Arthur Unappreciation Thread 7
Sum1's intro from the first thread:
The show's Arthur is its weak point. Weak, bland, ineffectual, totally lacking any hint of the epic hero. Granted they wanted to try a new take on Arthur, but this doesn't work, because we can't believe that he IS Arthur. Certainly it's plausible for Arthur to start out less impressive than he was in legend, but to be Arthur he still needs the potential to be great, and I get no hint of great potential off this Arthur. He comes off like he could never have become anything much. Admittedly, he does a great job holding off the enemy at the end of the show, but he still overall comes off like a man lacking any potential for greatness. Not only is this Arthur unimpressive, but I also find him not very relatable as well as totally uninteresting. In a show with fascinating versions of Merlin and Morgan this boringness really stands out. Clearly the showmakers had revisionist intent in making this Arthur, but it backfired badly. I suspect they wanted to duplicate the marvellous unconventional Henry VIII of the Tudors, a show which certain of them were involved in. But that success depended on the unique talents of Jonathan Rhys Meyers. Actors like that don't come along too often. This Arthur suffers not only by comparison with Meyers' Henry, but also by comparison with BBC Merlin's Arthur, who is likable, impressive and relatable. There have been many bad Arthurs onscreen (one only has to think of the dreadful Arthur in the 1998 Merlin minseries), but Camelot's Arthur is possibly the worst.
Arthur haters list~
sum1
Jenny's Dimple
cap'n cook
Against_all_odds
Past threads:
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...read-63025692/
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...-2-a-63076264/
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...-3-a-63097894/
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...2/index20.html
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...6/index20.html
http://www.fanforum.com/f366/arthur-...7/index21.html |
