sandwichjohnfilms

The bold and wild visuals of King Arthur: Legend of the Sword betray its core problem: a lack of story. Review by Matt Cummings Hollywood's fascination with the reboot seems to have no end. Apparently, our oldest myths are also up for theatrical reassembling, as King Arthur: Legend of the Sword arrives to an audience who probably wasn't clamoring for a retelling (the last was 2004 and it didn't do so well). The result is a highly-stylized, frenetic good time that will most likely end up in the discount bin, but not because it's bad. The story behind Legend of the Sword is different than the traditional tale: instead of being raised by a loving family after the death of his father, Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) is raised in a brothel after he's sent down the river Moses-style after his father Uther (Eric Bana) is killed during a coup by his brother Vortigern (Jude Law). Taking on the role of Morgana, Vortigern is courting ancient and deadly magic in

The bold but flawed Science Fiction drama I Origins strains under its own weight. I Origins suggests that while people possess an original and unreproducible set of eyes, those very same eyes and the memories it seizes can transfer to a yet-unborn person, once their original owner dies. For scientist Ian (Michael Pitt), proving otherwise has become a lifelong dream. Soon, he and research assistant Karen (Brit Marling) seek to prove that the eye is a product of slow, evolutionary change as opposed to its instant creation by some unknown force. The results make Ian famous, but not before a chance meeting with the mysterious Sofi (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey), whose eyes are among the most unique Ian has ever seen. After hooking up with Sofi, the two experience unimaginable tragedy, leaving Ian and Karen to continue their work. Now married and having produced a child, they realize the boy's eyes match those of another man whose recent death have gifted some of his memories to