Kingdom of Heaven [R]

[Soju Gorae]

I'm dying to see this one. It opens tomorrow and I can't wait. The scope of the movie looks gorgeous.

There's been some recent controversy about the historical accuracy of the film, but hey, as long as there's a lot of ass kicking, I don't care.

[Chesco United]

Could a mod stick an R in thread title? Thanks.
(plot details follow)
Well, I was a bit disappointed. I had read some of the reviews, which weren't too glowing. The dialogue was pretty awful, especially in the early part of the film. (I was afraid poor Liam Neeson would have to say "Patience, my blue friend" again :D ) The main thing I was looking forward to was (apparently uncredited) Edward Norton's performance as the leper king Baldwin IV, which did not disappoint. (Yes, I know Baldwin was dead by the time of the film, and IIRC, was not exactly going out in public in the later part of his reign.) As for as historical accuracy, well, it's a Ridley Scott film. I spotted A LOT of inaccuracies, and I'm sure others spotted many more. I thought the portrayal of Saladin (apparently by a Syrian actor) was pretty good. The battles were pretty good, though I would have liked to have seen more, of, oh, The Horns of Hattin (where Guy and his forces got crushed). The audience wasn't too happy coming out of the film, and out of the group of six that I went with, I might have liked it the best. Supposedly, there will be a much longer and explicit director's cut. Still, it was good to see a film about the Kingdom of Jerusalem, even if historically inaccurate. (Plus, it gave me a chance to wear my Jerusalem T-shirt with the kingdom's insignia, probably the closest I'll ever come to coming in costume to a movie thankfully.) However, this won't top the original of The Lion in Winter as my favorite 1180s movie. That 1968 film is ludicrously superior in dialogue to K Of H.
Any errors in this post are due to too little sleep and too much Jagermeister.]

[Belgian guy]

Could a mod stick an R in thread title? Thanks.
(plot details follow)
Well, I was a bit disappointed. I had read some of the reviews, which weren't too glowing. The dialogue was pretty awful, especially in the early part of the film. (I was afraid poor Liam Neeson would have to say "Patience, my blue friend" again :D ) The main thing I was looking forward to was (apparently uncredited) Edward Norton's performance as the leper king Baldwin IV, which did not disappoint. (Yes, I know Baldwin was dead by the time of the film, and IIRC, was not exactly going out in public in the later part of his reign.) As for as historical accuracy, well, it's a Ridley Scott film. I spotted A LOT of inaccuracies, and I'm sure others spotted many more. I thought the portrayal of Saladin (apparently by a Syrian actor) was pretty good. The battles were pretty good, though I would have liked to have seen more, of, oh, The Horns of Hattin (where Guy and his forces got crushed). The audience wasn't too happy coming out of the film, and out of the group of six that I went with, I might have liked it the best. Supposedly, there will be a much longer and explicit director's cut. Still, it was good to see a film about the Kingdom of Jerusalem, even if historically inaccurate. (Plus, it gave me a chance to wear my Jerusalem T-shirt with the kingdom's insignia, probably the closest I'll ever come to coming in costume to a movie thankfully.) However, this won't top the original of The Lion in Winter as my favorite 1180s movie. That 1968 film is ludicrously superior in dialogue to K Of H.
Any errors in this post are due to too little sleep and too much Jagermeister.]

Pretty much what he said.


*Spoilers ahead*




I liked Neeson's character. After his characters dies the movie lacks a beating heart, with Bloom failing to capture the imagination. Part of the problem is also that Balian is too perfect for his own good, and for the good of the movie. The more jaded and raw Maximus in Gladiator was a far more appealing leading character.

Other good stuff: the guy playing Saladin, and in general the depiction of Saladin's men and army. The scene with the two armies marching on each other under a scorching sun at Kerak.

I also had my reservations with their choice of leading lady. In the same way that Diane Kruger wasn't a believable Helen of Troy, Eva Green doesn't make a great Sibylla, and her relationship with Balian seems to come out of nowhere.

[God_Borat]

The Saladin guy is Egyptian-America, i read like 4 articles in the papers about him here.

[AsanoAram]

The movie was very good in my opinion, the siege was absolutely beautiful. Visually the movie was very impressive.
The inaccuracies in the movie would be:
The Leper King (Baldwin IV) was already dead when this story started
Sybilla did not love Balian and was very faithful to her husbad, Guy
There was no such person as Godfrey of Ibelian
Balian was not a Blacksmith, but actually a Lord in Jersualem, who was much older then shown.
Never the less, it was still great, and I recommend everybody go out and see it.

[Ghost]

I liked it. But I'm a sucker for sword and sandals. Except Gladiator, which I hated. Go figure. The problem with this film is that it tries to invest a platoon's worth of character traits into one character. But the siege was an amazing sequence.

[sch2383]

I also had my reservations with their choice of leading lady. In the same way that Diane Kruger wasn't a believable Helen of Troy, Eva Green doesn't make a great Sibylla, and her relationship with Balian seems to come out of nowhere.

I would imagine that their relationship is fleshed out in the 45 minutes Scott was foreced to cut by the studio.

[SABuffalo786]

I'm not looking for a history lesson, I just want to be entertained.

If they bend the facts a bit, oh well.

[Soju Gorae]

Thought it was ok. Not a lot of the characters I cared for. They weren't involving enough except for King Baldwin and Saladin. The action scenes were nicely done but we've all seen them before in other epics. So I hoped the story would be compelling enough to balance that out, but that never happened.

Overall, not a bad movie. Just... ok.

[nazzo]

The Saladin guy is Egyptian-America, i read like 4 articles in the papers about him here.

The actor who played Saladin is Syrian.

I liked the movie becuase it showed how Muslims didnt kill civilians after they win a war. (unlike Bin Ladden, who by the way does not represent Islam and he is banned from all Muslim countries except Afganistan.)

You may noticed Saladin took the cross from the ground and put it back on the table. (He did this becuase as a Muslim he should respect others even if they were fighting a war with him).

[El Ardillo]

it sucked...my friend saw a press release and he said it was douchey compared to Gladiator.

as for Bin Laden, in name he is banned but in practice he isnt. dont try to make it seem like the arab world is all roses, they are pretty backward...

i decided to edit this because it came off a bit, racist...

i believe that saladin was a classy guy. he was mannered from what i have learned of him. however, as i see things today it becomes apparent many times that certain factions within Islam are influencing my view of the overall religion. in actuality i realise the severity of my thought and i wish to apologize saying that, "Islam is a peaceful and manner faith that i have no quarrel with"

[nazzo]

El Ardillo

Terrorist are being fought in Kuwait, KSA, and other countries. In Kuwait alone they cought over 50 Al-Qaeda terrorists. In KSA they prisoned hundreds of terrorists. I also have a friend who is cop in Kuwait who got injured fighting the terrorists.

Yes I know some Muslims (small amount) follow Bin Ladden, but they are just desprate for attention.

As a Muslim I love Chritians and other religions and have nothing against them. And most Muslims are like me. I just hate seeing people blame us for what Bin Ladden did.

Jehad does not mean fighting the innocent it means fighting those who fight you. But retards such as Bin Ladden just see it in a diffrent way.

If Bin Ladden gets caught by the U.S., I will consider is a victory for the Muslim nations as well.

[El Ardillo]

that, my friend, is the islam i love.

[SABuffalo786]

Solid if not spectacular way to start off the summer movie season.

I liked the whole anit-fanaticism angle, no matter what the religion.

This will hold me over until Star Wars.

[astabooty]

Overall, not a bad movie. Just... ok.


Pretty much what I thought. Probably a bit better than ok though.

[panicfc]

Saw it on Sunday, and have to say I liked it.

I knew it wasn't going to be historically accurate. Didn't expect it to be. Was still a nice story, but I didn't like the flesh-cutting sounds. Could have left that out, plus the new "all battles are a blur" isn't as fun to watch as a good Errol Flynn sword fight.

[Soju Gorae]

Saw it on Sunday, and have to say I liked it.

I knew it wasn't going to be historically accurate. Didn't expect it to be. Was still a nice story, but I didn't like the flesh-cutting sounds. Could have left that out, plus the new "all battles are a blur" isn't as fun to watch as a good Errol Flynn sword fight.
I was under the impression the movie was historically very accurate.

Which parts of it weren't?

[AsanoAram]

I was under the impression the movie was historically very accurate.

Which parts of it weren't?

Balian was much older in real life, he did not have an affair with Sybilla, she was very happily married to her husband, Guy de Lusignan.
There was no such character as Tiberias.
That is the most obvious wrongs in terms of historical details. But Saladins army did take Jersualem in a siege, and they did allow all to leave freely. Also Reynald was actually killed by Saladin, because of Reynald's raids on caravans.

[Chesco United]

Tiberias was based on a real person (Raymond III of Tripoli, IIRC).

[freekickwiz]

I fell asleep three different times during this movie :/

There wasn't enough action to keep me entertained.