Still thinking about this.
Except now I’m envisioning:
Standard King Arthur movie with the usual ‘back in the 6th century…’ establishing blub, which looks a little odd because it started with a specific year, which was crossed off and replaced by another, which was also crossed off and replaced by ‘~6th century, give or take’ along with a few other editorial addendums.
Opens with Uther and Merlin discussing the siege of Tintagel. Things go smoothly until Uther’s name is used, cue the first interruption to explain that Uther was probably an ‘invention’ of Geoffrey of Monmouth, but then that academic is interrupted by a Geoffrey apologist (possibly yours truly) to defend his work with a complicated spiel that gets interrupted by the actor who plays Merlin insisting ‘we should get back to the story’
What follows slowly unravels into a poorly disguised academic debate mediated by the Merlin actor as the voice of ‘well I was actually There!’ And it slowly becomes clear that not only does he genuinely believe he’s Merlin, but his version of the story is absolutely the most unhinged and least academically supported version and relies largely on the French Romances for some reason*.
*the reason being that this is an accurate representation of many fans, who hold the Romance era as the ‘Cannon’ for King Arthur even knowing it is not the ‘Historical’ or even ‘Original’ narrative.