King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D YIFY Movie

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D

Robbed of his birthright, Arthur comes up the hard way in the back alleys of the city. But once he pulls the sword from the stone, he is forced to acknowledge his true legacy - whether he likes it or not.

IMDB: 7.135 Likes

  • Genre: Action | Adventure
  • Quality: 3D
  • Size: 1.93G
  • Resolution: 1920*1080 / 23.976 fpsfps
  • Language: English
  • Run Time: 126
  • IMDB Rating: 7.1/10 
  • MPR: Normal
  • Peers/Seeds: 9 / 23

The Synopsis for King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D

Robbed of his birthright, Arthur comes up the hard way in the back alleys of the city. But once he pulls the sword from the stone, he is forced to acknowledge his true legacy - whether he likes it or not.


The Director and Players for King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D

[Director]Guy Ritchie
[Role:]Astrid Berges-Frisbey
[Role:]Charlie Hunnam
[Role:]Jude Law


The Reviews for King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D


Reviewed byyesterdayman2002Vote: 9/10/10

Saw this at a Promo Screening last night and have been shocked by theharsh reviews from the critics.

I went in expecting to see a by-the-numbers generic fantasy like theones Disney churns out regularly. But instead I was surprised to findthat Guy Ritchie has applied to King Arthur the same style andtechnique that made his Sherlock Holmes films so beloved.

In this film is the witty dialogue and creative editing we've (at leastsome of us) have come to love from Guy Ritchie. There was never aboring scene throughout. The action is good, the effects are good, butit is the manner of delivery of it all that brings this to greatness.

The acting is solid, some characters are less developed than others butI did not feel that this hurt the movie at all.

I've seen King Arthur movies before but have never seen it told in thismanner, it is to King Arthur what Batman Begins was to Batman.

Should you see it? If you did not enjoy Guy Ritchie's other works,especially the Sherlock Holmes films then you may have issues with hisstyle, but if you were entertained by any of his other films then thereshould be no reason for you to not be entertained here also.

The reviews does this movie no justice. it doesn't have to be the old story with no creativity.Reviewed bymohamed-elbahnasawyVote: 9/10

I believe this movie would have been a master piece of a series due to the huge amount of event packed into 2 hours, but this is no criticism on how great the movie is and how the numbers of this site doesn't do it justice. 90% of the negative reviews comes under the lame excuse of "that's not how king Arthur is supposed to be". If you actually want a movie where you know everything already starting from the story, characters and twists then I'd call you the stupidest ever. Yes this isn't your typical king Arthur movie, and that adds even more to the awesomeness of it.amnt saying the movie is flawless, no movie is, but it was great starting from acting, animation, story, music tracks, everything. Again would have been better off it was a series and I hope there would be a sequel including the knights of the round table, sure Lancelot and some dramatic betrayal or even Arthur's betrayal himself to the kingdom.

A disappointing mess.Reviewed bymatt shawVote: 1/10

There are very little redeeming qualities about this mess of a film, and it really is a mess. If I had to walk away with a positive though, I would say the music was pretty good for the most part.

So where to start.

The acting from Charlie Hunnam (I loved him as Jax Teller) is laughable. Almost as laughable with how "pretty" he was in one of the final fight sequences of the film even though he had just taken a pasting. He is so wooden, so unbelievable that it is hard to take him seriously or believe anyone would follow him. It helps then that the rest of the acting is shoddy too. The female mage is so flat she may as well be horizontal. David Beckham's cameo is out of place and painful and... Well what did you expect when they saw fit to employ "Denny from Eastenders"? The lad can't act in the soap, let alone a movie. Any time a soap actor appears in a "blockbuster" I get that sinking feeling... Let's not forget that Charlie started in Byker Grove though but we can't hold that against him. We can hold this film against him.

Jude Law was decent enough, stepping away from his usual type of character. One of the only characters you could believe in but one you're not supposed to like. The problem being, as he is the only believable character in the film - you can't help but root for him.

The rest of the performances were paint by numbers, collecting a pay check and if this was the best Guy Ritchie could get from them - perhaps he isn't fit for being a director? And - to be fair - he probably isn't. At least, this type of film. He nailed Snatch and Lock, Stock - that much is a given and there are traces of that directorial style in this film (characters recalling stories and flitting between them talking and flash back sequences for example) but the problem is - it felt forced and out of place here. Put with that the fact Guy simply cannot direct action - you have a problem. It felt like two films. One film where you can get suckered in with the stories the characters are telling and the other, you're wishing your life away watching rubbish CGI, limp acting and a muddled mess of a fight sequence. Seriously - why so many slow motion shots of Charlie cutting through wood?!

In one scene where he uses the sword, it happened so fast that I still don't really know what happened. And the fight at the end? I still don't know who hit who for the best part of it. Although, given how pristine Charlie looked afterwards, I am guessing he had time to pop off to a spa whilst the Big Bad fought alone.

The script is as much to blame as the cast and crew though. It's a mess, jumbled up with too many dialogue sections spliced with flashbacks that aren't necessary. For this kind of film - perhaps a more linear story would have made more sense? As mentioned above, it felt like a film of two halves because of the constant jumping back and forth and switching to medieval sword play. It was also trying to be funny when that too missed the mark. The audience laughed a couple of times (a couple more than myself) but that was it.

This is the first time I have stepped from a Guy Ritchie film and felt such bitter disappointment. Had this been someone's first film, I doubt they would ever work again.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017) 3D Related Movies

18 Fingers of Death! (2006) Poster

18 Fingers of Death! (2006)

Company of Heroes (2013) 1080p Poster

Company of Heroes (2013) 1080p

Captain America: Civil War (2016) 3D Poster

Captain America: Civil War (2016) 3D

Outpost: Rise of the Spetsnaz (2013) 1080p Poster

Outpost: Rise of the Spetsnaz (2013) 1080p

Dead Ringer (2018) 1080p Poster

Dead Ringer (2018) 1080p

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016) 3D Poster

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016) 3D

Payday (2018) Poster

Payday (2018)

An Innocent Man (1989) 1080p Poster

An Innocent Man (1989) 1080p