ITT: Crusade Kino

>would have been perfect if Orlando Bloom wasn't in it

>implying Frankish crusaders did jack shit except sack fellow Christians and leave Constantinople weaker until its last days
Deus vult fags are the worst.

He was fleshed out better in the directors cut, he's an important character as a symbol of innocence and the viewers eyes in Jerusalem as a newcommer. He stands for the knight's code of honor and the movie clashes his sense of justice with the reality of the crusades, and he humanized the Muslims he had contact with so the viewer didn't view them as evil. Without him the movie has no emotional resonance or themes.

Lion in Winter is top-tier

El Cid and The Warlord are Heston core

>movie would'a been perfect if the director didn't love muslims so much

But he portrays Christians and Muslims in a pretty neutral, nuanced manner? Did you watch the director's cut or not?

Ironclad, In the Name of the Rose

The Tudors is a Decent show.

The only "bad" Muslim we see is the Imam, and he isn't hardly as bad as several of the Christian characters.

That being said, the movie is from the Christian perspective and the only Muslim characters we really meet at Saladin and the imam.

The movie is basically organized Christianity is bad. The Muslims wanted to live in peace but those crazy Christians forced Saladin's hand. And even then Saladin was magnanimous about it.

I'm an atheist, but I can understand OP.

It showed the bishop of Jerusalem in the same light as muslim Imam on other side user, the story just had more christian characters. I would argue it was just scott's narrative against organized religion and problems that it creates(hypocrisy)

>The Muslims wanted to live in peace but those crazy Christians forced Saladin's hand

That's pretty much true though. The Christians instigated the conflict that cost them Jerusalem in the end.

If there was a God we'd get an HBO drama set in Constantinople.
>literal Byzantine politics and backstabbing
>diverse cast with Viking/English mercenaries, Turks, A-rabs.

>religion of turning the other cheek

there was low level agression on traders and pilgrims to the holy land for hundreds of years plus the reconquista so technically the muslims did "strike first" but they just expanded like any empire tries to do

Turning the other cheek doesn't mean letting someone slap the other one. Romans slapped slaves with the "unclean hand" and equals got a bitch slap. The phrase means turn so that they must strike you as an equal if they are going to strike you again.

Also, GOD WILLS IT!

muslims of the middle ages > muslims now

at least they had a semblance of culture then. now they're just a horde of violent farmers fueled by self-righteous hatred for everything that isnt them

I'm not disagreeing with you there, but in 1187, it was the Christians doing the raiding in the holy land that caused Saladin to march on them and defeat them at Hattin. There was a truce before that.

Ain't it sad that the islam world was once a bastion of civilization, culture and science?

Then they went all ABRAKADABRAH.

I mean Christian Yurop was weird as fuck in the middle ages. Superstitious and fearful of most things.

I bet you would sack Constantinople. You filthy Frank. Crusades were a joke Pope Urban pulled to make him seem legitimate, which went too far. 1st crusade murdered every man woman and child inside Jerusalem. When Saladin re took the city he let almost every civillian leave peacably. Even Christians admired him.

why did christians eventually lose

isn't god on their side?

pride

guy was a stupid motherfucker

>Christians have a designated shitting hand
Jewish machinations.

Muslims dindu nuthin

>not being on Saladin's side

Romans, try to keep up. It's like you never watched Spartacus. Also, they were Jews at the time, still diverging into what would later become Christianity.

>he let almost every civillian leave peacably

He let most of the nobility go but anyone who couldn't pay a ransom was enslaved.

Still better than what the christians did though.

You're an idiot. The point is that none of those nobles, Barons, Counts, Princes, etc.. were Christians at all. It was because they were faithless that they lost, and because the Muslims were faithful that they succeeded. This is why you have more respect for the main character at the end than for King Richard, because at that point you expect nobles to not be true believers at all.

The film was a wake up for the West to begin true belief again, but it fell on your pleb ears instead that categorizes it as 'hurr durr christians are dumb'

youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo

>Muslims rape, enslave, murder, and rob whites for 1500 years
>cut the balls of slaves and treat them far worse than any American slavery
>no one ever talks about this because they've been spoon-fed Marxism and can only think in terms of class warfare where whites represent the ruling class

Historically speaking it did portray Islam with far too flattering of a perspective.

>>Christians have a designated shitting hand
Muslims still do.

A reminder to kill a traitor before an enemy.

The imam, the obstinate merchant guy, the first Muslim guy Balian kills are all douchey characters. Saladin and Alexander Siddig are the only positively portrayed Muslims I can think of. You have similarly douchey Christian characters and also good Christian characters. If you just want to project a binary vision on the movie, that's fine, but it's objectively incorrect

It's good for tits, but it's also not medieval.

Also Wolf Hall is a better show.

The Splendor of Imperial power is built on the backs of eunuch choirs and niggers in chains, my friend.

>islam existed since 600s
>doing anything for 1500 years

Fucking talented if they managed to warp time

>ctrl+F
>Seventh Seal
>no results

if dubs you all end your lives

>exposing classy shit to a "kino" thread
Please refrain from wasting pearls upon swine. "kino" folk can only be worse than the British public that complained that Wolf Hall wasn't enjoyable because they director didn't use artificial lighting.

All of you plebs don't even understand the movie.
IT'S PRO-MUSLIM AND ANTI-CRUSADER
You really think Ridley Scott would make a pro-crusader film?

>if I attack him for rounding up 100 years then I get to ignore millions of people that got butchered and enslaved

...

>war of conquest
>didn't actually hand back the Byzantine territory as they swore

Komnenos only wanted reinforcements to resist the Seljuks, Jerusalem was held by the Fatimids.

Resisting the Seljuk advance is fine but the actual crusade was just as aggressive as the Muslim invasions before it. Jerusalem was held by Muslims for over 400 years before the First Crusade, that was hardly reactionary.

>god on the side of christians

lol no

I really hope it gets picked up again. Apparently Rylance and Lewis are still both wanting to do it.

Your quality will be known among your enemies, before ever you meet them my friend.

>undermining your own argument by fucking up on basic easily verifiable fact

Wew

You can't really believe this. Both sides were shades of gray. Some were good, others were bad, and even more just were. The only "evil" Christian groups were the Templars, the Bishop (if you can consider him, since he actually seems like an apostate) and possibly the group that comes for Balian at the beginning. The Muslims had their own warmongers and the servant that Balian kills in the desert, etc. I thought they did a good job of not favoring one side or the other.

...

What is a Kingdom of Heaven thread worth?

>Tancred and his banner

Feels kinda bad man.

Movie when?

It's book form is already crusader kino, particularly the ending chapters.

Agreed, man.

Raimond, Godfrey, and Tancred were the most morally upright leaders of the crusade.

Nothing.

>this semen demon

sorry, Everything.

>receive one of the best works of television in the 21st century
>do not give it a second season because "Hurrf durrf, I don't like that everything is dimly lit at night"
Truly, Britain rules the waves.

>be German
>First Crusade is called
>Levant is far away
>kill all local jews instead

I thought it didn't get a second season yet because Mantel didn't finish the damn book.

Is it seriously dead? I might have to overthrow their monarchy if I don't get Wolf Hall s2.

>it's a Normans decide to stop being marauding cunts and conquer somewhere not in Europe for once

It's pretty kek that Bohemond abandoned the march on Jerusalem and carved out his own little kingdom like his Norman shit family before him.

germanics will use literally any reason to massacre their neighbors

subhumans, the lot of them

I don't know, was just making a very non-comedic assumption.
But really, if shit like GoT can forge on ahead despite overtaking source material, surely Wolf Hall can as well since it loosely draws from real life events.

>written in the 70s
>even predicted the cuck pope
It will never get made.

I thought they were waiting, and that Mantel wasn't eating her way into an early grave like Martin.

Don't forget it's prediction for Switzerland being the only hold out nation in Western Europe.

People ITT seem to have pretty good knowledge of the Crusades. What movies, books, and youtube videos/podcasts should I check out, assuming I know nothing?

Preferably balanced and not too Cred Forums, those guys worship a frog god.

scholagladiatoria is tops for medieval through 19th century weaponry and armor. Always fun to see him looking at historical reliefs and tapestries as well as combat treatises.

Most crusade era stuff is only chainmail and early full faced helmets though. I prefer his 16th century stuff on full plate and 19th century british colonial stuff.

There's a huge pool of books to choose from, what I would advise is to read books by both Western and Eastern historians. Not even necessarily just because of bias, a lot of Western historians will focus on the European background and impact naturally but it's really quite interesting to read into all the stuff happening in the Muslim world at the time as well, with the crusaders being an outside force impacting them.

Let's hope we get a good middle ages mod for Bannerlord....in 10 fucking years. I just want to be a peasant wrecking nobles in tourneys.

Usama ibn Munqidh's stuff is pretty fun to read. He was a Syrian guy that pretty much lived his entire life through the crusades, fought a lot of frontier battles, hunted lions and shit, hung out with crusaders from time to time, and just generally engaged in a lot of manly banter and shit.

Whenever I approach a new historical topic I tend to get contemporary things, you can go into all the modern scholarly historical analysis later. Have fun first.

Is there any point in watching the theatrical cut if I've seen the director's cut?

I guess only if ypou want to compare and contrast.

youtube.com/watch?v=4ztOV2wrrkY
lol :^)

You misunderstand, the character is important but Orlando is shit

You fags don't get orlando's character he was supposed to be nothing, uncharismatic, simple man who was caught in the affairs of a greater event and the character handled it well.

HANNIBAL BARCA!

They should have used him better in Game of Thrones, R.I.P.

>Muslims rape, enslave, murder, and rob whites for 1500 years
>cut the balls of slaves and treat them far worse than any American slavery
>Europe didn't do this for just as long

Everyone understands that user. It just feels jarring to watch Orlando Blooms acting next to the pitch perfect cast that surrounded him.

>lose balls
>get to hang out with a harem full of bitches
>this is terrible treatment

> You filthy Frank
Heh

Who fuels the hatred?

>Turning the other cheek doesn't mean letting someone slap the other one

It LITERALLY does

>But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

arn is pretty good

Better quote actually

>And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other

Salafists, for one

The crusades did more damage to Christianity than it did to Islam. Hell they fucking ruined the Byzantine Empire and paved the way for the Ottomans to rise since there was a power vacuum after the 4th crusade conquered Constantinople instead of going to the holy land. It also united fractured Muslim people under religious unity in order to fight back and they grew into powerful kingdoms.

Jerusalem only had like 1 or 2 decent kings, the rest were fucking idiots who were only seeking glory and ended up fucking everything up. Not to mention being a isolated kingdom who had terrible relations with what should have been their biggest ally, the Byzantine Empire, and being surrounded by Muslims on all sides they had no chance once the hype train stopped

>being a muslimcuck

you ok m8?

What's wrong with her hand?

Hannibal was a cuck. Now Scipio, there's a true alpha (he was a consul of Rome)

What's it say about hungary? I have a pdf copy but never got around to reading more than the first 20 pages

The Islamic world is a bit overblown. They retained a lot from conquered civilizations and passed it off as their own.

Didn't know that Cred Forums was filled with muslim apologists.

>letting heathens control your sites of pilgrimage

Yeah that movie was quite anti christian and pro mudslime

>unite all of europe to repel the muslim hordes from the holy land
>lose 5 out of 10 times to said hordes
>lose the other 3 to infighting
>win one by attacking the byzantine empire for no reason
And yet they still want another crusade
top kek

It's henna.

Newfag.

youtube.com/watch?v=M1r9xljkCg0

No it's not, its rather shit.