Iam with jayseelan in Delhi and he was repeatedly saying we should watch this movie King Arthur. I was like Iam sure you wtached it atleast 4 times before you have asked me to watch it with you. He was like oh yeah how did you know ?!
I was Watching this movie last night and was literally enthralled by the dialogues and the script and the background music and what not. It was a totally gr8 movie. The way it was picturised was stupendible, the locations were soo suitable and perfect. Ofcourse not to mention to story and screen play. Lancelot, Bors, Tristan, Gawain, Galahad and Dagonet form the order of the samaritan knights protecting the Hadrian wall protecting the Roman ruled Britan from the woads and they now are going to be free. While the debate of a peaceful Rome and the religion is debated widely in the film though not direct its a film I cherish watching again and again.
Wikipedia calls it a fabled story and the historicity is debataed till date. But what so ever is the historicity but a king of such stature and dignity is what if he is a legend only by fable and myth is welcome to set an example to the current day administrators.
The historicity of the King Arthur legend has long been debated by scholars. One school of thought, based on references in the Historia Brittonum and Annales Cambriae, would see Arthur as a shadowy historical figure, a Romano-British leader fighting against the invading Anglo-Saxons sometime in the late 5th to early 6th century. The Historia Brittonum (“History of the Britons”), a 9th century Latin historical compilation attributed to the Welsh cleric Nennius, gives a list of twelve battles fought by Arthur, culminating in the Battle of Mons Badonicus, where he is said to have single-handedly killed 960 men. The 10th century Annales Cambriae (“Welsh Annals”), dates this battle to 516, and also mentions the Battle of Camlann, in which Arthur and Medraut were both killed, dated to 537. Neither text refers to Arthur as a king, although this may not be significant as they often name kings without mentioning their title. The Historia Brittonum calls him dux bellorum or “dux (commander) of battles”.