My favorite take on the Arthurian legend is that by Stephen Lawhead, his entire Pendragon Cycle series.
My review from another thread:
I saw it last night. I paid $17.00 for me and my gf. I was not horribly disappointed. If you are ok with what Guy Ritchie did with Sherlock Holmes you’ll be ok with what he does with Arthur.
If you’re looking for something more consistent with the traditional Arthurian canon, stick with Excalibur. If you’re the type that nitpicks the historicity of clothing, weapons, architecture, etc., you won’t enjoy this film. If you hated 300 because there’s no such thing as crab-clawed executioners, you’ll hate this film. If you enjoyed 300 for the warrior ethos and action you might enjoy this film.
I have no idea what Guy Ritchie’s politics are; I assume they tilt well towards the left merely because of his prior association with that Madonna tramp...but I do think it interesting that as England slides into the dumpster, he has reached back into Britain’s history to celebrate quintessentially British heroes, first with Holmes and now with Arthur. If he makes Boadicea movie, I’ll probably catch it too.
A few things I particularly liked about the film were the notion of a basket of deplorables rising up against an illicitly usurped throne, led by one who has risen from amongst them. Arthur’s assumption of the mantle of leadership was a reluctant struggle, trying to resist his destiny until he came to recognize that people were fighting and dying in his name. As with a lot of Ritchie’s films the CGI is at times, over the top, but it tends to support the plot line rather than detract from it. Finally, some of the landscape cinematography of the English/Scottish countryside is as breathtakingly beautiful as Braveheart.
It may not be a great movie, but it’s not as horrible as it’s being made out to be.