Product Details

• Actors: Clive Owen, Stellan Skarsgård, Ken Stott, Til Schweiger, Ray Stevenson
• Directors: Antoine Fuqua
• Format: Anamorphic, Color, Dolby, Subtitled, Widescreen
• Language: English (Dolby Digital 5.1)
• Subtitles: English
• Region: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only. Read more about DVD formats.)
  
• Aspect Ratio: 2.35:1
• Number of discs: 1
• Rating: Unrated
• Studio: Touchstone Home Entertainment
• DVD Release Date: April 3, 2007
• Run Time: 139 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 3.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (503 customer reviews)
• ASIN: B000MQ58WC
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #13,131 in Movies & TV (See Bestsellers in Movies & TV)
• For more information about "King Arthur (Director's Cut) [Blu-ray]" visit the Internet Movie Database (IMDb)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com

It's got a round table, some knights, and a noble warrior who rises to become King Arthur, but everything else about this revisionist legend is pure Hollywood. That's not such a bad thing if you enjoyed Rob Roy, Braveheart, Gladiator, and Troy, and there's some intriguing potential in presenting the "real" Arthur (played by Clive Owen) as a 5th-century soldier of Rome, assigned to defend Roman-imperial England against a hoard of invading Saxons (led by Stellan Skarsgård in hairy villain mode). As revamped history and "archaeological findings" would have us believe, Guinevere (Keira Knightley) is a warrior babe in face-paint and Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd) is a nonentity who fades into the woodwork. Never mind! Best to enjoy the harsh, gloomy atmosphere of Irish locations, the ruggedness of Owen and his hearty supporting cast, and the entertaining nonsense of a Jerry Bruckheimer production that strips battle-ready Guinevere down to leather-strap S&M gear while all the men sport full-body armor. Hail to the queen, indeed! --Jeff Shannon

Product Description

From the producer of PEARL HARBOR and the director of TRAINING DAY, the Extended Director's Cut of KING ARTHUR explodes onto Blu-ray Disc® in a blaze of hard-hitting action and glory not seen in theaters. Prepare for unsurpassed thrills as history's greatest legend roars to life in this astonishing new format. Now the adventure is longer, grittier and more explicit in this valiant tale of Arthur (Clive Owen), Guinevere (Keira Knightley), Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd), and the Knights Of The Roundtable. Behold the pageantry and power of every fierce battle in spectacular 1080p, while swords clash and fortresses are pounded in thunderous 5.1 48 kHz, 24-bit uncompressed audio. Catapult your entertainment experience into another realm with Blu-ray™ High Definition!

See all Editorial Reviews

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

35 of 37 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars My Kind of King Arthur.... At Last!, April 27, 2006

By	Gormlaithe (Colorado, USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: King Arthur - The Director's Cut (Widescreen Edition) (DVD)

I have read the negative and positive reviews of this film, especially noting the numerous complaints about historical accuracy. But considering the era from which this story is created, and the various possibilities regarding exact time and place of events, (if they ever occurred at all), I think the film is a truly magnificent, thought-provoking piece about King Arthur.

Bringing in the aspect of the Sarmatians was long overdue in the Arthurian arena. Although various historians may argue the point, much evidence does point to the use of stirrups by about 8000 Sarmatian cavalry in the Roman army as early as 175 AD. With the commonly held belief that the stirrup was not introduced until many centuries later, I thought it a bold move for the movie makers to incorporate this into the film as well. It seemed to be one of the most commonly noted 'discrepancies' by reviewers, but I disagree - it is very accurate.

If you have watched only the PG13 version of this film, by all means, please watch not only the Director's Cut version, but take the time to also watch/listen to Antoine Fuqua's narrative over the film. His narration explains a lot, especially about how they had to change things drastically to make the mandated PG 13 rating. His explanation regarding his version of Lancelot and Guinevere is quite a statement as well.

The alternate ending was quite dark, or perhaps even depressing, in a way. I don't know which ending is more suitable, and actually would have liked to have seen perhaps a different ending altogether, just don't know what that would have been.

I thought the actors were incredible; the battle scenes (director cut) some of the only such scenes I've ever watched that let you identify the main characters' roles during the fighting; the photography was the best I have ever seen; the music illustrated and enhanced; and this movie left you wanting to see more when it was over.

There was no dwelling on use of special effects for blood and gore, or rediculous feats of super-power athletics, or campy remarks that would bring you immediately back to your own century. The horses were not constantly being tripped during battle scenes, either. All these were a welcome change from so many movies of today.

Above all, it passed the real test of a great movie - it left you with 'a feeling' after it was over.

In short, I loved it. Antoine Fuqua, you are a genius.

20 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Aenglaland, April 7, 2006

By	Eoin (UK) - See all my reviews

This review is from: King Arthur - The Director's Cut (Widescreen Edition) (DVD)

The movie is pretty good BUT watch the directors cut only, however, historically and geographically it's a bit awry.
YES there was a Romano-British warlord called Artorius Castus, YES 4000 Sarmatian heavy cavalry were sent to northern Britannia around 180 AD from southern Russia, it was part of a peace deal between Marcus Aurelius and the Sarmatians. YES the sword religon was a Scythio-Sarmatian ritual of the sacred sword, blood, plunging it into the earth etc
However most of their desendents by the 450's AD (when the movie is set) when the romans left britain would have been native british, and half were thought to have left to fight with Constantine in Europe.
NO they wouldn't have worn armour as in the film. The Picts were ORIGINAL peoples of northern britain (Scotti were immigrants from Dal Ria in North Ireland). They may have worn blue (Woad) body paint as modern research has suggested it had antiseptic properties to protect against wounds, they did use composite bows and crossbows. The romans invited in the Saxons as mercenaries against the Irish, Scots, Welsh (no such term as Celt then! thats an 18th century invention) and other Saxon raiders. They rebelled when they weren't paid and took over southern britain, brought they're families over and the rest is history (evenually to become Aenglaland...England). One of the biggest mistakes in the film though is that all the romano-british v saxon fighting took place in southern britain, not around Hadrian's Wall, and the final battle of Baden Hill is thought to be in south-western england.
But if you're not too bothered by that it's not bad, particulary the less sanitised Directors Cut version with the blood restored!
If you're interested check out the book "Arthur the Dragon King by Howard Reid" for a good comprehensive historical account.

44 of 51 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Interesting Interpretation, December 8, 2004

By	FitzFG (Upstate New York) - See all my reviews

This review is from: King Arthur - The Director's Cut (Widescreen Edition) (DVD)

If you are looking for a strict retelling of the stereotypical King Arthur legend then this movie is not for you. If, however, you are open to seeing new interpretations of the tale then I would recommend watching this movie. This movie does a good job of combining the legend with history and a little bit of fantasy/epic-heroism. In doing this it becomes a movie that tells the story of the "real" Arthur and yet has enough elements of the legend to imply how the real story could have developed into the legend after years of retelling and exageration. One thing that I personally liked(others may disagree) is that they sidelined the love triangle between Arthur, Lancelot, and Guinevere. There were interactions that can be seen as the origins of the legend, but the love/betrayal plotline did not overwhelm the more engaging central plot.

This film only rates four stars because it is just a good film, not a great one. I would recommend renting it first to see if you like it before buying it.