Cinema: Kingdom of Heaven

I went to see the Kingdom of Heaven last night and I just wanted to share.

It was not that great. The movie was long with lots of battle scenes. I think that it was just about battles. There were castle walls being seiged by tall towers that were rolled in by the enemy. There were countless unrealistic CGI arrows flying through the air during each battle (from unseen archers usually).

The story was about a small town blacksmith who realizes that he is royalty or something. He starts to fight the good fight so that he can gain attonement for killing a priest. He ends up on the edge of the battle when he stands up for goodness (and not religion). When the kingdom is offered to him - and subsequently he could have made great decisions to cancel the battle and end the wars - he turns the crown down and the queen (whom he already has slept with). Why does he turn it all down? Because he isn't looking for power. He is looking for peace. Stupid guy could have found peace by picking up the crown and making peace. But instead he lets the bad christian french guy get the crown and the queen and the bad christian french guy leads the people right into war the next day.

Instead of getting away scott free our hero gets forced into the battle of christians and jews against the muslims. Somehow, he becomes the lead person and gets to 'parlay' with the enemy after a fierce battle, and he turns over Jerusalem to the muslims for safe passage of the survivors of the battle.

Back to the experience of the movie; I was never drawn into liking the characters. For a while I was even rooting for the muslims to win. They were portrayed as the nicer of the two camps. The christians were dominated by leaders who were hungry for war and land and used religion to get what they wanted, often in a backstabbing or infighting way. The queen turned into a sort of goth depressed creature in the end and the hero seemed wishy-washy when he turned down the 'peace' of the power of the crown, cause he didn't feel like it.

There was a theme to the movie that was delivered in the style of Kyle on South Park teaching the adults not to do wrong. When the hero has a chance to speak to the people, he says that the land of Jerusalem doesn't belong to anyone yet belongs to us all- and there should be no fighting over it. It was kind of weak when I thought the point of the movie was to show the people who wanted to take over the holy land taking it over.

During the battles I kept thinking 'where are the orcs?'

I give this long pointless movie a 4 out of 10.

Glad to know... Now I won't be wasting $$$ on This..

I saw it Thursday evening, and although not a stunning film, I actually thought it was OK, and like a lot of films today, delivers some interesting info from the past, although not always acurate, and a little dramatised for film.

And if you remember this battle over Jerusalem is still raging on today. I would say, if there is nothing better to do, worth seeing.

was it as tedious as the lord of the rings films?

The director is the same as the one that made Gladiator. So more Gladiator style.

You better. They were the ones who were attacked after all... It's not fun waking up to find a bunch of crusader knights ramming your door down, I'm telling you.

Anyone who tries to start a debate about the crusades after this post will be shot and fed to the dogs... I know where you live.

good film. Although it was seriously far fetched. Would say it was a mixture between troy and lord of the rings with a hint of tripple x's cheese!

Absolute shite. Just like Gladiator is just a collection of violent scenes loosely strung together.

But what about Rambo, Commando, The Terminators...

@ ChemicalBurn

Terminator 1- excellent movie - atmospheric as all hell - prolly Arnie's best movie - even though Running Man has better lines. It even has something like an original plot line for it's time. Not even gonna address the others...

It's the same as the difference between "Dead Ringers" and say a shitfest like "Scream 2"

What nonsense, Gladiator was a cracking film. Not all violent scenes

while watching the film, i thought, man this reminds me of gladiator. duh, didn't know ridley scott did this film too. and gladiator was actually a good movie!

i thought KoH was okay, but i was not convinced at all why bloomey went to the crusades. that whole beginning was just not convincing. and profundo, he went to jerusalem in the hope he could find his wife a way back into heaven. he "had" to kill the priest to flee. that was just so obvious!

kingdom of heaven had a fabulous cast: liam neeson, jeremy irons... so i was realy disappointd. the best was the leper king! man the emotion you got from his eyes and his voice (which i read was edward norton's).

the battlescenes were just really boring and way too short. the best scene was when banion had his shirt off for a few seconds. ooh la la la. agree with profunod, 4 outtta 10. two thumbs down.

Different strokes I s'ppose...didnt like this , didnt like Gladiator but like u i noticed much similarity.

I watched this on the weekend and found it really good and interesting.

It appears different people have different opinion's. I saw this on Thursday (first day it was released) and actually really enjoyed it. And find although perhaps a little dramatised for the movies, the story is interesting, considering the battle between the Muslims and Jews is still going on today.

I thought it was ok, although about an hour too long. And even though Orlando looked yummy I thought he was a little too weak to be cast as the main character. Liam Neeson, David Thewlis and Jeremy Irons just stole the scenes they were in.

The battle scenes were great, and this is coming from a girl who hates gore.

It could have been such a fabulous film, but it was just full of all this wishy washy Hollywood bull$hit that didn't want to upset anyone. I am sure that there were no people like Orlando's character who 'understood' what was wrong and said that the land belongs to no one. It was made from a 21st century perspective, and apart from the obvious bad guys, most were all nice and understanding, which is completely unbelievable.

Shame, because Gladiator was great, as was Black Hawk Down, also a RS film.

Eh... Alien (s) ???

How could the man who made Alien (1979) - a cinematic and design masterpiece, come up with this shite?

Gladiator (also Scott) set the trail, but every other hystory-epic since then has failed miserably.

Re: Alien

I didn't mention that film because it was so long ago. Of course Blade Runner as well, what a masterpiece...

Blade Runner also a classic, no doubt.

But Alien? I mean it is a work of art. The living walls, the darkness and the atmosphere of impending dread.

Really a watershed in cinema. A bit like the E-Type Jag or the Lucky Strike logo. Things that always look cool.

i must say that i thought KOH was at least adequate. i agree that orlando bloom doesn't really zing in scenes the way liam neeson and jeremy irons do -- or even the way edward norton did through his mask. but the kid does a good job of swinging a sword and looking, when needed, confused, helpless, or determined. (though it's my personal opinion that he needs to do a film that doesn't require swordplay quick, or he'll be last week's flavor of the week in a hurry.)

the battle scenes were ok, but i really hate it when they use quick edits to force that adrenalized feel on the audience, rather than simply choreographing better fights. i kept wondering where the orcs were, too.

so: we learn that orlando bloom is a whiz with a sword, that he has Morals and Does Good Things, and that water is important in the desert. if you can get water to your household, all men will admire you, even when you surrender the city they've watched their friends and fathers die to defend. are these the messages we're supposed to get?

jerusalem belongs to all of us? having Morals and Doing Good Things means you get to live with the queen in rainy cold england for the rest of your days? or something about water? notice how they all fought with fire? somebody work up a good fire and water metaphor for me... did they mean for it to teach us about the crusades? or that it's silly to fight about land because of religion, especially in the desert?

i really like period flicks that treat the period respectfully and -- who knows -- maybe even teach us something about the topic they're covering. but hollywood believes that most people, and therefore the bulk of people in movie audiences, want adrenaline, blood, and titties, so content gets pushed aside for flash. much like the movie "titanic" was a chick flick set on a boat, "KoH" is a fight flick set in the past.

but i mean, hey, it's the movies: go for the ride, not the education.

What do the historians think of it? Have they matched everything up ok? Does everything fit the period? (Hate it when theres 13th century castles and armour in a 6th century setting, the reverse is seldom seen thankfully) Are there any characters or events that match real life and does the film do a good job of it?

off topic, but anyone seen XXX2? Gonna be watching it tonite with a couple of mates and am wondering if I should ditch at the last moment.