AvsGirl41
New Yorker
Orlando gets his first starring role.
And I was underwhelmed. Once again, another epic that falls short.
Anyone else see it?
And I was underwhelmed. Once again, another epic that falls short.
Anyone else see it?
Kingdom of Heaven
- Thread starter AvsGirl41
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
i posted this in the 'last movie you've seen..' thread. i thought 'kingdom of heaven' wasn't bad. the battle scenes were good and orlando bloom is a hottie. i did kind of go 'uh oh' when i realized he was going to be carrying the movie, i'm not sure if he has that kind of presence yet.
i must admit, i don't know a lot about the crusades, and after watching this, i feel like i know even less. it seemed to me that the movie assumes you know who these characters are, as well as the social, political and religious history that led up to the events in the film. like i said, my historical knowledge of this era is sketchy at best, so i was confused at certain points in the movie. then again, maybe it's just a fictional story set during this time period - who knows?
anyway, on a positive note, it's made me want to read up on the crusades, so maybe i'll go buy a book on it
i must admit, i don't know a lot about the crusades, and after watching this, i feel like i know even less. it seemed to me that the movie assumes you know who these characters are, as well as the social, political and religious history that led up to the events in the film. like i said, my historical knowledge of this era is sketchy at best, so i was confused at certain points in the movie. then again, maybe it's just a fictional story set during this time period - who knows?
anyway, on a positive note, it's made me want to read up on the crusades, so maybe i'll go buy a book on it
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
I saw it yesterday afternoon. I liked much more than I thought I would. Orlando is a eye-candy to be sure, but he did a decent job.
I'd recommend it.
I'd recommend it.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I liked it much more than I thought I would too, I hate gory violence in movies though. I know there's all this "controversy" about the view it allegedly takes on Christians/Muslims..honestly all I remember about the Crusades is what I learned in whatever grade that was so long ago.
Orlando is just breathtakingly beautiful in that movie. I thought he did a decent job too. Then again, I might forgive him just about anything
Does anyone know for sure if it's Ed Norton playing the king who has leprosy? I thought I read that. Of course I could just look it up online
Orlando is just breathtakingly beautiful in that movie. I thought he did a decent job too. Then again, I might forgive him just about anything
Does anyone know for sure if it's Ed Norton playing the king who has leprosy? I thought I read that. Of course I could just look it up online
Last edited:
tiny dancer
Blue Crack Distributor
I hope it comes to my town.
Se7en
Rock n' Roll Doggie
lmjhitman said:anyway, on a positive note, it's made me want to read up on the crusades, so maybe i'll go buy a book on it
i love a woman who thirsts for knowledge.
so i've been doing a little reading online to determine the historical accuracy of this film. a lot of reviewers have slammed ridley scott for sugarcoating the conflict between the crusaders and the muslims, particularly in portraying the muslims as peace-loving. but, apparently saladin was/is known for being a generous and chivalrous leader, especially in his dealings with richard the lionheart.
from the wikipedia: "Saladin's relationship with Richard was one of chivalrous mutual respect as well as military rivalry; both were celebrated in the courtly romances that developed in northern Europe. When Richard was wounded, Saladin even offered the services of his personal physician, a signal favor for Muslim medical practice was the best in the Western world. At Arsuf, when Richard lost his horse, Saladin sent him two replacements. There were even plans to marry Richard's sister to Saladin's brother... Not long after Richard's departure, Saladin died in 1193 at Damascus. When they opened Saladin's treasury they found there was not enough money to pay for his funeral; he had given his money away to those in need."
there is also mention of saladin's capture and execution of raynald of chatillon and the capture of guy of lusignan, so this part of the movie is also accurate. i haven't read anything so far about queen sibylla or balian of ibelin, so maybe those characters are fictional?
i'm finding all of this quite fascinating, by the way.
from the wikipedia: "Saladin's relationship with Richard was one of chivalrous mutual respect as well as military rivalry; both were celebrated in the courtly romances that developed in northern Europe. When Richard was wounded, Saladin even offered the services of his personal physician, a signal favor for Muslim medical practice was the best in the Western world. At Arsuf, when Richard lost his horse, Saladin sent him two replacements. There were even plans to marry Richard's sister to Saladin's brother... Not long after Richard's departure, Saladin died in 1193 at Damascus. When they opened Saladin's treasury they found there was not enough money to pay for his funeral; he had given his money away to those in need."
there is also mention of saladin's capture and execution of raynald of chatillon and the capture of guy of lusignan, so this part of the movie is also accurate. i haven't read anything so far about queen sibylla or balian of ibelin, so maybe those characters are fictional?
i'm finding all of this quite fascinating, by the way.
i thirst for many things mr. se7enSe7en said:i love a woman who thirsts for knowledge.
OP
OP
AvsGirl41
New Yorker
Clearly, those movie reviewers haven't picked up a history book in a few years!
The film was very accurate in portraying the Muslims. Saladin really did allow safe passage for Christians out of the city--as opposed to the Christians, who as Orlando's character rightly pointed out, had slaughtered all the Muslims within the city.
I don't know alot about the Crusades, but the bits and pieces I've read have always stressed how the Muslims generally were kinder or more respectful to their prisoners. It's something that was swept under the historical rug of course--the Church hardly wanted anyone to know the "infidels" had behaved better than the holy Crusaders-- but is now given its rightful place in history.
Sometimes they should include an encyclopedia in the press kit.
The film was very accurate in portraying the Muslims. Saladin really did allow safe passage for Christians out of the city--as opposed to the Christians, who as Orlando's character rightly pointed out, had slaughtered all the Muslims within the city.
I don't know alot about the Crusades, but the bits and pieces I've read have always stressed how the Muslims generally were kinder or more respectful to their prisoners. It's something that was swept under the historical rug of course--the Church hardly wanted anyone to know the "infidels" had behaved better than the holy Crusaders-- but is now given its rightful place in history.
Sometimes they should include an encyclopedia in the press kit.
Anthony
Refugee
In terms of accuracy the film was as accurate (all the characters, with the exception of Godfey of Ibelin existed) as a contemporary historical epic these days is allowed to be, despite having little peeves (such as in real life, King Baldwin had already died before the time in which the movie is set in).
I have to confess that I had to watch this film immediately; it starred three of my favourite actors, looked gorgeous and was directed by Ridley Scott, whom I've admired for a long time. The movie certainly has good things going for it; namely the performances by Neeson and Irons, not to mention a very touching and affecting performance by Edward Norton. Also, the actor who played Saladdin, Ghassan Massoud, provided a touching and effective performance. Orlando Bloom was passable, if a bit wooden at times, and didn't really interfere with the movie too much.
However, the film's narrative and plot suffered substantially from the politics of the crusades contrasting with contemporary politics. Half-measures seem to be the curse of it; Scott doesn't want to make a strictly accurate portrayal of the crusades, and yet, he needs to have the obligatory villains to the story and a half-baked romance. The result is that you have a movie that stresses how noble everybody was, with the exception of the Templars (who are portrayed as pugnacious maniacs), and yet many battles that, consequentially, really don't involve very much. Halfway through the movie I thought to myself 'this really isn't going to work;, and to a certain extent, it doesn't. However, Scott convinces in terms of the tone he chooses to adopt for the last ten or fifteen minutes, and he manages to convince in a way you didn't think was possible. Its almost as if the last five minutes justifies the odd plot structure the film assumed. Balian's encounter with Richard the Lion Heart at the end really does, in my eyes, justify the awkward construction.
Try to look at the film purely from the character arc constructed for Balian, and how he comes to represent and summarise the sheer insanity and bloody turmoil of the never-ending Crusades. Try to look at someone fractured, confused and having problems with the notions of 'faith' and what it means to 'be good'. By the end he's pretty much none the wiser, but he has what most people who went to the Crusades didn't appear to have; a sense of direction.
From that point of the view, the movie isn't as weak and as awkward as some may think.
Ant.
I have to confess that I had to watch this film immediately; it starred three of my favourite actors, looked gorgeous and was directed by Ridley Scott, whom I've admired for a long time. The movie certainly has good things going for it; namely the performances by Neeson and Irons, not to mention a very touching and affecting performance by Edward Norton. Also, the actor who played Saladdin, Ghassan Massoud, provided a touching and effective performance. Orlando Bloom was passable, if a bit wooden at times, and didn't really interfere with the movie too much.
However, the film's narrative and plot suffered substantially from the politics of the crusades contrasting with contemporary politics. Half-measures seem to be the curse of it; Scott doesn't want to make a strictly accurate portrayal of the crusades, and yet, he needs to have the obligatory villains to the story and a half-baked romance. The result is that you have a movie that stresses how noble everybody was, with the exception of the Templars (who are portrayed as pugnacious maniacs), and yet many battles that, consequentially, really don't involve very much. Halfway through the movie I thought to myself 'this really isn't going to work;, and to a certain extent, it doesn't. However, Scott convinces in terms of the tone he chooses to adopt for the last ten or fifteen minutes, and he manages to convince in a way you didn't think was possible. Its almost as if the last five minutes justifies the odd plot structure the film assumed. Balian's encounter with Richard the Lion Heart at the end really does, in my eyes, justify the awkward construction.
Try to look at the film purely from the character arc constructed for Balian, and how he comes to represent and summarise the sheer insanity and bloody turmoil of the never-ending Crusades. Try to look at someone fractured, confused and having problems with the notions of 'faith' and what it means to 'be good'. By the end he's pretty much none the wiser, but he has what most people who went to the Crusades didn't appear to have; a sense of direction.
From that point of the view, the movie isn't as weak and as awkward as some may think.
Ant.
U2@NYC
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
I am still wondering why they keep on putting someone as insipid as Orlando Bloom in the main role of all these epics...
Just to get the chicks to see it, I guess.
Just to get the chicks to see it, I guess.
saltwaterkiss26
War Child
U2@NYC said:
Isn't Liam Neeson in it, too? I like him...
U2@NYC
Rock n' Roll Doggie Band-aid
Well, it also seems that the chicks are not going... movie made only $20 million on opening weekend.
Se7en
Rock n' Roll Doggie
lmjhitman said:i thirst for many things mr. se7en
lmjhitman, the enigma that is you entices me to no end. is it bad that i equate your, as yet, unknown beauty with that of your avatar? oh god
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
I admit Orlando was a major attraction, but I don't think that makes me stupid for seeing it I didn't see any ugly women in that movie either.
I saw Gladiator even though I'm really not a big fan of Russell Crowe. I don't think Ridley Scott cares all that much about historical accuracy, maybe he does.
I think the box office was slow over the weekend in general, maybe due to Mother's Day.
I didn't see any ugly women in that movie either.I saw Gladiator even though I'm really not a big fan of Russell Crowe. I don't think Ridley Scott cares all that much about historical accuracy, maybe he does.
I think the box office was slow over the weekend in general, maybe due to Mother's Day.
Bono's shades
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Seeing as Liam Neesom, Edward Norton AND Jeremy Irons are all in this movie, not to mention Orlando Bloom (hey, he may not be a great actor, but he's pretty) are all in this, I will definitely have to see it at some point. I really don't like the fact that Ridley Scott is directing it though, because I friggin' hated Gladiator.
MrsSpringsteen
Blue Crack Addict
Jeremy Irons is still incredible, and Liam was too as usual
lol, I pretty much friggin hated Gladiator too
lol, I pretty much friggin hated Gladiator too
i have since found this out. very insightful post ant.Anthony said:
i'm currently reading up on the different orders of knights involved in the crusades (templar, hospitaller, teutonic).
from occultpedia.com: "The Knights Templar, or Templars, were a military and religious order founded in Jerusalem during the Crusades. ...
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, head of the Cistercian order of monks, drew up the order's rule, but in 1128 Pope Honorius II officially recognized the Templars as a separate order, conferring on them an unprecedented degree of autonomy: they were responsible only to the Pope and not to secular rulers, were exempt from local taxes and judicial authority, and were solely responsible for clerical appointments. ...
The Templars seal showed two knights on one horse, the story being the first master was so poor that he had to share a horse with one of his followers, but after the fall of the Acre in 1291, when the crusading forces were driven from Palestine, the Templars' main activity became money-lending, and their enormous landholdings and financial strength aroused great hostility and jealousy among rulers and clergy alike. It was rumored that they had abandoned Christianity, that they worshipped a demon called Baphomet, and indulged in a variety of perverted orgiastic and cannibalistic rituals. In 1307, Philip IV of France, in debt to the order, charged the Templars with heresy and immorality. They were arrested and put on trial, and confessions were extracted by torture. Similar attacks were mounted against the order in Spain and England, and Pope Clement V, after initially opposing the trials, suppressed the Knights Templar by papal bull at the Council of Vienne in 1312. When the Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, and other leaders of the Templars retracted their forced confessions and declared their innocence and the innocence of the order, Philip had them burned at the stake at Paris in 1314. The Templars' holdings were dispersed, some going to the Knights Hospitalers and some to secular rulers, although Philip received none. It has been suggested that some leading Templars escaped and founded the Freemasons; another tradition is that Templar survivors founded the Rosicrucians."
i really should have majored in history or something. this stuff is too cool.
equate what you wish mr se7en. but be aware that the lovely miho in my avatar is beautiful but deadly.Originally posted by Se7en
lmjhitman, the enigma that is you entices me to no end. is it bad that i equate your, as yet, unknown beauty with that of your avatar? oh god
i, on the other hand, will continue to think of you as a riddle wrapped in a mystery wrapped in a lemon encircled by a shopping cart.
be sure to dream of me tonight.
Se7en
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Liesje
Blue Crack Addict
I'm going this weekend! Gladiator is my absolute favorite. Maybe Kingdom of Heaven will allow me to determine if that has more to do with Russell Crowe or Ridley Scott.
I have no idea how accurate Gladiator was. I know about Marcus Aurelius and if I'm correct, Gladiator was kind of a mish-mash of pieces of history from that period of time. I thought the religious aspect (or lack thereof) was insightfully accurate.
I have no idea how accurate Gladiator was. I know about Marcus Aurelius and if I'm correct, Gladiator was kind of a mish-mash of pieces of history from that period of time. I thought the religious aspect (or lack thereof) was insightfully accurate.
Anthony
Refugee
I loved Gladiator, and it was a far better film than Kingdom, but having said that, Gladiator was a substantially less accurate movie. The entire basis of the plot (Marcus Aurelius wanting to bring back the Republic) was unfounded; Marcus Aurelius firmly believed in a monarchy and wanted Commodus to succeed him.
There are more, which I won't go into because, ultimately, 'Gladiator' kicks ass.
Ant.
There are more, which I won't go into because, ultimately, 'Gladiator' kicks ass.
Ant.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Anthony said:'Gladiator' kicks ass.
It does. But then, anything with Russell Crowe in a skirt has all I want.
Anthony
Refugee
Hrm... did you see him in Master and Commander? Though not a skirt, what nice hair he had. Yes, thats the word, 'nice'.
Ant.
Saracene
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
I saw it today. After a slew of underwhelming "epics" in the last couple of years I went in with minimum expectations and as a result I enjoyed it even though it wasn't great. I really think they shot themselves in the foot casting Orlando Bloom as a lead - I've nothing against the guy but he just doesn't have the presence or intensity required for the role. Gladiator had a pretty ordinary script and the sort of solemn, leaden dialogue that plagues epic films of this kind, but damn if Russell Crowe wasn't like a jolt of electricity that kept the movie together. I could totally belive that his character was a guy that other men would follow to their death. Now no one as good-looking as Bloom can be a total waste of time, but he's completely overshadowed whenever he has to share a scene with powerhouses like Liam Neeson or Jeremy Irons or the actor who played Saladin - he was awesome! Edward Norton's leper king was a fascinating, haunting character; wish there was more of him.
Action was well done as befits a Ridley Scott film, but, as my brother put it, after Helm's Deep and Pelennor Fields every big-scale battle looks mmeh in comparison. And although it may be well-intentioned and admirable, IMO it hurts the film when during a battle you're not siding with anyone; there's no real involvement. True, in many war films you're not meant to cheer for anyone, but those films also don't treat warfare in "wow, cool" fashion.
Action was well done as befits a Ridley Scott film, but, as my brother put it, after Helm's Deep and Pelennor Fields every big-scale battle looks mmeh in comparison. And although it may be well-intentioned and admirable, IMO it hurts the film when during a battle you're not siding with anyone; there's no real involvement. True, in many war films you're not meant to cheer for anyone, but those films also don't treat warfare in "wow, cool" fashion.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Anthony said:
Yep. All fleshy and commanding.
Saracene
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
AvsGirl41 said:
The film doesn't mention the fact though that only the Christians who could pay their way out were allowed to leave. Those who couldn't afford the ransom were all sold into slavery. Saladin might have been a chivalrous man, but also a pragmatic who had to pay his troops after all.
MissVelvetDress_75
Blue Crack Addict
Orlando Bloom Similar threads
