Posted on 05/10/2005 7:20:05 AM PDT by robowombat
It is a great book. And she recognizes the fact that what motivated the majority of Crusaders was not material gain.
Great post and article. I must get his book.
"Non Nobis, Domine, Non Nobis, Sed Nomini Tuo Da Gloriam"
The fourth crusade weakened the Byzantine Empire so much that opened the door for the Muslims to take over much of Southeastern Europe several centuries later.
BTTT. Great post
I understand that it's fiction, but historical accuracy is preferable...
Another similar view that KOH is a POS.
“Kingdom of Heaven” - first impressions review
by Donald Sensing @ 5:11 pm. Filed under Culture
Subtitle: “Orcs attack Jerusalem.”
I had an opportunity to go with Son Two to see this movie this afternoon, so I took it. Herewith my first impressions, hurriedly jotted before I leave to attend tonight’s panel seminar at BlogNashville.
The lengthy siege by Saladin’s army against Jerusalem cannot help but bring to mind the siege by the Orcs against Minas Tirith in The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. And KOH sufers for it - Ridley Scott seems not near the action director that Peter Jackson was (baffling since Scott’s actions scenes in Gladiator were very well done) and one instinctively keeps looking for enormous oliphaunts and nazguls flying around.
But mostly KOH suffers in comparison because you actually care some about LOTR’s characters, and Scott never gives you any reason to care a whit about KOH’s characters. Orlando Bloom has been criticized in other reviews for being too small in both physical size and acting for KOH’s lead role, Balian. I was skeptical of this criticism, but no longer. Whether intentionally or not, Bloom underplays the role terribly. For the characterization to work, Balian has to seem larger than life, but he never does, especially stacked against Jeremy Irons and Liam Neeson, each playing good guys, and Ghassan Massoud, playing Saladin - who is also a good guy in this movie.
The conflicts of the film are entirely one sided. The bad guys are all Christians, which is not really a criticism as the POV is from within the Christian kingdom. And there were some pretty sorry leaders among the real crusaders. Besides, the Christian king of Jerusalem is portrayed as a man of honor, courage and righteousness. No, my problem with these characterizations is not that the movie’s POV is so one-sided, it is that the portrayals are so darn wooden and shallow:
Head bad guy to evil henchman: “Start me a war.”
Evil henchman: “It’s what I do.”
And then he does so by letting the Templars loose on an innocent Muslim village where they literally hack everyone to death. Blood-spattered, the evil henchman mutters, “This is what I am. Somebody has to be me.” Maybe he could break into song!
There’s the entire motivation for slaughtering Muslims, according to screenwriter William Monahan, that and a monk shouting near the beginning, “Killing an infidel is not murder, it is the way to heaven!” We never learn just why the bad men want a war so much except their repeated insistence that, “It is God’s will!” The bishop of Jeruslem, a bit part, is likewise presented as a lampoon: he craven, cowardly and quite willing to discard both his vows and faith to save his skin. When faced with the approach of the Saracen army he tells Balian everyone should, “Convert to Islam, repent later!”
The whole movie is filled with this kind of pedanticism, with cardboard cutouts in leading roles. Then there’s Balian’s rousing speech to Jerusalem’s people before the siege begins. It’s so modern-politically-correct it makes your ears bleed. Later, Saladin advances under a white flag and Balian goes to meet him:
Balian: “Before you take this city I will burn everything in it to the ground - every church, every mosque, every sepulchre, and I’ll not leave one stone standing atop another.”
Saldin: “Perhaps it would be better if you did.”
Because, you know, if the Jews, Christians and Muslims didn’t have Jerusalem to fight about, then we’d have peace in our time! Aaaaarrrrgh! Maybe Balian and Saladin should have been co-arsonists.
I am trying to find some redeeming features in this porridge, but can’t really think of any except some scenes that were well-done cinematically. I didn’t find the close-combat scenes very well done, especially compared to Gladiator, but the catapult sequences were very well done. The opening barrage, at night, is shown from the defenders’ perspective and is visually gripping. (I have doubts about their historical accuracy, though that’s not a big deal since Scott is obviously telling myth here, not history per se).
Not only are the Christian bad guys shallow, wooden, predictable and eee-vil, they are professional soldiers who are too stupid to know that their men, mounts and draught animals require water. Balian alone, a blacksmith by trade, understands this, but do the Crusader leaders listen to him? Noooooooo… Saladin knows the importance of water, too, so his well-slaked troops easily vanquish the collapsing knights.
(There really was a Crusades battle in which the Christian army finally suffered as much from thirst as from Muslim attacks, and lost at last because they abandoned the fight in their desperation to get water. But the battle portrayed in KOH isn’t that battle.
Earlier in the movie Balian surveys his inherited estate near Jerusalem and instantly recognizes that it needs water. So he has his men dig a well! And they find water! Hallelujah! At last somone who knows that to have water all you have to do is dig!)
If you really have to see this movie, do yourself a favor and wait until it’s on DVD, which may not be very long. That way you can skip or sleep through everything before the siege. I almost did. And come to think of it, you can sleep through most the siege, too.
I give Kingdom of Heaven 3.5 broadswords out of 10. Official web site: kingdomofheavenmovie.com
fyi on this thread.
Bump for later read.
excellent piece. thanks for posting it.
Bump
Excellent!
Bookmarked!
Bump for later
O.K.
I believe you when you quote your source, but I never read anything at all like that which makes me wonder about the source.
I DO know that the "History" Channel is often inaccurate.
bump
Setting The Record Straight Bump! Thanks.
bttt
There have been six, so far, AFAIK, this link being the oldest:
The Real History of the Crusades
Crisis Magazine | 4/1/2002 | Thomas Madden
Posted on 04/07/2002 10:35:39 PM EDT by traditionalist
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/661560/posts
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
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.