[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tv/ - Television & Film


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


>2026
>The only good King Arthur adaptations are Excalibur from the 80s and Merlin from the 90s
How?
>>
>>218217351
Because that's when soul still existed
>>
>he hasnt watched the camelot musical from the 60s
>>
When a story is so old and iconic it's kind of seeped into the cultural osmosis and doing a straight adaption is a bit boring.

Saint George and the Dragon for example. A hero knight goes and saves the princess and slays the dragon. It's a super old mythological story, probably derived from Greco-Roman myths and re-used by Christians.

Would a straight adaption be interesting? We've seen it time and time again. Guess what Super Mario is at its core? It's a retelling of Saint George.

You have to do something unique or interesting. King Arthur? There's a bit of that in Star Wars with the Jedi and light sabers and such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_George_and_the_Dragon
>>
>>218217351
Read Jack Whytes Pendragon series.
>>
but pic related is good and from the 60s
>>
>>218217351
>How?
Because the world is so brown now that nobody even has a frame of reference for Arthurian legends or knows what they are



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.