Support NeoGAF

[Kumiko Nikaido]

I thought the movie was good. Not quite the epic that it could have been, and the battle scenes felt like they were "going through the motions". Some of the dialogue was bad and just plain simple (like Balian's one word answers to questions).

The cinematography was eye-opening, but don't expect majestic vistas like in The Lord of the Rings. And I agree that there should've been more depth and motivation for the characters, but that was limited by the 2.5 hour running time.

The battle of Jerusalem straight up felt like Return of the King-lite, and the carnage does get bloody at times.

The underlying theme of religion and the subject matter involved, and the factions caught up in it (Christians, Muslims, etc.) will either make you like or dislike the film. And with movies like The Lord of the Rings trilogy, Troy, and other epic movies out there......well, the experience of Kingdom of Heaven comes off sort of diluted. Just don't have high expecations for this film, and you'll come out this decently entertained.

 

[Cold-Steel]

My two bits:

The actors all did their parts well: Liam Neeson, Jeremy Irons, Orlando Bloom, and Co. were all very good.

The battle scenes weren't nearly as in detail as Gladiator but overall the film had amazing cinematography throughout.

My only complaint was the ending of the movie, it just didn't "end".

There was no...completion to the package. But everything was solid overall.

I'd give it an 8/10.

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

I'd give it a, "If you wait for it to be on HBO you can watch it for free, and then wish you had that 2.5 hours of your life back." That's just above the "paying $10 and then wishing the same thing" rank.

 

[temp]

I'd give it a, "If you wait for it to be on HBO you can watch it for free, and then wish you had that 2.5 hours of your life." That's just above the "paying $10 and then wishing the same thing" rank.

Man, you really didn't like this movie. Did you like Gladiator?

 

[Cerebral Palsy]

Man, you really didn't like this movie. Did you like Gladiator?

I thought Gladiator was much better than this.

 

[sol5377]

not great; not horrible. just meh.

6.9 out of 10

 

[cubicle47b]

I really liked the movie for what it tried to be, not what it actually accomplished. The script was weak in places, a lot of it dialogue, some of it plot. It was still very entertaining if you're not just looking for big battles. I found the politics of Jerusalem interesting, as well as the core message of the movie about religious harmony and mutual respect for non-extremists and virtue being king.

I actually liked the siege at Jerusalem better than the siege at Minas Tirith, too. The strategy of the city is interesting and Bloom's character doesn't do anything ridiculous like surf an elephant killing everyone on it and then the beast itself and no weak-ass ghosts come along to save the day at the end.

 

[siege]

Yeah, I liked the siege on Jerusalem in KoH more because it was atleast realistic. Then again, I can't stand the Lotr movies. Overrated trash.

My only complaint was the ending of the movie, it just didn't "end".

That's the way it really was though. The Third Crusade starts right after.

 

[Insertia]

So this isn't too good? Guess I'll be seeing House of Wax.
What a crappy weekend for movies.

 

[siege]

So this isn't too good? Guess I'll be seeing House of Wax.
What a crappy weekend for movies.

Wait. One person in the thread hated it and another said it was merely average and you're going to see House of fucking Wax instead? KoH might not be as good as Gladiator, but it's certainly a good film.

 

[whytemyke]

I wish someone would do a movie about the seige of Jerusalem around 70 A.D. instead of this one during the crusades. The seige that ended the Second Temple period to me, it seems, would be much more suited for a director like Ridley Scott to make, rather than trying to get all religious and shit. "I am Titus... Bow to me or I kill you!"

 

[ManaByte]

I wish someone would do a movie about the seige of Jerusalem around 70 A.D. instead of this one during the crusades. The seige that ended the Second Temple period to me, it seems, would be much more suited for a director like Ridley Scott to make, rather than trying to get all religious and shit. "I am Titus... Bow to me or I kill you!"

No, if they wanted to make a sobbing love letter to Islam like they tried to do with Kingdom of Heaven (in order to apologize for Black Hawk Down), you don't make a movie set before the Third Crusade and turn the Knights Templar into villains. That's retarded.

What you do is make a movie about the Fourth Crusade where they were going to retake Jerusalem by going through Egypt, but got sidetracked in Constantinople where they pillaged the entire city in horrible ways.

 

[cubicle47b]

a sobbing love letter to Islam

I thought the movie was fair to everyone involved except for the Templars. Someone had to be the religious extremists for Scott to make his point, though (and since the vast majority the movie takes place on the Christian side and the majority of the audience is western I can't fault it *too* much).

edit: Historical epics will almost always be heavily distorted, the intent of the movie was a good one so I'm happy.