Nothing. Everything

Remember when Ridley Scott wasn't completely senile

To be fair, his complaints about Balian are asinine. Yes, he's a fully fictional character who bears a name of a real figure, who gives a fuck. His character traits are explained in the beginning (he had a previous experience in warfare and was taught engineering) and he didn't 'just have 2 conversations with the king', there was a huge time skip in the narrative

I think any complaints about historical accuracy in film are asinine. If you wanted to jerk over that, read a book. I have a really good grasp of the history of the crusades and I seriously don't expect anybody to take a 3-hour epic as representative of even a fraction of what went on then.

I felt that almost everything about Kingdom of Heaven was beautiful, even the villians were wonderful pig fuckers. It was like some idealistic, romanticized, and fantasy depiction of religion and life in the middle ages. Just like out of the books we had in elementary school.

Maybe I'm just a sucker for flowery European-accented language but every time Thewlis, Irons, Norton, Green, and Neeson opened their mouths I just melted.

The only complaint I had was Bloom's unconvincing acting. He just didn't have the right voice and the gravitas absolutely everyone else had. He didn't have that thousand-yard stare that I think he needed due to losing his wife and losing his religion. But his lines were still beautiful if not terribly convincing.

God, I fucking love this movie so much.

Something valuable. Something worthless.

I think what most people fall in love with about these 3-4 hour epics filled with romance, battles, villainy and heroics is the fantasy and presentation. I always view them as Michael Bays Transformers for the slightly more sophisticated viewer. Beautiful cinematography, thick atmosphere, huge battle scenes, serviceable dialogue that at least sounds authentic and a protagonist most people can root for. You will have a great time if you can stop paying attention to the cracks and holes.

Jerusalem as a city has zero value. As a Spiritual hub. It has everything of value.

>even the villians were wonderful pig fuckers
>implying the mudslimes were the villains on this movie

The entire movie is based on WHY the crusades are happening, yet it gets the reasoning BACKWARDS. That's not in accuracy: that's historical revisionism making a 180 degree change.

That Jerusalem means nothing to him strategically, but everything to the crazy jihadist behind him.

Dude read about Baldwin
The guy was badass

I considered the bishop, de Lusignan, and de Chatillon the bad guys. Not the muslims.

I don't know how anybody could think the Muslims were the bad guys there. I don't know how you could think anybody is so stupid as to assume the Muslims were the bad guys.

>not posting the most kino of King Baldwin

youtube.com/watch?v=g_J4rAf2Qjg

i think that was his point, that in the movies they weren't portrayed as the baddies, which was not accurate

I think the point was there were bad guys on both sides. Remember the head imam in Saladin's camp was a complete ignorant asshole

Nothing. Everything.

All very nice but none of that's historically true. It was of very significant material value, in part as a result of its spiritual value.

nothing of material/resource/stratigic significance
but valuable as a spritual way and specifically a show of power

he who controls jerusalum controls the abrahamic faiths

The movie does fail in showing Muslims as just being the other side of the coin, but there are a few underlying things, such as how someone tells Saladin that his underlings were starting to become restless and annoyed that Saladin was stalling an attack on the holy city.

People tend to miss the entire point of the movie, that being that people use religion as a means to further their own selfish goals.
The film's weakest link is easily Bloom, but everything else from the cinematography to the set and costume design, to the soundtrack, and the pacing and everything is just so well done that it's an absolute joy to watch and hard to put down if I watch even just a minute of it. Easily in my list of favorite movies

For the sake of discussion and circle jerking, how exactly would you portray the Muslims as the other side of the coin. If we could write in something, what would it be?

You have that one asshole who threatens Saladin before Saladin tells him to fuck off. Do you need another guy like that? Do we need Saladin making an eye-rolling appeal to God in front of his men that he obviously thinks is bullshit but necessary to motivate and hold these people together.

he meant that, though jerusalem had very little strategic value to the muslim armies, it had a significant symbolic value

some might take issue with his extreme language, for instance even though jerusalem had little strategic value, to say it had no strategic value would be absurd; however it's clear he is exaggerating

The film wasn't just a commentary on how religion is used by the powerful for selfish goals, Balian's character was a character who genuinely believed in the religion the others used to shift the balance of power, and the film showed the juxtaposition of those characters and character traits.

All the others had fallen or left, but the ones true to their faith were at Jerusalem at the end.

>The only complaint I had was Bloom's unconvincing acting. He just didn't have the right voice and the gravitas absolutely everyone else had. He didn't have that thousand-yard stare that I think he needed due to losing his wife and losing his religion. But his lines were still beautiful if not terribly convincing.

if I had a time machine I'd place Kit Harrington in Orlando Blooms place.

...

It didn't have little strategic value. It's all bollocks to fit the stupid theme the writers had in their mind the entire time despite it clearly not being apt.

It can be broadened to mean that really nothing has value except for what we attribute to it

I would probably try and fit in more scenes just depicting other faiths in general.
The greatest extent we see of the Muslim side is just a couple scenes at Saladin's tent really. It shouldn't be incredibly obvious things either, but at best subtle hints in scenes featuring them that things are so clean on the other side as well (which the movie already does a bit)

I think the movie is fine as it is though and that people who nitpick at it by saying the Muslim's were dindus missed the point of the movie.

Historical accuracy can be saved for documentaries.
When telling the story it's better to stretch the truth to make it more interesting and fitting an overall thematic theme better.

Was David Thewlis's unnamed Hospitalier knight literally an angel? Dude just disappears into the middle of the desert after Balian goes on his rant about the burning bush.

Yes, he dies. But I feel that freaky disappearing act adds an element of divinity to his character that hammers in the fact that everything he says is the true purpose of religion: "I put no stock in religion... holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves... and goodness; what God desires is *in your heart and mind* and what you decide to do everyday you will be a good man. Or not."

>historical revisionism

I'm sorry was this a Hollywood film or a fucking BBC biopic?

The problem comes when you stretch things as far as they did. The theme was forced and it shows, to the point that it's sometimes rather ham fisted. It works as an entertaining film in an interesting setting but thematically it's patronising and offensive to me.

It's intentionally vague. I think the point is more that he reinforces the idea that goodness is independent of organised religion and exists in the individual. You could see it as a divine element but I don't think its very reasonable to ignore his death for the sake of the interpretation.

I really don't think it's worth reading into it much at all though, it really is just a case of them leaving you to fill on the blanks and I don't believe they had a coherent answer to the question in mind.

I think the story would have been too cluttered to introduce the other faiths. But I agree that some sort of division within the various sects of the Muslims would have been interesting.

There's a story about Saladin that I think they could have used. There was a time when Saladin laid siege to the fortress of the Assassins, who were Muslim as well. Then one day, he wakes up and beside him is a piece of cake with a dagger rammed straight through it. The idea is being that they could have killed him in his sleep but didn't. So he lifts the siege and leaves.

I think a scene like that could be put into the film. There doesn't even need to be spoken lines. He just wakes up, sees stabbed cake, and that's all you need to explain the fragility of his position and what he has to do.

Did he ever comment on how good the cake was?

Delicious. Disgusting

t. Saladdin

>Medieval people wouldn't expect a bastard as king

>Countless of real life examples of bastard kings in medieval Europe and Near East

Thank you for that

NICE

It would damage Saladin as a powerful figure and one of the most dominant forces in Islamic history. Furthermore, it would get Muslims to not watch the movie since it portrays Saladin as a tool and a slave to fate. Saladin ultimately stepped in to redress a historic sgitsgow of historic proportions, which is historically accurate. All his actions in the movie reflect this pragmatic rationale.

He's there because he's compelled by community service to take a city he personally doesn't give a shit about, and the only time he seems elated is when the job is actually done and the religious nutjobs finally stop riding his balls.

/thread

What if they had a Muslim commander make a snide comment about Saladin being a Kurd?

>What if they had a Muslim commander make a snide comment about Saladin being a Kurd?

I think that'd be whey too problematic

Oooh I member!

Goddamn it carlos.

I was under the impression it means that personally Saladin didn't really care for the conquest of Jerusalem so it was worth nothing for him, but since his subjects really wanted to take it he kinda had to or his authority would be diminished.

>tfw downloading the yify torrent now
I've been meaning to watch this movie forever, but this thread finally pushed me over the limit.

>yify

you are a fucking retard and i bet you are about to watching the fucking theatrical cut too

>community service
I wish our world leaders felt that way. They're not doing any community service at all.

George Washington didn't want to do the job, but he felt it was best for the country that he did.

I wonder if anybody can get away with that today. If someone running for President outright said only a crazy person would suffer through a year long campaign for four years of the harshest criticism for themselves and their family. Giving up all future freedom to go out in public or drive. Leaving a better paying job to make a shitty $400,000 a year. That they put themselves forward not because they want the job, but because they knew they were the most capable and what the country needs.

I wonder if, were such a person to run for President, once the attacks ridiculing this person who sounds so unmotivated, if the people would be as stupid as they are and think this person is ignorant, lazy, or delusional. Do you think the media would acknowledge that campaigning is completely fucking ridiculous?

Strategically, nothing.
Politically, everything.

If Jerusalem wasn't of such religious importance, there would be no real reason to put in such effort to take it. And if the defenders refused to surrender and burn the structures inside it wouldn't be a big deal from an economic or military standpoint. But taking it secures his position as the leader of the Arab world.

My only real complaint as far as historical accuracy goes is that Patriarch Heraclius was portrayed as a coward when in real life he was as important as Balian for securing a peaceful surrender. It's like having a movie about Eisenhower, and portraying Churchill as wanting to appease the Nazis.

its the 3 hour cut. Don't be jelly because I'm enjoying this in a10 v10.

DEUS VULT

Any other movies similar to this?

man Ayrabs look good in black

Arn - The Knight Templar extended version is okay.