By Matt Schwoebel (an amateur historical Arthur scholar/enthusiast)

Contact Me
See my complete profile

Friday, July 16, 2004

Historical Criticism of the Bruckheimer/Fuqua King Arthur Movie

 
The producers of King Arthur the film have portrayed it in the press as an accurate historical version of the Arthurian legend.  It is not.  In fact, it does not even come close to the majority scholarly opinion on the historical Arthur or of Dark Age Britain in general.  My critique of the film’s historical inaccuracy is listed as ten points below.  I have generally avoided commentary of a purely film-based review nature, except when plot points or characterizations are too historically inaccurate (or unbelievably prejudice) to avoid.           
 
Definition Note = History is based on literature, archaeology, and what can be reasonably inferred from these sources.  Legend is often based on some real event or person, but it can be difficult to tease out the truth from the fiction.  Myth is part of a culture’s folklore and old Pagan religious motifs.  In addition to the limited historical information on Arthur, there are numerous legendary works with many having mythical aspects added over the centuries.

Go To Historical Inaccuracies of King Arthur :: 1. Arthur's Knights

1 Comments:

Blogger Unknown said...

considering the legend of King Arthur was pure fiction - I'd say there's little point in debating it - the 'facts' is whatever you want to believe

December 6, 2014 at 9:33 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home