|Why is his name "Arthur?" It's a rather unique name, it certainly applies to him (when we think of an "Arthur," we tend to think of "King Arthur" first), so, of all names (especially the choice of something more exotic, like "Uther" or "Vortigern") why is he named "Arthur?" Because "Arthur" was the "author" of his own free will and destiny. Arthur became the author of the new peace after the chaos, Arthur was the author of the deeds of Excalibur, Arthur was the author of humility and chivalry and, therefore, masculinity, and it's because we need to be reminded of all these things that Guy Ritchie has made this film, told this tale and conjured to our minds--like the nightmares Arthur suffers--the history of why we have treasured the values we have, and chosen the decisions we did, and why we avoided so many different paths, those which were taken by Vortigern.|
One of the easiest ways to begin an analysis of a film is to ask yourself what other films it reminds you of; what scenes invoked memories of films where you had seen such scenes previously, and then, once identified, ask yourself, why would the film makers "quote" those films within their own movie? For example, in Dracula Untold, there is the issue of a multitude of boys being sold into slavery from one kingdom into another, and we see the same in King Arthur; why? Children symbolize the future, and because men symbolize the active principle, men (young men and men of child-bearing age) tend to symbolize the (future of the) economy; these boys being sold into slavery, then, is the economy and the future of the economy being sold into slavery. How? The European Union, symbolized by the Vikings there to conduct trade with Vortigern. This is symbolized by Lucy who was beaten because women symbolize "the motherland," and especially since she was Arthur's adopted mother (with the other women) what the Viking does to Lucy, has--according to Ritchie--been done to England herself. At the end, when the Vikings face Arthur, Arthur says this: you face all of England, not just a single person or government official.
The story of Arthur pulling Excalibur from the stone is for men what Cinderella trying on the glass slipper is for women: a coming of age, a sign of gender identity and collective wish fulfillment. So, we can say that there is an element which reminds us of Cinderella (Kenneth Branaugh) which was recently released, and juxtaposing the two stories, we see the similarities and how they have addressed issues of gender identity, traditional, gender identity.
On another vibe, we can also see Clint Eastwood's film Unforgiven being cited when a prostitute is beaten up (Lucy in King Arthur). Ritchie adds an important commentary with this scene, because Arthur handles the injuries in this film, whereas, in Unforgiven, the prostitutes (Strawberry Alice) hired men (i.e., prostituted the men to be assassins) and only got death, whereas they could have had wages to provide for themselves instead. Is Arthur acting like a trade union in going after the Viking and getting Lucy's wages? No, he's acting like a man who is grateful to the woman who helped raise him, and that's the huge difference Ritchie wants us to notice, because in standing up for Lucy, Arthur fulfills his duty as a man, that is, protecting those he cares for, because they, too, have cared for him. Ritchie, then, provides us with a radically different example of "exchange" than that the Left cites for Karl Marx and market exchange; this "exchange" is based on love, not on someone getting what they believe to be is their "fair share."
Then again, we also see Ursula and The Little Mermaid (which we discuss more fully below), but we can see this as an example of the prince having to choose between the the good woman (Ariel) and the bad woman (Ursula). With Vortigern, when we see him with a good woman, like his wife, he kills her for something bad (power), and with Maggie, he imprisons her because she has threatened his power, then he kills his daughter for even more power. The Viking who abused Lucy, of course, was a guest of Vortigern, so we see how abuse spreads through shady business deals (the selling of the young boys). The Prince in The Little Mermaid isn't just choosing the woman he'll marry, but how he is going to become for the rest of his life; Ariel, on the other hand, has chosen the prince to be the man she wants to give herself to, to make of herself an offering to make him be a better man than what he would be otherwise (more on this below with The Mage).
Another film I think Ritchie cites is Anthropoid, which you probably didn't see, but you should, It was excellent. Just as there is a betrayal in Anthropoid, so, too, does the blonde-headed Rubio betray where the cave is that the Resistance has made as their base, and everyone is killed. There might also, however, be another vague reference in Ritchie's cameo he makes. When Arthur and the others plot assassinating Vortigern, we see Ritchie dressed all in blue for a brief second, as a man who would support "assassinating the king" and so they could use his building for Goose Fat to shoot Vortigern. Because Anthropoid is also about an elaborate assassination, we can see the two films linked; however, because Vortigern is not assassinated, Ritchie might be providing commentary that the assassination in Anthropoid didn't bring out the best in the characters (remember, Anthropoid was more of a call to arms against Obama than a historical drama); in other words, Ritchie cites Anthropoid so he can say, we could have had Vortigern die as a result of a political assassination, but that would not have brought out the strenuous sacrifices and courage Arthur had to summon to overcome Voritgern.
We've seen a lot of octopuses lately, and to at least some degree, the "sea witches" or sea nymphs with their long legs, are certainly octopus-like; so why does Ritchie do this? Well, we just saw in Guardians Of the Galaxy Vol 2 how, at the start of the film, how the conservative, pro-capitalist audience is the octopus-like creature that is being destroyed at the start of the film (the one with a hide so tough, Drax is swallowed by it to try and kill it from the inside? Yea, that symbolizes the conservatives in America; please see Patricide: Guardians Of the Galaxy Vol 2 for more). But the octopus theme has been common in all of Marvel's film because it's the symbol for HYDRA, and, of course, the symbol for the terrorist organization in the James Bond film Spectre (and we will discuss the sea witch in greater depth below). So, by listing and connecting one film to other films you are reminded of as you watch it, a public dialogue and debate is created, with the film you are watching at the moment bridging issues concerning film makers which you have been smart enough to pick up on.
And now for something completely different. In the poster above, Arthur wears a jacket which we see him wearing two different times in the film. The first time we see him wear it, we've watched the montage of Arthur growing up and watching Lucy and the other women get beaten up by various "customers," and then, when Arthur watches, he gets beat up too, except for the last time, when a man goes to strike Arthur after beating up Lucy and Arthur stops the man's hand in mid-strike; Arthur wears this coat pictured above when he does that, and again after the scene when Vortigern's men have killed all the members of the Resistance in the cave. Why? Because Ritchie uses costume to tie-in these two scenes: the man beating the woman is like Vortigern beating England, and in both situations, it's Arthur who is there to stop it. Why? The jacket tells us. There is sheep skin fur lining both the neck and wrists: sheep nearly always, not always, but nearly always, symbolize sacrifice (because that is the animal most often associated with sacrifice) and we know that the hands symbolize our honor (we shake hands to symbolize giving our word when we intend to honor something we have spoken) and arms symbolize our strength (not just physical strength, but strength of character, morals and values as well) and the wrists bring that together to make a unified man. The neck symbolizes that which leads us in life, like a leash. SO, what we have, is that Arthur can only stop the beating England is receiving once he agrees to be the sacrificial lamb and lay down his life for England, but in being willing to make that sacrifice--because he's willing to put England before himself, as well as the lives of others--and because he values others above himself, he has increased his strength and honor through humility. What about the leather of the jacket? When Uther carries little Arthur from the castle, Arthur is wrapped in a thick fur coat, then when he trains with George, we see Arthur wearing a fur vest; the fur symbolizes the animal appetites and passions (the living like an animal, rather than the son or daughter of God with an immortal soul to guard over) so Arthur slowly, through the tough lessons of life, overcomes those appetites and gains respect for himself. The leather, then, symbolizes Arthur's toughness, his durability and tough hide (like the tough hide of the octopus in Guardians Of the Galaxy Vol 2) to take a beating but not get beaten down. The way Arthur holds the sword means he has taken the honor of Excalibur, the duty and solemn duty it represents, to his heart and he not only cherishes that, but it's a part of him as well.
Power is a "trigger word" for all interpreting themselves today as minorities: those identifying as minorities firmly believe (or at least attempt to make everyone believe they believe) that white, heterosexual men (especially if they are of Christian, and of the middle or upper class) define, exert and, thereby, abuse power to protect themselves, their power base (such as their economic standing through business) and maintain the self-identified minorities in ignorance and poverty. We'll come back to this claim in a moment, because Ritchie deals with this in the film in the person of Vortigern; however, what's imminently more interesting is the way which Ritchie redefines power with an element that would NEVER be mentioned by the Left: sacrifice.
They have no love.
They have no gratitude.
|In the very top image is an illustration of Ursula, the Octopus witch who is likely the source of inspiration for the water nymph to whom Vortigern goes for power and favors; in the second image down from the top is Vortigern sending the murdered body of his daughter Catia into the water so he can have an increase in his powers; in the third image down is one of three faces we see of the water nymph granting Vortigern power and the fourth image down is the long,.... "eel"-like legs/arms of the water nymph greeting Vortigern as she comes to talk with him. The last image, very bottom, is Arthur being pulled into the water by the Lady of the Lake and her "garlands" (for lack of a better description) embracing him.|
Let's discuss the Marxist angle of "the price" Vortigern is willing to pay for the power he wants (i.e. the power he believes he "needs"). First of all, this is, in base, monetary terms, an "exchange," the exchanging of the blood of a loved one for whatever it is you want, and on Vortigern's wish list, there is nothing but power (we'll discuss Vortigern and power below). Why would this siren want the blood of a loved one? Well, there is good reason to at least suspect that Ritchie is calling upon real life for this scene: anyone who knows anything about the Illuminati has at least heard of the blood sacrifice they require for a person to become super-famous and rich. Just type in "celebrities and blood sacrifices" and you will hit on a wealth of researched case histories at least suggesting that the occult references (like all the triangles and occult magic we see in Vortigern's tower) are, in fact, communicating to us about the very real ties of Hollywood to the occult and the links of power and domination of satanic influences (and even if you don't believe that, we cannot deny that there has an on-going and organized public effort by the Left to use satanic spells against Donald Trump, the same way we see Vortigern using spells against Uther and Arthur). So, in terms of "exchange" and what value does the blood of a loved one hold for a demon like this siren, we have our answer: when you are willing to kill someone you love for something you want more, then you give your soul to corruption and evil gains that power of you. As most everyone reading this post probably knows, a human never enters into satanic pact with a demon and maintains control over events: you give yourself to that demon. Just as Ursula in The Little Mermaid knows how to keep Ariel's soul forever because the prince really wants to hear the singing again, so the sea witch in King Arthur knows Vortigern There might be the illusion of power and control, however, that is fleeting, and this is why the sea witches have three faces, rather like Dante's Satan in the bottom-most circle of Inferno: the two attractive faces are the faces we want to see of power and wealth, but the ugly, old, bloated and evil face of the third woman who does the talking and granting the power is the truth behind the illusion. This brings us to our discussion about the water nymph demon pictured above. Now, in Excalibur (the 1981 film), Uther Pendragon, the father of Arthur in that film, makes an exchange with Merlin that, if he can lay with Igrayne for one night (she's the wife of one of his barons) Uther agrees to give Merlin "the fruit" of that union (the infant Arthur). In 1981, what people in the US were selling their souls for--sex, and specifically, taboo sex (homosexuality), symbolized by Uther's adultery--was the plague bringing ruin and devastation to the country and it could be expressed in one word: AIDS (1981 was the first year HIV was clinically observed, and the film Excalibur predicted some kind plague was coming). Today, however, Ritchie has traded in the desired sex for power and satanic activity, and given the revelations from WikiLeaks about presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, as well as former aides coming out and attesting that she is, in fact, a practicing witch who goes to monthly satanic meetings in Los Angeles, (and, when King Arthur Legend Of the Sword began production, everyone, especially in Hollywood, assumed Clinton would be the next president), we cannot help but think of Vortigern as a metaphor of Hillary Clinton. Why is this important? Because, as the leader goes, so goes the country, and leaders getting entangled with satanism means the country will, as well (just look at the public "binding spell" against Trump, and Hillary isn't even the leader; think how bad it would have gotten if she had made it into the White House). The problem is, a lot of people think they would never fall for Satanism, however, they also aren't actively working on being good Christians, either. If you aren't fighting the spiritual battle, you are losing the spiritual battle, which means the devil is winning. Ritchie provides us with the perfect visual to illustrate exactly why the spiritual battle is imperative: the "eel-like" arms of the sea-witches, vs. the garlands of the Lady of the Lake. Either we will be drawn into evil with those long, snake-ish arms, pressing us to the bosom of damnation, or we will be drawn into the mystery of ourselves for our eternal salvation and that of others as well.
Now, the women.
|This is the most important place in the film, even more so than the place where Uther died and Arthur pulled the sword: the alter. This is where life begins, this is where life ends, when life is properly lived. In the darklands, Arthur has to take the sword to the alter to see what happened and, as we see in the top image, the runes on the sword light up; why? It's the Truth, the Light of Truth and it's infusing Arthur, compared to the bottom image and Vortigern shrouded in the darkness of lies and corruption. We have all ready discussed at least a little why it's so important that Arthur sees Uther and what Uther does with the sword, but there are at least two other reasons why this is important: first, it was an act of love, and it reveals to Arthur the incredible love his father had for his son, as well as the people placed in his care, his kingdom. Second, it provides Arthur with a role model, someone to whom Arthur can look up and model his actions after so Arthur in his turn can become a role model for all other men (which is where chivalry comes from).|
The great irony about sacrifice, which Ritchie points out so wondrously, is what Christ said: "For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world yet profits his soul?" (Matthew 16: 25-6). We see both Arthur and Vortigern at the alter of sacrifice, each man there with a completely different intent: Vortigern to gain control over the world, and Arthur to stop him. Excalibur, in the top image, lights up with the truth of the mystical words engraved upon it, just as the Truth is engraved upon our hearts. In the bottom image, we see Vortigern wanting to spread the same darkness throughout the world which has consumed his own soul, and bring death to all. What's the deciding factor in this struggle? Women. It's the Lady Of the Lake who directs Arthur in the right direction, and it's The Mage willing to sacrifice herself (letting the guard hold a knife to her throat in George's courtyard, then letting guards take her hostage to Vortigern's castle when Arthur has thrown Excalibur away).
On a slightly different note, the fireball we see Vortigern holding in this bottom image, as well as one we had seen him holding in the trailers, might be a reference to the 1994 Russian film Burnt By the Sun; why? The film takes place in 1936, the USSR, and a young man who had been recruited by the KGB (one way to interpret "recruited" is "forced") to go oversees and do their dirty spy work for them, leaving behind the woman he loved; in moves Sergey, a colonel who had his eye on the young woman (yes, it's very much like the story of David and Bathsheba, but it's taking place under Stalin). The young man returns to exact revenge on Sergey for turning him into a monster and stealing the woman he loved, and he does it with the same means that Sergey forced him into the KGB to begin with. The point is, at the start of the film, then at the end, there is this free-floating fireball, just like the one Vortigern holds, wandering around, a kind of symbol for Stalin himself and the Orwellian universe he created, but also a universe with no love, no equality, no justice, and absolutely no hope for anyone. Why would Ritchie (IF, this is, indeed, what he is doing) reference Burnt By the Sun? Burnt By the Sun is obviously an anti-communist film, and Vortigern is a socialist/communist figure (at least he's representative of those in the US wanting to overhaul the republic and capitalist system we have had with a form of neo-communism), and Ritchie wants to warn those who have, perchance, seen Burnt By the Sun, that Voritgern is, indeed, an extension of Joseph Stalin. What about those who haven't seen Burnt By the Sun? Well, look down at the next caption, and therein lies your answer.
A phallic symbol is meant to invoke the male penis, especially when erect. Why? I wish you hadn't have asked that, because this is where it gets difficult, but that's okay, we will get through this together. The answer depends upon who you ask, and because feminists and other minorities ("minority" being anyone identifying themselves as such, but specifically those who are not male, are not white, not Christian, are not heterosexual or part of the 1% economically) have dominated the discussion of phallic symbols now for decades, and has been completely colored in their own self-interest with no on challenging their self-absorbed, dramatic interpretations of the "white man's narcissism."
|Why does the Left hate white men so much? As we have discussed before, it's because they are the dominant "power holders" in today's society; just as Jews were "power holders" in Hitler's Germany, the Left specializes in targeting an isolating "an enemy" then rallying their allies against that enemy and turning them into scapegoats. If you don't believe me, check out this story about the newest video game coming out, Far Cry, which has white, Christian men who eat red meat and read the Bible, as the villains of the game. Is the "power" which white men hold in Western European civilization the real threat to those who see themselves as minorities? No. The real threat which white, heterosexual men pose to the Left are their values. and anyone (male or female, white, black, red, yellow or mixed) can hold these same values (and many do) and fight for those values, but they are traditionally associated with white men because they are both distinctly European and Christian. What are those values? The basis of Chivalry, masculinity and the Christian faith. Just as these three things, inter-related, have built up European and American civilization, so they have kept order and brought peace and prosperity to all peaceably participating within that system. This is the very reason the Left hates it so much: the Christian society of masculine rule outlaws anything that will bring it down, which will corrode society and its members. Miniorities, on the other hand, want these perversions, and so blame white Christians on "hatred" and "intolerance," "racism" and "greed" so they can unleash the devil through their sins and call it "social justice." Just as Vortigern unleashes evil in King Arthur: Legend Of the Sword, the Left wants to do the exact same thing.|
How? The "false phallus."
In the images above, we first see Arthur with Excalibur, the "good phallus," the good ruler with his power he uses for the greatest good of society. It doesn't always work out that way, but this provides the most peace and the greatest benefits for the greatest number of people. Below King Arthur, we see Princess Ahmanet from The Mummy; what does she hold in her right hand? A knife, a jagged, nasty knife she uses to cut the throat of her father, the pharaoh, and then of anyone else who gets in her way. Below that is Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) in Wonder Woman; what's she doing? Pulling out a sword that is destined for a great warrior,.... or is she really re-writing history to make a woman seem like a better "King Arthur" than King Arthur? In the bottom image, we see Emma Cullen using her rifle (which, in this film, is a phallic symbol) to "take revenge" on the industrialist Bogue (symbolizing capitalism). We also just saw Gamora (Zoe Saldana) in Guardians Of the Galaxy Vol 2 use a sword (phallic symbol) to kill a giant octopus symbolizing capitalism (please see Patricide: Guardians Of the Galaxy Vol 2 for more). It's possible we will be seeing something similar in Pirates Of the Caribbean 5 with the trident of Poseidon. What I am saying here, is that phallic symbols are going to be important for the next year, and if they are being "cut off" that is a clear case of castration.
Because that is where God is.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner
I have been writing about King Arthur: Legend Of the Sword since the first trailer dropped; here are the other discussions which includes analysis you might be interested in, which I have not copied into this post:
Symbols In King Arthur: Legend Of the Sword
Symbol Analysis Of King Arthur Legend Of the Sword Teaser Trailer
Vortigern and 7 Details Of King Arthur Legend Of the Sword
2 New Spots: King Arthur Legend Of the Sword