From “Charge of the Light Brigade” subbing India for the Crimea to “U-571” crediting Yank forces for seizing Nazi Enigma machines, British auds are used to Hollywood reworkingtheir cherished history. But one anonymous film buff in Warwickshire, unhappy with “King Arthur’s” assertion that the legendary monarch was actually Roman, is fighting back.
The disgruntled cineaste took issue with the pic’s poster, which promises “King Arthur, the untold story which inspired the legend.”
Antoine Fuqua‘s epic depicts the mythical king as a Roman soldier stationed in Northern England. But the objector, anonymous per Advertising Standards Authority policy, asserted “there was little historical evidence to support the Arthurian legend” and said the poster “misleadingly implied the film’s storyline was based on historical fact.”
Buena Vista Intl. conceded to the ASA that “very little was known about Arthur or the Dark Ages” but insisted the film “brought the story closer to the historical truth than any other film about Arthur.”
That’s close enough for the ASA, which decided auds were likely to understand the film is a work of fiction and interpret the claim as “differentiating between events that could have happened and myths.”