Why I loved "King Arthur"

Most of the critics blasted Guy Ritchie's latest King Arthur. It lacks credibility and the plot is not linear - they say. Some affirm it is loud and loose. Some reaffirm its failure by calling it a jumbled affair, weighed down by confusing supernatural elements. Or even declare it the biggest flop of 2017. Amin.

But these are exactly the reasons why dreamers all over the world get the chance to enjoy it to the marrow. Specifically because it lacks credibility. And precisely because it is not linear.

Nonlinear reasoning (like nonlinear systems) is disruptive. It challenges the status quo of our Western intellectual tradition, based largely on dyadic relations. Nonlinear systems appear chaotic. Unpredictable, counterintuitive, contrasting with the much simpler and clearer linear structures. They have no predictability. And that disturbs our brains, not accustomed to escaping binary realities.

Yes, King Arthur is not a masterpiece of cinematography. It has a noisy texture and a less refined narrativity compared to Ritchies previous Lock, Stock, Snatch, and RocknRolla.

Yes, King Arthur might be wild, chaotic and loud. But it is a wonderful reminder of a beautiful legend buried deep in the unconscious mind of our Western civilisation.

In a world governed by self made kings and queens, endemic fraud and ego dominated prophets, legends are welcome kind reminders for critical sensibilities.

Magic: binding the conscious mind

Moral dualism is deeply embedded in the belief system of our Western civilisation. The relentless conflict between the benevolent and the malevolent has been generally accepted as the blood pained thread of our culture.

Nonlinear reasoning introduces an odd third factor: magic.

This third element heralds the transformation of the oppositional elements of the dyad into a position with new properties that could not have been known before their meeting. The tertium quid non datur.

Supreme good and supreme evil are thus pushed to extreme edges by the magical (element) - which of course our mind cannot grasp. And what our mind cannot grasp is either thrown to the Evil or subjected to mockery.

The Legend of King Arthur, by being interlinked to the heart with the extra-ordinary figure of Merlin, stands for all the above.

Both Merlin and Arthur bear the difficult task of symbolising he who is different. He who is the outsider. He who is high-roping between the known and the unknown, between the explainable and the unexplainable, between good and evil. They both stand for the odd third factor. They both challenge the status-quo, conventional rules, conformity, accepted norms and rusty old ranks. They are both believers, seekers, shape shifters, comfortable with the uncomfortable. They both represent the union of opposites, pointing out to a conflict hidden well into the depth of our psyche.

Merlin and Arthur did not survive the age of chivalry. But they stay with us forever, hidden in the dark waters of the collective unconscious psyche of the human race, as totems for chaos, counter-intuition, and magic. Merlin and Arthur are the tertium quid.

So, yes, King Arthur is not a masterpiece. It might be too fast and too loud. It plays with the original play, editing facts and replacing characters. It coins and stirs. Who is the Mage? Where is Merlin? What are the Darklands? How can everything happen so fast? Why is there no timeline?

Third factor considered, all these questions get their answers.

King Arthur is not a masterpiece. But it is a beautiful storytelling act. Dedicated to all those Oliver Twists roving the world, ready to bind their conscious mind and believe in their own magic.