Fantasy and History: Two Very Different Films

Over the course of the past couple weeks, I've watched two very different course-related films: Excalibur (1981) and King Arthur (2004). Somehow, I had managed to never see either. Excalibur was long. The effects were poor by today's standards and the film overall seemed very dated. This provoked a sort of "Mystery Science Theater" response from my boyfriend and me and I ended up laughing through much of the plot. However, this film filled me in on many of the gaps in my knowledge of the King Arthur legend, at least one perspective of the story, including characters, quests, and nemeses. Sorcery and the supernatural weave into every element of this version along with the existence of other worlds and alternate modes of life. The film grounds itself purely in fantasy; these are the kinds of events that could convince you that Arthur and his knights never existed. King Arthur however was the bigger surprise as it contained absolutely no magic (although, I had to suspend my disbelief as the petite Keira Knightley wielded a battle-axe larger than her torso in hand-to-hand combat against iron-clad barbarians). In this film, a sword is pulled from a stone, but it hardly seems miraculous. Merlin is more of a pagan priest and cheiftan than he is a wizard. Politics and war reign in this rendition and I appreciate the attempt to place Arthur in history, before the folklore and fantasy arose. In part, by showing the continual savagery of outside (and inside) forces against the Britains, the film illustrates the oppression of the common people and shows their need for an Arthur. Not unlike the desperate farmers who find themselves forced to protect the homeland after Maximianus depletes it of its army in Monmouth's History of the Kings of Britain, the warriors in King Arthur fight (with more drive and skill than Monmouth's farmers) for freedom after legions of Romans and Saxons have trampled their land and their lives. If there is any historical truth to the endless string of battles, bloodshed, and greedy leaders then these oppressed people would need to create a savior-figure like Arthur to keep them spirited and hopeful. Perhaps, even if Arthur never existed, the very legend of him helped the Britons to survive.