# Kingdom of Heaven



## dwndrgn (May 7, 2005)

Saw this one today.  All in all I'd give it a 5 out of 10.  Not bad, not great, just ok.

It's a good story, the attempt to keep Jerusalem independent of the rest of the Arabic world.  Unfortunately it seemed as if the editors had a field day.  There was so much stuff left out and so much seemed to happen so fast that I felt that the whole thing happened within a week.  There was no sense of time.  A couple of things jarred as well - (spoiler alert) 















- one of the main characters dies within the first 10 minutes.  A little startling.  Especially when the audience really has no background to work from, we've now lost the character who could fill that in for us.

Orlando Bloom's entire dialogue would fit in one paragraph if put together.  Since we've no background on him nor his father, we really have nothing to go on.  The secondary characters also weren't fleshed out well.  I felt that the acting was done well and the casting seemed to be strong but they weren't given enough to work with.

I just didn't get the symbolism of the Princess cutting her hair superimposed by an image of the dead king's disease-ravaged face.  Seemed a bit odd.

It was visually stunning though.  They used a new technique (ok, new to me at least) for filming the gore of the battlefield.  It was recognizeable but worked just the same.

I left feeling that it could have been a great movie if they had left all the missing pieces in and perhaps cut it into two movies.


----------



## The Master™ (May 7, 2005)

Maybe the best bits will be left for the DVD Special Edition release!! 

So, Ridley Scott didn't repeat his success with Gladiator??? 

Not a film I'm looking forward to seeing, and with your info, I'm even less inclined to go see it...


----------



## NinaWilliam (May 7, 2005)

Hi,
I am not going to watch this movie.. i watch the trailer but, i didn't like it  Gladiator was much better...

anyway.. i think am going to watch a horror movie..


----------



## rune (May 7, 2005)

I'll still go and see it probably in a couple of weeks.  I liked the look of the trailer, and feel it may still appeal to me.


----------



## Wanderer (May 7, 2005)

I saw the movie today, and by my opinion the movie is just ok. nothing spectacular. battles are good, and music in some parts is great


----------



## Tsujigiri (May 7, 2005)

I'm giving thought to condemning two hours of my life to this later this evening.....


----------



## Neon (May 8, 2005)

I'd like to see this movie and probably will within the next week or so.  And I knew that the magnificence of Gladiator couldn't be repeated, but hopefully this came close  .


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 11, 2005)

I thought that this movie was fantastic.  I agree with Dwndrgn with regards to the passage of time in this movie.  Was it days, weeks, months or years?  Also the young knight seemed to rise very very quickly.  As did his tactical knowledge, his ability to find water in the desert and his ability to lead men.  Did none of the other experienced knights not consider they would die of thirst in the desert?  And none of the people on the land know how to dig for water??

The battle scenes were top notch, as were the costumes and Jerusalem looked absolutely tremendous.  The cast was great too.  I love David Thewlis especially, he should be in more movies.  Orlando Bloom worked with Ridley Scott in Black Hawk Down in a very small role.  He plays the lead role in Kingdom of Heaven and looks stunning, though his acting still needs much honing.


----------



## Hypes (May 13, 2005)

I saw this last night and I enjoyed it far mrore than I had thought I would have. However, I would have enjoyed a more extended siege and an equally fleshed out main character (Bloom had how many lines in the movie?). 

The actors were overall superb, and Bloom did what he does best: look great on screen and not much more. But it worked, certainly, and all the more power to Ridley Scott for making a movie with such a clear message directed at both sides of the contemporary struggle over that godforsaken realm.


----------



## Lacedaemonian (May 14, 2005)

The message was loud and clear, however he forgot to mention petroleum.


----------



## rune (May 14, 2005)

I went to see this last night and quite enjoyed it    Did feel the movie jumped around a bit, probably because it was trying to fit in too much stuff so I felt the story didnt run as smooth as I would like.

I thought the actors were believable and couldnt see anyone that too a bad part. I thought Bloom seemed to grow up a bit in this movie, though I prefer him not looking quite so scruffy


----------



## Culhwch (May 14, 2005)

I saw this last weekend. I think I expected too much. Visually, it's stunning. Script and story-wise it was a bit of a shamble. Perhaps an extended cut will be better, but I'm not sure. Some of the dialogue was just terrible. And some parts were just plain mystifying - the hair, Balian's flying trip from village smith to knight extraordinaire. Then in the last half of the film, thirty seconds didn't pass before we'd cut back to the queen, framed artfully in a window, staring meaningfully into the middle distance. Again and again and again...

Love David Thewlis, thought he was underused. Most of the others were as good as they always are. Orlando Bloom might do better sticking to side-kick roles. Not leading man material. I heard that Ridley wanted Paul Bettany for the lead, but got shouted down by the studio. Not sure if he'd have been better or worse, though, in such an ordinary film.


----------



## Hypes (May 14, 2005)

Bettany can act though, there is that.


----------



## Chefo (May 15, 2005)

I would agree that the visuals were stunning yet there was something missing with this one...

The irony of the things is that the concept around which the movie is based-"In Jerusalem you are not what you are born but what you make of yourself" is conveniently forgotten when our unsuspecting blacksmith turns out to be a baron's heir. Well, luck never hurts, does it...

I also wasn't sure what the movie was really about--apart from condemning religious fundamentalism there was nothing tangible for me to identify with. I didn't feel for the main characters either... As already mentioned, our brave, new to the area protagonist was a hidden military genious ready to be discovered while the veteran knights were stupid beyond comprehension. To quote Tom Clancy-"Fiction has to make sense"... 

Apart from that, I applaud that the movie tries to stay at least partially true to history... the Crusaders did lose to Saladin because he cut them off from the water but that had to do more with Saladin's generalship that with Crusader stupidity.

Overall, I'd give it a 4/10 for the visuals were the movie's saving grace.

My 2 cents,

Chefo


----------



## Wanderer (May 15, 2005)

I had no big expectations of this movie, becouse it was announced as the greatest spectacle of the year, and in general when they announce it like this, with all this epithets, then you now that movie is ****. but must say that I was surprised with this one. my valuation: 3/5. good actors, good battle scenes, and good music in some parts


----------



## Starbeast (May 4, 2011)

*This is one of my top ten movies of all time!*​ 

Great depiction of the way things were like roughly a thousand years ago, an awesome film by Ridley Scott.​


----------



## Coolhand (Jun 7, 2011)

This is one of those movies that you REALLY have to see the Directors Cut of. I saw the theatrical version and gave it a disappointed "meh". Then against my will I was talking into seeing the extended directors cut, and the film became one of my all time favourite movies. Orlando Bloom's character suddenly makes sense (he used to be a siege engineer and has fought in the crusades before, which explains how he suddenly seems to know how to defend cities) and there is an extended sub-plot regarding the Queen of Jerusalem and her son which is PIVOTAL to her character but that the theatrical cut utterly missed out. There's a fantastically shot and choreographed sword-fight between Guy and Balien at the end of the movie, loose ends are tied up, plot oddities explained, characters get more screen time and their actions make sense. 

Seriously, try the directors cut. It's worth it.


----------



## svalbard (Jun 8, 2011)

This would be one of my favourite movies except I know too much of that period of history and Scott just decided to change whole chunks of it.

For example Balian was a middle-aged nobleman in the Holy Land. He was charged with defense of Jerusalem and in the end he did strike a bargain with Saladin. Any one who could pay were allowed to leave the city. Not quite the egalatarian story line that is presented in the movie.

So it is not quite an accurate or great depiction of life back then.


----------

