Kingdom of Heavens

benji · 3rd February 2006, 11:27 PM

I have finally found the time to watch this movie on DVD. Based on revuews I didn't have high hopes. But I must say I was surprised! I can see why the movie isn't a big hit among believers of all sorts. It shows perfectly well how rational men on both sides have been pushed into a war they did not want by fanatic, religious warmongers.

merentha · 6th February 2006, 01:42 AM

I saw this movie three times in the theatres, and the DVD countless times since. I didn't like it at first, but it gets better with repeat viewings. Fans of the film are clamouring for the Director's Cut to be released on DVD. So far, it was only screened in one remote theatre in Los Angeles.

Anyhow, the recent uproar over the Danish cartoons reminded me of my favourite line in the movie spoken by David Thewlis' Hospitaller character: "I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god."

Some things never change.

benji · 6th February 2006, 01:57 AM

What suprised me (positively) was that the christians were not shown as the "good guys" in the movie, but that there were good and bad guys on both sides. The good guys being the least religious characters. Coincidence? I'm sure its not....

Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things -- that takes religion. (Steven Weinberg)

ceo_esq · 6th February 2006, 09:25 AM

I found this movie dopey in the extreme. I have to hand it to Ridley Scott, however - it takes some nerve (and ego) to rewrite the Crusades as a conflict between religious fanatics in one corner and liberal Hollywood secularists in the other corner. Nervy, but silly. Unfortunately, this and many other questionable decisions on Scott's part meant that audiences left the cinema probably understanding less about the period's culture and history than they did when they bought their tickets.

By the way, the "I put no stock in religion" line Merentha mentioned was a good example of what I'm talking about. We know you put no stock in religion, Ridley. Many of us don't, either. But it's narcissistic as well as anachronistic to project yourself onto a twelfth-century knight. We get the point - the only virtuous, sensible or admirable figures in this struggle, if there were any, must have been people who thought just like you. Thanks for setting us straight again, Hollywood!

benji · 6th February 2006, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

I found this movie dopey in the extreme.

Dopey in the extreme? War of the Worlds (the new one) is dopey in the extreme. Matrix 2&3 are dopey in the extreme. Of course, KoH isn't history channel, but...

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

I have to hand it to Ridley Scott, however - it takes some nerve (and ego) to rewrite the Crusades as a conflict between religious fanatics in one corner and liberal Hollywood secularists in the other corner. Nervy, but silly. Unfortunately, this and many other questionable decisions on Scott's part meant that audiences left the cinema probably understanding less about the period's culture and history than they did when they bought their tickets.

Well - at least they hopefully understood, that even then, religion wasn't about religion, but about power.

Originally Posted by ceo_esq

By the way, the "I put no stock in religion" line Merentha mentioned was a good example of what I'm talking about. We know you put no stock in religion, Ridley. Many of us don't, either. But it's narcissistic as well as anachronistic to project yourself onto a twelfth-century knight.

Do you really think it's impossible for a veteran knight who has probably fought in more than one battle and wo has seen "invincible" christian armies get slaughtered to come to the conclusion that maybe there isn't much to all that religious babble? At least Saladin actually was a reasonable man - I don't think a religious fanatic would have agreed to truces like he did.

Ed · 9th February 2006, 06:24 AM

I've read a fair amount on the Crusades and I thought that this flik was pretty accurate. I thought that Balin's motives were pretty reasonable. I think that the depiction of Reynald was pretty much spot on, the guy was pretty much a psychopath it appears. There are nits (Reynald did not rape and kill Saladins sister) but overall not bad.

Saladin was a very smart and practicle man. I think that Scott's depiction was pretty good vis a vis the historical evidence. Balin, as I am sure you know, was a real person but his story was conflated with others (and enhanced) for dramatic purposes.

Overall, the movie was quite good (to me) and gets better with repeated viewings.

headscratcher4 · 9th February 2006, 07:00 AM

It lost me at the beginning...I found it hard to believe that the "blacksmith" bastard son of a knight would be recognized as the heir to that night and that without courtly training could fit so neatly in to a very structured class system. Otherwise, the dipictions of the times wasn't too bad, but movie making and the need for acceptable heros that a modern audience can relate to has a way of mucking up history...imo.

merentha · 9th February 2006, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by headscratcher4

It lost me at the beginning...I found it hard to believe that the "blacksmith" bastard son of a knight would be recognized as the heir to that night and that without courtly training could fit so neatly in to a very structured class system. Otherwise, the dipictions of the times wasn't too bad, but movie making and the need for acceptable heros that a modern audience can relate to has a way of mucking up history...imo.

A fair bit of backstory that explains Balian's experience with siege engines and warfare were missing from the theatrical release and reinstated in the Director's Cut. The entire arc of Sibylla's son, Balian V, is also restored in the DC. Apparently, the entire collapse of Sibylla's psyche towards the final third of the movie had to do with her son than her brother. We never got to see any of that because some idiots at Fox felt that no audience would want to sit through a 3-hour long movie and forced Ridley Scott to make the cuts.

Ed · 10th February 2006, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by merentha

A fair bit of backstory that explains Balian's experience with siege engines and warfare were missing from the theatrical release and reinstated in the Director's Cut. The entire arc of Sibylla's son, Balian V, is also restored in the DC. Apparently, the entire collapse of Sibylla's psyche towards the final third of the movie had to do with her son than her brother. We never got to see any of that because some idiots at Fox felt that no audience would want to sit through a 3-hour long movie and forced Ridley Scott to make the cuts.

Directors cut?

merentha · 11th February 2006, 02:23 AM

Originally Posted by Ed

Directors cut?

Yes. The Director's Cut was screened in late December 2005 at some obscure theatre in LA (no idea what Fox was trying to do). Anyhow, Amazon is accepting pre-orders for the 4-discs DVD set which is expected to be released on May 23.

Ed · 11th February 2006, 05:06 AM

Originally Posted by merentha

Yes. The Director's Cut was screened in late December 2005 at some obscure theatre in LA (no idea what Fox was trying to do). Anyhow, Amazon is accepting pre-orders for the 4-discs DVD set which is expected to be released on May 23.

Cool. Thank you.

Just checked Amazon.... no mention of the DC.

merentha · 11th February 2006, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by Ed

Cool. Thank you.

Just checked Amazon.... no mention of the DC.

Kingdom of Heaven DC

Ed · 12th February 2006, 04:40 AM

Originally Posted by merentha

Kingdom of Heaven DC

Thanks.

3rd February 2006, 11:27 PM	#1
benji Scholar Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Switzerland Posts: 107	Kingdom of Heavens I have finally found the time to watch this movie on DVD. Based on revuews I didn't have high hopes. But I must say I was surprised! I can see why the movie isn't a big hit among believers of all sorts. It shows perfectly well how rational men on both sides have been pushed into a war they did not want by fanatic, religious warmongers.
	__________________ "The problem with the global village is all the global village idiots." -Paul Ginsparg

6th February 2006, 01:42 AM	#2
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437	I saw this movie three times in the theatres, and the DVD countless times since. I didn't like it at first, but it gets better with repeat viewings. Fans of the film are clamouring for the Director's Cut to be released on DVD. So far, it was only screened in one remote theatre in Los Angeles. Anyhow, the recent uproar over the Danish cartoons reminded me of my favourite line in the movie spoken by David Thewlis' Hospitaller character: "I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god." Some things never change.
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437

6th February 2006, 01:57 AM	#3
benji Scholar Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Switzerland Posts: 107	What suprised me (positively) was that the christians were not shown as the "good guys" in the movie, but that there were good and bad guys on both sides. The good guys being the least religious characters. Coincidence? I'm sure its not.... Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things -- that takes religion. (Steven Weinberg)
	__________________ "The problem with the global village is all the global village idiots." -Paul Ginsparg

6th February 2006, 09:25 AM	#4
ceo_esq Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 4,940	I found this movie dopey in the extreme. I have to hand it to Ridley Scott, however - it takes some nerve (and ego) to rewrite the Crusades as a conflict between religious fanatics in one corner and liberal Hollywood secularists in the other corner. Nervy, but silly. Unfortunately, this and many other questionable decisions on Scott's part meant that audiences left the cinema probably understanding less about the period's culture and history than they did when they bought their tickets. By the way, the "I put no stock in religion" line Merentha mentioned was a good example of what I'm talking about. We know you put no stock in religion, Ridley. Many of us don't, either. But it's narcissistic as well as anachronistic to project yourself onto a twelfth-century knight. We get the point - the only virtuous, sensible or admirable figures in this struggle, if there were any, must have been people who thought just like you. Thanks for setting us straight again, Hollywood!
ceo_esq Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 4,940	Last edited by ceo_esq; 6th February 2006 at 09:27 AM.

6th February 2006, 10:24 AM	#5
benji Scholar Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Switzerland Posts: 107	Originally Posted by ceo_esq I found this movie dopey in the extreme. Dopey in the extreme? War of the Worlds (the new one) is dopey in the extreme. Matrix 2&3 are dopey in the extreme. Of course, KoH isn't history channel, but... Originally Posted by ceo_esq I have to hand it to Ridley Scott, however - it takes some nerve (and ego) to rewrite the Crusades as a conflict between religious fanatics in one corner and liberal Hollywood secularists in the other corner. Nervy, but silly. Unfortunately, this and many other questionable decisions on Scott's part meant that audiences left the cinema probably understanding less about the period's culture and history than they did when they bought their tickets. Well - at least they hopefully understood, that even then, religion wasn't about religion, but about power. Originally Posted by ceo_esq By the way, the "I put no stock in religion" line Merentha mentioned was a good example of what I'm talking about. We know you put no stock in religion, Ridley. Many of us don't, either. But it's narcissistic as well as anachronistic to project yourself onto a twelfth-century knight. Do you really think it's impossible for a veteran knight who has probably fought in more than one battle and wo has seen "invincible" christian armies get slaughtered to come to the conclusion that maybe there isn't much to all that religious babble? At least Saladin actually was a reasonable man - I don't think a religious fanatic would have agreed to truces like he did.
	__________________ "The problem with the global village is all the global village idiots." -Paul Ginsparg

9th February 2006, 06:24 AM	#6
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	I've read a fair amount on the Crusades and I thought that this flik was pretty accurate. I thought that Balin's motives were pretty reasonable. I think that the depiction of Reynald was pretty much spot on, the guy was pretty much a psychopath it appears. There are nits (Reynald did not rape and kill Saladins sister) but overall not bad. Saladin was a very smart and practicle man. I think that Scott's depiction was pretty good vis a vis the historical evidence. Balin, as I am sure you know, was a real person but his story was conflated with others (and enhanced) for dramatic purposes. Overall, the movie was quite good (to me) and gets better with repeated viewings.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

9th February 2006, 07:00 AM	#7
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	It lost me at the beginning...I found it hard to believe that the "blacksmith" bastard son of a knight would be recognized as the heir to that night and that without courtly training could fit so neatly in to a very structured class system. Otherwise, the dipictions of the times wasn't too bad, but movie making and the need for acceptable heros that a modern audience can relate to has a way of mucking up history...imo.
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

9th February 2006, 07:23 AM	#8
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437	Post may contain spoilers Originally Posted by headscratcher4 It lost me at the beginning...I found it hard to believe that the "blacksmith" bastard son of a knight would be recognized as the heir to that night and that without courtly training could fit so neatly in to a very structured class system. Otherwise, the dipictions of the times wasn't too bad, but movie making and the need for acceptable heros that a modern audience can relate to has a way of mucking up history...imo. A fair bit of backstory that explains Balian's experience with siege engines and warfare were missing from the theatrical release and reinstated in the Director's Cut. The entire arc of Sibylla's son, Balian V, is also restored in the DC. Apparently, the entire collapse of Sibylla's psyche towards the final third of the movie had to do with her son than her brother. We never got to see any of that because some idiots at Fox felt that no audience would want to sit through a 3-hour long movie and forced Ridley Scott to make the cuts.
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437

10th February 2006, 05:31 AM	#9
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Originally Posted by merentha A fair bit of backstory that explains Balian's experience with siege engines and warfare were missing from the theatrical release and reinstated in the Director's Cut. The entire arc of Sibylla's son, Balian V, is also restored in the DC. Apparently, the entire collapse of Sibylla's psyche towards the final third of the movie had to do with her son than her brother. We never got to see any of that because some idiots at Fox felt that no audience would want to sit through a 3-hour long movie and forced Ridley Scott to make the cuts. Directors cut?
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.

11th February 2006, 02:23 AM	#10
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437	Originally Posted by Ed Directors cut? Yes. The Director's Cut was screened in late December 2005 at some obscure theatre in LA (no idea what Fox was trying to do). Anyhow, Amazon is accepting pre-orders for the 4-discs DVD set which is expected to be released on May 23.
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437

11th February 2006, 05:06 AM	#11
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Originally Posted by merentha Yes. The Director's Cut was screened in late December 2005 at some obscure theatre in LA (no idea what Fox was trying to do). Anyhow, Amazon is accepting pre-orders for the 4-discs DVD set which is expected to be released on May 23. Cool. Thank you. Just checked Amazon.... no mention of the DC.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day. Last edited by Ed; 11th February 2006 at 05:13 AM.

11th February 2006, 07:44 PM	#12
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437	Originally Posted by Ed Cool. Thank you. Just checked Amazon.... no mention of the DC. Kingdom of Heaven DC
merentha Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 437

12th February 2006, 04:40 AM	#13
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	Originally Posted by merentha Kingdom of Heaven DC Thanks.
Ed god Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 8,691	__________________ "The history of science is the record of dead religions" Phrases And Philosophies For The Use Of The Young Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) Our Guarentee: One obscure (or not) Python reference per day.