Posted on 05/06/2005 8:41:56 PM PDT by GulliverSwift
I'm sure somebody thought it was a lost cause. There's always somebody to think everything is a lost cause, it's the nature of man.
The Battle of Tours on one side and the battle and siege of Vienna on the other side. I agree, great movie material.
It is an interesting tale, fit for telling on the big screen (with "stadium style" seating).
We enjoyed it, and I must add we didn't go in with a chip on our shoulder, looking to be offended... after all it's just entertainment.
"lost cause..."
your right of course.
Scott has never been a good storyteller. His movies live and breathe on his Art School background. 'Blade Runner' has minimal plot but is eye poppingly beautiful to look at.
The said thing is that this time the Europeans are going to lose the battle of Tours as their birth rate continues to fall and they allow more muslim immigrants.
I enjoy a nice violent war movie, but I don't want to pay to help a certain liberal point of view.
Hollywood would mess it up and void all sense of accuracy.
The Muslims would "relieve" the poor peasants from their evil Christian rulers who abuse them.
Saladin wasn't, but the Mamluks were. One of their leaders Baybars was ruthless and unlike Saladin did not cloak his policy in the language of Jihad. In 163 he destroyed the cathedral at Nazareth. He took the Templar fortress at Safad and massacred the garrison after agreeing to spare its defenders. He sacked Jaffa in 1268 and took the city of Antioch and killed its inhabitants. It was probably the single greatest massacre of the crusading period.(Madden, page 181).
Scott is typical of the British left, which is hostile to Christianity.
He's "savvy," which means you have to be pro-nonwestern and specifically, anti-Christian.
I read somewhere that the Battle of Tours was--among many other things--the origin of the French baked good known as thecroissant, which came to symbolize Charles Martel's destruction and Christian France's "devouring" of a vastly superior (in numbers) Muslim force.
Martel's Frankish army defeated an Arab army, which had swept through southern Asia and north Africa, before conquering most of the Iberian peninsula and much of southern France. Only once in history did infantry without bows and arrows or firearms withstand mounted and armoured cavalry. Martel achieved lasting greatness by inspiring his Franks to do what was thought to be impossible.
It was this battle that earned Charles the surname "Martel," for the merciless way he smote his enemies. Most historians believe that had he failed at Tours, Islam would probably have overun Europe.
I saw it today. It's boring. Not much of a story; no passion or excitement. It did try to be neutral in some respects, but I found I didn't care because it was such a boring flick.
I've never said that any of his previous movies were anti-Christian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.