亚瑟与其他6位圆桌骑士，为罗马帝国效力15年之久的原因便是对于真正自由和平的企盼。而强大的罗马帝国在他们该获自由身的时候提出了附加的条件。赴一场得到自由之前必死的战役。
可控成本 罗马主教以上帝之名要求他们效忠。其实只是为了利益上的考虑牺牲掉他们。除去上帝之外，并无任何不利用的事情发生。即使是面对金子般纯洁的忠诚。
灵枢经脉篇
亚瑟王有平等和仁慈之心。所以觉察得到罗马主教的残忍。进而萌生出对自己忠于罗马之心的质疑。特拉基维尔询问亚瑟的话很犀利：亚瑟，你在不该勇猛之处勇猛，在不必厮杀之地厮杀，这是因为什么呢。亚瑟回答说：是为了那个罗马，虽然它已不复存在。特拉基维尔凝视着他，缓缓的说：你到底在害怕什么？
亚瑟的恐惧源自人对于世界的恐惧。恐惧希望本不存在之时，恐惧信仰崩塌的一刻。被亚瑟所深深痛恨的杀母仇人梅林曾这样告诉亚瑟：让你拔出那把王者之剑的，不是对我的恨，而是对你母亲的爱。亚瑟听完这些后，最终决定与黥面人联手对付到来的撒克逊人。只有爱
能给内心深处恐惧的英格兰之王以指引。
剧毒蛇女
圆桌骑士们曾说：这些杀戮在明日都会被看做一场噩梦。
但是每个部族的人们，都会拿起战斧，举起盾牌，世世代代循环往复必死的战役。他们均是以自由之名而赴死。或许可以怀疑这些英雄们所笃信的信仰和赖以生存的傲慢高贵的人格有这样那样的局限，说到底竟是人自身的矛盾。
终究会为了安全感而筑起城墙，终究会因为不满足而起攻掠之心。你方是为了永久的安宁，我方是为了有朝一日可以安宁。于是安宁对安宁，便是永无止息的荣誉之战。
这种纷争甚至没有办法可以阻止。并不是像十字军东征队伍里的巴里安当初那样，选择不插手这些纷争就能让事情变好。耶路撒冷之争只能在基督教的十字军奋力守城，让穆斯林的军队首领萨拉丁领教到基督教的尊严和不可摧毁之后，才能提出保佑人民安全撤出城池这种实为仁义却在战争中显得相对懦弱的请求。才有可能获得安宁。
驻村工作日志
连提出安宁的前提也是需要血与火的考验，人类注定要用最为真实残酷的方式检验自己对神性的向往和对希望的捍卫力量。总是不能在绵软懦弱的平和环境里相信自身可以做到不乱方寸。因为人类总不是个人意志，而是众人意志。一个人的安定，不足以影响所有人安定。反而会使一些人的不安定想法活动得更剧烈起来。
这不禁让人想到那个著名的好人理论。本身一个村子里都是坏人，他们每个人偷另一个人的东西，最后所有的人拥有的东西仍是一样多。所以这里安宁无事。直到有一天这里来了一个好人。他不偷东西。好人的东西越来越少，就有另一个人的东西越来越多。终于有一天，这个村子里出现了严重的混乱。
我倒觉得这个村子就是简化的人间。或者更浅显的说：严重混乱的村子就是人类自身不可避免的命运。
The legends of King Arthur and the Knights勇士 of the Round Table are so popular and accessible易受影响的 that they generate产生 a new motion picture every decade-or-so, e
ven though no single movie could ever hope to capture the scope of the entire Vulgate Cycle. King Arthur, from producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Antoine Fuqua (Training Day), is the latest re-invention, and the first Arthur movie since 1995's failed First Knight. (I'm not counting 1998's animated The Quest for Camelot, since it isn't really about the king.) Although intended to be rious, this tale of old Britain never convinces us of its straightforward intentions. Every chuckle and snicker heard in the theater comes at the expen of a stentorian line of dialogue or a deeply emotional moment. The term "unintentional comedy" was coined for a movie such as this. Yet King Arthur is too long and too full of itlf to offer more than a few fleeting moments of entertainment. It doesn't take long for tediousness to triumph.
The film gets off to a bad start when a title card asrts that historians have agreed that there is one man who inspired the tale of King Arthur. Nothing could be further from the truth. When it comes to Arthur, there is no connsus. Many historians believe he is 100
% fictional. Others point to one of veral men who might have inspired the legend. King Arthur takes the view that this man was Riothamus, a.k.a. Artorius, a Roman commander of half-British descent who fought Saxons for the Emperor during the 5th century. Pretty much everything in the film, except the man's name and a few historical details, is a hodgepodge of material from the Vulgate Cycle mixed indiscriminately with ideas from screenwriter David Franzoni's imagination. The result is a borderline-incoherent story that is so riddled with holes and impossibilities that it defies understanding.
Arthur is played by Clive Owen, who is the only one in this mess to display any screen prence. (If Owen is in the running to succeed Pierce Brosnan as James Bond, this will not help his cau.) He is surrounded by a group of knights with familiar names: Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd), Tristan (Mads Mikkeln), Gawain (Joel Edgerton), Galahad (Hugh Dancy), Bors (Ray Winstone), etc. Only two of the men have any individuality. Lancelot is an annoying whiner啜泣者 and Bors is an amusing thug暴徒. Everyone el is in dire n
eed of his own theme话题 song, such as the one given to Brave Sir Robin in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Who would mix up Tristan and Gawain if each had a couple of minstrels诗人 trailing落后于 追赶after him?
西山旅游 Merlin (Stephan Dillane) is in the film, too, except he's not a wizard, 术士 but an old guy in tattered 破碎的clothing with a lot of dirt on his face. He's the ruler of the rag-tag Britons and he has decided to join Arthur in driving out the Saxon invaders侵略者, who are led by a Big Bad Bearded Barbarian played by Stellan Skarsg錼d, who spends most of his limited screen time whispering menacingly威胁地. Arthur, for a variety of obscure不清楚的 reasons, has decided to turn his back on Rome (from whence he hails) and stick around in the snow and fog that defines Britain. I'm sure that the lure诱惑 of being king has something to do with it, as does the promi of having repeated with Guinevere (Keira Knightley), a flat-chested warrior woman who paints her pale skin blue and wears a faux如果就造句虚假的 dominatrix costume. 服装白贵宾>职业责任 Somewhere in the middle of the movie, she picks
up a bow and makes like Legolas.
更多影评
If I was being kind, I would call Fuqua's direction uninspired. A more honest appraisal评价 is that it's inept愚昧的. The battle scenes are horribly staged; half the time, it's impossible to get a clear n of place or direction. The movie's tone is unbelievably somber; Fuqua takes this story and its characters far too riously. The top-notch cinematography by Slawomir Idziak is better than the movie derves. The big one-on-one battle is about as energetic and impressive as the Ben Kenobi/Darth Vader duel in Star Wars. That was fine in 1977, but it lacks the panache and energy we have come to expect 25 years later. (Imagine if Star Wars Episode III ud similar choreography for its climactic light-saber duel? If you want to e guys fight like they mean it, watch Troy. (That movie also deconstructs a legend, but does it with moderately greater success.) As for the clash of armies, let's just say that this doesn't come clo to The Lord of the Rings, which has become the gold standard for epic battles. By comparison, King Arthur is corroded iron.
