https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b61EfOg6bYg
Printable View
Unless 100 Eyes wrecks literally everyone, I don't think I'll be able to get excited for this.
The only King Arthur movie I've ever liked is Excalibur. I don't see that changing anytime soon.
I totally missed that Tom Wu was in the cast so I thought this was a non sequitur sort of post. Well played, Vash!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vash
This is kinda dumb. Asian or not, Tom Wu is a martial arts devotee.Quote:
https://i4.s.heat.st/wp-content/uplo...trip=all&ssl=1
‘King Arthur’ Movie Deletes Tweet After Backlash Over ‘Kung-Fu George’
By Heat Street Staff | 10:42 pm, April 25, 2017
Sherlock Holmes director Guy Ritchie’s new blockbuster King Arthur: Legend of the Sword opens May 12. The $100 million movie, which stars Charlie Hunnam, Jude Law and Idris Elba, is unlikely to be too faithful a take on the famed medieval Camelot exploits of Arthur, Guinevere and Lancelot.
The movie’s official Twitter account posted a tweet designed to whet moviegoers’ appetites by rolling out the Knights of the Round Table. But a reference on the poster to a character named “Kung-Fu George” (played by Tom Wu) caused outrage on Twitter. Some approved:
But many social justice warriors objected to a character named “Kung-Fu George” on the basis that it promotes the stereotype that all Asians should be martial arts devotees.Quote:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C957-y2UwAAAbSD.jpg
View image on Twitter
Follow
Hubert Vigilla @HubertVigilla
Guy Ritchie's King Arthur looks like ****e, but I would watch the hell out of a movie about a character named Kung-Fu George
8:10 PM - 20 Apr 2017
1 1 Retweet likes
Quote:
Follow
Stuart @MooreStu
Really wanted to see that new King Arthur but there's a character named Kung-Fu George... nvm I guess.
6:39 PM - 20 Apr 2017
Retweets 1 1 like
22 Apr
Movie studio Warner Bros caved in to the protests and subsequently deleted the tweet. Geri who tweets under the handle ‘Chinesechica’ was claiming credit:Quote:
Geri�� @chinesechica
@wuhoo @dragonc Thanks! I honestly don't know, it's super random. Then again, if Matt Damon can be in medieval China why can't an Asian be in King Arthur? ��
Follow
Jerry Wu @wuhoo
@chinesechica @dragonc The analogy would be Kung Fu George is the real King Arthur. Instead, this is reinforcing Asian male stereotypes that we all know kung fu.
8:11 AM - 22 Apr 2017
Retweets likes
She kept going on about it:Quote:
View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter
Follow
Geri�� @chinesechica
So I called out the new King Arthur movie for being racist in their advertising and they ended up deleting their tweet. I'm living.
7:47 AM - 21 Apr 2017
268 268 Retweets 566 566 likes
Modern-day heroism!Quote:
20 Apr
Devin Healey @CougThoughts
@chinesechica @DemonPatriarch @jpraise_dmc @kingarthurmovie Extensive = 14 seconds of googling
Follow
Geri�� @chinesechica
@CougThoughts @DemonPatriarch @jpraise_dmc @kingarthurmovie Did our thread just get the King Arthur account to delete their original tweet?? I'm shook pic.twitter.com/P1zSEFL3HP
7:12 PM - 20 Apr 2017
1 1 Retweet 2 2 likes
So much for Kung Fu George...:o
Quote:
MAY 15, 2017 6:30am PT by Pamela McClintock
Box-Office Meltdown: 'King Arthur' Could Lose $150M After Falling on Its Sword
"The whole 'Game of Thrones'-on-steroids direction the studio went with from the get-go just didn't get anyone psyched to see this," says one analyst.
For a brief, shining moment, anxious executives at Warner Bros. were hopeful that director Guy Ritchie's King Arthur: Legend of the Sword would open to at least $25 million in North America and overperform overseas, where historical action epics can often conquer audiences.
It wasn't to be. The dark origins tale about the mythical medieval king fell on its sword at the box office over Mother's Day weekend, earning just $15.4 million domestically — slightly ahead of Sunday's $14.7 million estimate — and a dismal $29.1 million from its first 51 foreign markets, including bombing in China with $5 million. While the event film has yet to land in other major territories, including the U.K., the forecast is grim.
King Arthur, starring Charlie Hunnam in the titular role, could lose $150 million or more for partners Warners and Village Roadshow after costing $175 million to make before a major marketing spend, according to box-office experts who say the movie isn't likely to earn more than $145 million globally (studios only get half back in box-office receipts in the U.S, and even less overseas). RatPac-Dune Entertainment — the film financing entity launched in 2013 by Steve Mnuchin (who is now U.S. Treasury secretary), James Packer and filmmaker Brett Ratner — also has a stake in the movie.
A Warner Bros. spokesman disputed that the loss could climb to $150 million for the various partners.
"King Arthur is a paint-by-numbers Hollywood disaster — wrong director, wrong cast, wrong script, etc.," says box-office analyst Jeff Bock. "The whole Game of Thrones-on-steroids direction the studio went with from the get-go just didn't get anyone psyched to see this."
Bock, along with others, says Hunnam (Sons of Anarchy, Pacific Rim) wasn't enough of a movie star to carry the film. "TV stardom is one thing; for these epics, you need an equally epic lead performance," says Bock.
Marking the first major miss of summer 2017, King Arthur also boasts one of the lowest domestic openings of all time for a big-budget major studio title after Monster Trucks, the movie that prompted Paramount to take a $125 million write-down even before debuting to $11 million in January of this year, and Disney's 2011 Mars Needs Moms ($6.9 million).
"The concept missed," says Warners domestic distribution chief Jeff Goldstein. "We're very disappointed."
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword unfurls during a time of transition for Warner Bros., where the production regime that oversaw the film's long road to the big screen has been ousted in favor of new leadership.
In December, longtime New Line chief Toby Emmerich was named president and chief content officer of Warner Bros. Pictures, replacing Greg Silverman, who in turn replaced Jeff Robinov. The shake-up came amid AT&T's bid to buy parent company Time Warner for $85 billion.
Ritchie had a close relationship with Robinov and Emmerich, having made the Sherlock Holmes franchise and The Man From U.N.C.L.E. The two Sherlock movies, starring Robert Downey Jr., were successful; Man From U.N.C.L.E., not so much.
Ask studio insiders, and they'll tell you that most were nervous about how King Arthur would perform at the box office after the movie's release was delayed several times. Medieval-themed movies have lagged at the box office in recent years, another prominent example being Universal's 2016 sequel The Huntsman: Winter's War. Not to mention, Warners hasn't had much luck in launching live-action franchises based on fairy tale IP (leave that to industry leader Disney, whose most recent success is Beauty and the Beast). Like King Arthur, Pan and Jack the Giant Slayer fell flat at the box office.
The coming weeks will be crucial for Warners' marketing and production team as it launches summer tentpole Wonder Woman on June 2 and Christopher Nolan's World War II action-epic Dunkirk on July 21.
"It isn't particularly surprising that King Arthur flopped in North America. I don't remember the last time a medieval film was successful in this market. The story just doesn't seem to resonate here anymore, and someone tries to resurrect it seemingly every five to 10 years," says Wall Street analyst Eric Handler of MKM Partners. "What I did find surprising was the weak numbers internationally, particularly in Europe."
I could not bring myself to watch this. First off, it portrays King Arthur looking like a freaking 21st-century reality TV 'bachelor' or an underwear model, shadow boxing like a hyped-up MMA fighter. In fact, none of the actors' appearance nor the imagery in the trailer suggests the late 5th-early 6th century; the period in which the King Arthur saga supposedly took place.
As for the 'kung fu' guy, if they can put Matt Damon as a warrior in ancient China, why not a Chinese in dark ages Britain?
I still have no interest in seeing the film, though.
I watched this on a trans-Atlantic flight last week. I jumped on this grenade for everyone. You can thank me by subscribing.
Usually I'm okay with Guy Ritchie flicks. He does bromance well. And the knights of the round table is the ultimate bromance orgy. But wow, this really sucked. It's all CGI, miserable CGI, and takes such liberties with the tales that it really should've just been titled something else, like Magic Sword King, or Alternate Universe Arthur. Black Sir Bedevere? Chinese Sir George? Magical King Kong-sized mastadons? There's sword fights, but the sword fights are super lame. When Arthur grabs Excalibur, it's like Stormbringer - he turns into a Tasmanian devil berserker - which begs the question 'Why doesn't he just do that at the beginning and dispatch all the bad guys right away?' The rest is simple hack and slash. Tom Wu plays exactly the same role as in Marco Polo's 100 Eyes and turns in the only fair fight sequence and it's only one small exchange. Frankly, there isn't nearly enough of him in this film. There's even a Kraken - I LUVS KRAKEN - but it's done so bizarrely - half nekkid hotties and an Ursula writhing in tentacles - that it was just disappointing. Same goes for a mage-induced hallucination. I enjoy a good cinematic hallucination, but you can tell when filmmakers are really experienced in hallucinations, and when they are faking it. Jude Law struggles so hard to make this into something as the villainous Vortigen, but he's so surrounded by dumb that it's a total fail. Richie needs to go back to making gangster flicks.