I gave it 7 on IMDB. Some movies are much better imo, like all of the LotR movies, Gladiator or 300...but this is a very subjective stuff of course, so don't get me wrong, I am not even trying to argue.

Gladiator is definitely amazing. One of my favorite movies.

only 90? I was thinking more like 105 or 110

wow,I was not even going to consider going to this movie but based on all this I guess I will.  My turn at picking the movie so the wife HAS to go.  She made me see lovely bones so I deserve it damn it!

Samurai, Dragons, Hookers, Germans, Machine Guns, Bi-planes ...

WTF!??

I was not comparing it, it is the same director, it is based off a graphic novel just like The Watchman and it could go horribly wrong. At the very least  it should more enjoyable than a root canal ! I think it is the weirdness that attracts me to it, I think old asylums and hospitals are the spookiest places on the planet!

 King Arthur: The Directors Cut is an epic that's up there with the best of all epic movies.  I've watched it at least 7 times now and have thoroughly enjoyed it every time.

Oh, and it's not one of those artsy fartsy 'Camelot' fantasy adventure things, either... this movie has grunt.

Starkers..Starkers...Starkers....*shakes head* That King Arthur movie brings a bad name to Arthurian Legend. It's a good movie, but it has nothing to do with Arthurian Legend. All they did was steal the names of King Arthur and his knights and try to put a semi-realistic twist on it from a historical perspective. Totally ruins Arthurian Legend.

And this is coming from somebody who went to see that dribble which is "Twilight"????  

AND watches Futurama????   *shakes head... vigorously*

Trouble is, Arthurian legend is mostly portrayed as a woosy fantasy with an artsy fartsy romance with Guinevere.  Nah.. NO balls!!!!   And who's to say it steals from the Arthurian legend and gives it a bad name.... NONE of us were there.  Nope, I'd rather see an Arthur who actually had a 'pair', rather than the wimpy pathetic creature in most movies, seen at some round table bullshit with a bunch of poofy knights discussing the weather.  Nah, no grunt!!!

Granted, "Excalibur" took the sooky Camelot fantasy out of the legend, to some extent, but it is still no more believable or legendary than "King Arthur", directors cut or otherwise.

My tuppence worth.... but you know... each to his/her own.

The thing is, King Arthur probably did exist.... not necessarily as Arthur of the legend, but as some ruler of the time, with all the challenges and difficulties portrayed in the movie, "King Arthur"  And it wouldn't have been a time of sitting around on some poofy throne discussing the manners and pleasantries of court.  No, it would have been a time of epic battles to preserve the kingdom and serve its subjects well. 

Sadly, too many of the Arthurian legend type movies portray Camelot to be some heaven-like place, and the worst thing to happen is a serf steals a loaf of bread... or the court jester breaks a (finger) nail. 

And Who TF thought to put it all to effing music, fer crying out loud???  I know some insipid twat did... OMG he needs stringing up by the gonads.   Nah, I'm a blokes bloke and such like musicals are for girls and the limp wrist brigade... no offense to the Liberace types, but such epics and legends need to remain just that.... epic and legendary.

That'd be fourpence worth now, wouldn't it.

[almost] every day there's a bigger and brighter movie coming out...and the people go 'wow'...this is hot shit...or this is shit hot.....

Special effects aren't 'special' anymore, not if every man and his dog has it/them.

Truly 'great' movies are gonna be remembered YEARS after their release....long after the ADHD teenie audience has moved on to....hey, nice flower....

My all-time favourite movie was, and still is....A Clockwork Orange ....saw it in 1973 [incidentally in one of about 2 only ever screenings in England at the time - Kubrick pulled the rights after it was called to be censored].

It was 'interesting' in that even THE BOOK [Burgess] was censored for the US market......[good old liberal free-thinking Americans home of the brave...land of the free ...last bastion of prudishness]

No 'special' effects...no CGI...not even a car chase...but it had 'action'....and the music was from some dead German bloke who probably no-one knows....

It had a story...it had social commentary....it even had a language [no, not some bleating from a bloke in a gorilla suit, Lucas].

It's 37 years old now....much has 'dated' but as social commentary it is still totally relevant.

Another 'great movie' would be Mad Max ....made on a shoe-string budget....no special effects [again]....all the car crashes, etc were real as in fair-dinkum.  I think Goose still has the record for the fastest filmed bike-crash 'stunt' [MotoGP doesn't count....they aren't staged]...

Me, not necessarily...but old stuff that HAS stood the test of time...has stood the test of time.  New 'stuff' hasn't....yet....

If you ignore the 're-hashed story' that is Avatar...it's a great movie....might even be considered such in 30 years time, too.

I liked it...I also liked 2001...Gladiator...300...Lord of the Rings....Alien....Aliens...Predator...Terminator....Die Hard....District 9 ....

But then...I also liked To Sir with Love....[was timely for me]...

Never bothered with ET...or Titanic.  And those Star Wars things which I DID endure as at least they were claiming to be S/F....were aimed at too young an audience and really cloyed when you realise they were simply a medium/opportunity for product-placement/promotion of their related toy industry [the real money-spinner]....