieval Arthur tale, Morte d'Arthur and was simply adapted by the director and Rospo Boorman. It departs from the original in a few trippy and sexy ways, but it stays relatively close to the original text. It's been a long time since I've seen it, and it always has a horrible fever dream quality for me, so I may be remembering poorly. Frankly, I just remember Gabriel Byrne not bothering to take off his chainmail before sexing it up with Igraine, and that Lancelot wore nothing under his armor.
So why not just, you know, write a new adaptation of Morte d'Arthur? An insistance on obtaining Boorman's film rights suggests nothing more than a shot by shot remake which is silly. There's plenty of sex, violence, and fantasy to be wrung out of the original Arthur legends. The whole myth has been begging for someone to tackle it, and bring a Pre-Raphaelite version (only R rated!) to life instead of another dull "Here's the true story behind the Arthur legend" film. I'd criticize more harshly, but frankly I'm just perplexed by anyone who opts to remake rather than return to the source material.
John Woo Packing a Large 'Caliber'
Filed under: Action », Independent », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Deals », Newsstand », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Western »
There is a real trend of King Arthur revisionism lately -- first there was Galahad, then Brian K. Vaughn's Roundtable, and now John Woo is taking a crack at it with Caliber. Variety reports that the rights to the series have been snatched up by Johnny Depp's Infinitum Nihil, Barry Levine's Radical Comics (also the book's publisher), and Woo's Lion Rock.Caliber sets King Arthur firmly into the American Old West, which is rather fitting, since as a location it's nearly as mythical as Camelot. Arthur is given Caliber, a tattooed six-shooter (how do you tattoo a gun?) given to him by the Native Americans. It's no ordinary gun, as it's never loaded with bullets. Only a man with Justice on his side can fire it, at which point it shoots lightning. Accompanying him through the Pacific Northwest are the The Knights of the Round Table, all noble gunslingers, bound by a code of honor to protect the weak and defend the innocent. I guess they have to carry regular guns, though. I can't find an online preview of the comic for you, unfortunately, so we'll just have to hope a Cinematical reader out there can fill us in on the first issue. It certainly has a pretty cover, but I'm not sold on the premise yet.
Brian K. Vaughan Sells 'Roundtable' to DreamWorks
Filed under: Action », Comedy », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Deals », Scripts », Newsstand », Dreamworks », Comic/Superhero/Geek »
According to The Hollywood Reporter, DreamWorks has emerged the victor in a heated bidding war for Bryan K. Vaughan's Roundtable. It seems many studios were desperate to get their hands on his spec, and no wonder -- he is arguably the hottest writer on the market these days. And I have to say, Roundtable sounds like one heck of an idea, and I am usually very dismissive of King Arthur revisionism. Vaughan's take will be a supernatural comedy along the lines of Ghostbusters. It revolves around Merlin trying to assemble a group of modern day knights to battle an ancient evil, only to discover that they are sorely lacking in the 21st century. The only heroes he can find are washed up athletes, cowardly scientists, or Academy Award winning actors.
The comparison to Ghostbusters has me all wound up -- and even at this stage, it sounds much better than the latest spin on Arthur, Galahad. A comedic take strikes me as far more daring than trying to cast Queen Guinevere as a villain. And who knows? It could be the heir apparent to Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail. (Or is that just blasphemy to even utter?)
Perhaps I am just blinded by the talent of Vaughan. But I don't think this man has made a single misstep yet. Even his episodes of LOST are terrific. So I'll turn it over to your unbiased thoughts: Is Roundtable too ridiculous to be believed, or so crazy that it just might work?
Review: The Last Legion
Filed under: Action », Theatrical Reviews », The Weinstein Co. »

"Old-fashioned" would be a good way to describe the tastily vanilla-flavored The Last Legion. Packed as it is (to the rafters) with equal parts cliché, convention, stereotype and plain old predictability, the movie could also be described as campy, corny, goofy, and all sorts of painfully familiar. "Boring," however, it is not. Hearkening back to the days in which a new sword-swingin' matinee was available every weekend, the international co-production certainly doesn't tread any new ground -- and it's even quite silly in some spots -- but that doesn't stop it from delivering some good fun. (Who cares if some of that fun is of the "unintentional" variety? That makes it even more fun!)
Sort of a loose prequel to the King Arthur legend, The Last Legion focuses on a young Roman emperor who is kidnapped by an evil warlord and sent to an island fortress with his wizened old teacher, only to be rescued by a super-heroic warrior and a gang of colorful sidekicks -- one of whom is a stunningly beautiful (and amazingly deadly) woman. Toss in a few obvious-yet-kinetic action scenes, a whole bunch of floridly storybook-ish tendencies, and just enough colorful characters to keep the thing afloat, and you've got a perfectly watchable time-waster ... once it shows up on cable / DVD, that is.
Kirsten Dunst's Breasts Were An Issue With 'Spider-Man 3,' She Says
Filed under: Action », Drama », Sci-Fi & Fantasy », Casting », Sony », Comic/Superhero/Geek », Remakes and Sequels », War »
Despite the fact that we all pretty much saw her boobs in the first Spider-Man, Kirsten Dunst apparently had to make them look bigger for Spider-Man 3. She told The Sun that she had to wear a padded bra and that she had no problem doing so. She says she doesn't think it's sexist -- she actually "embraced" the bigger bosom -- and is fully aware that her character's chest is enhanced for the action figures. Of course, the practice of augmenting female features is nothing even remotely new, but it continues to be an issue worth mentioning. Just last week there was a lot of fuss over the posters for the IMAX 3-D version of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix because Emma "Hermione" Watson's breasts had been re-sized (Warner Bros. claims the poster was not authorized and it has since been removed from the Imax website). If you remember a few years back, a similar issue was brought up regarding Keira Knightley's cup size with the poster for King Arthur.
Dunst also told The Sun that her character helped her to grow in other areas. She says the role has helped her to become a better actress and is very glad that the character was written as more complex than she is depicted as in the comics. Dunst even states that she would like to continue playing Mary Jane, though only if Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire return with her for Spider-Man 4 (we already know she thinks it'd be a flop without them all). Finally, Dunst confirmed to The Sun that her next project is the Marla Ruzicka film, Sweet Relief, which we first heard about a year and a half ago (and heard a little more about a few weeks ago). While the actress cites the Spidey films as the most important so far in her growth as an actress, I imagine that this more-serious role will require her to grow even more if she actually hopes to do the real-life aid worker justice.









