Have you two gotten around to He Never Died yet? It's on Netflix.
We'll hit that up.Have you two gotten around to He Never Died yet? It's on Netflix.
"I want John Travolta, but can't afford him, find me the most John Travolta like guy we can afford."
Was he able to parlay his John Travolta-ness into a long and fulfilling career of being John Travolta-like after this movie?
Honestly, the only people I'd ever recommend this one to are Japanese ultranats and annoying weebs.
That's the best line, though. Massoud seriously slays it there.Balian: "What is Jerusalem worth?"
Saladin: "Nothing. Everything."
DissMech: "No Ridley Scott. Stop. Stahp!"
Yeah I could talk for a long time about the historical problems in this movie, and quite frankly I think the history of the time is more than entertaining enough without adding shit in. Raynauld never raped Saladin's sister, do we really need that detail? He was a ruthless brutal warlord who was more than evil enough in life without attributing fictional crimes to the man. Myself I'm an atheist, but I still found the themes of religion as some sort of all corrupting evil to be incredibly grating. And it only made the Hospitaller's status as some sort of bizarre maybe-angelic figure all the stranger. You clearly don't like religion, but this Hospitaller who pops up and vanishes at random with the only rhyme or reason for doing so being, 'something profound must be said here' is clearly an angelic figure. Get your message straight movie.Man of all movies to review, you decided to review one of my favorites. I really like Kingdom of Heaven because Ridley Scott seems like a genuine history geek even it's more of a pop history type of things. His historical movies are always quite fun and actiony, and he manages to make some pretty good characters even if they're nothing particularly deep. One thing I find is how effortlessly he can make one dude or another sympathetic. As a random example, the Hospitallar from this movie I am quite fond of for reasons I can't entirely explain, even if the "religion is bad and leads to fanaticism" was rather strange from a Monastic knight.
On the matter of religion in the movie, I did find it quite grating. The account that we have from Ibn al-Athir is also quite a bit different from this, and the weird American overtones of "you can be whoever you want to be in the Holy Land" also kind of ticked me off because it was much more blatant here than the reality. When it comes to Saladin, the historiography is actually quite split. You have two extremes; one was that Saladin was the perfect moral warrior, and the other was that Saladin was a realpolitik dude who didn't care as much about Jerusalem. Usually these draw upon different parts of his reign to show their evidence, and obviously there's probably something in the middle there. Certainly Saladin could actually be quite ruthless; he locked away the Fatimid women and men from each other, and there are rumors he poisoned his uncle Shirkuh to take control of Egypt as vizier. Not to mention his reluctance to change the khutbah to praise the 'Abbasid Caliph and his recalcitrance in interactions with Nur al-Din, his nominal sovereign. In the end, Saladin was a complex character, but he was certainly one known, at least by 1187, for some level of moral uprightness (rumors that he or Richard of Lionheart murdered Conrad de Montferrat notwithstanding).
I was also a bit irritated with the kind of filter that he applied to Europe to things look even worse in stupid sucky France, but you can't win everything. It's a significant tone-down from Gladiator, at least, where Scott's filters make Mediterranean Rome look like rainy England even when it's sunny outside.
Of course, we do actually have evidence of someone who probably did espouse views a bit similar to that assigned to Baldwin during this period; Frederick II Hohenstaufen, the brilliant and eccentric Holy Roman Emperor who would send mathematical problems to the court of Sultan al-Kamil Ayyubi (one of the descendents of Saladin, reigning in Egypt) which would take the entire court to solve. He was also known for his deep appreciation of Islam (though that did not stop him from taking Jerusalem back in 1228, al-Kamil pulling down the walls and abandoning the city in one of the most infamous black marks that the Muslim 'ulema would not forget later).
Also, the claim of "200,000" Muslim soldiers is spurious. Guy de Lusignan was actually a weak and incompetent king who was unable to control Reynald, not his enabler. Sibylla obviously did not go back to Europe with Balian. Balian actually did not control Ibelin at this time. The meeting between Saladin and Balian, where Balian threatens to destroy everything, is however real. Balian did indeed threaten this, and Saladin accepted his terms, though in fact many residents could not pay the ransom fees required and were sold into slavery. This is attested in both the account of al-Wasil and Ibn-al Athir.
The director's cut is very good, the movie does not feel its length, and it does very well with all its characters. I must say that it is a very satisfying movie that can please most people on both sides, except if you're religious in which case you need to sigh a little bit at the very bluntly given "religion bad" message. But it doesn't detract enough from the film to prevent it from being a very good political romp. There's genuine tension and drama here. I just wish that they had focused more on living in peace than on fanaticism. Not that focusing on fanatacism isn't bad, but the movie's overall message tended to tilt very clearly into an argument against all religion, or at least religion beyond vague deism.
It's a decent line, and Massoud's acting throughout the movie was fantastic, but I don't like what it represents. Political actor or not (and yeah Saladin was a savvy politician at the very least) the man was still a devout Muslim, Jerusalem means a lot. And on that note, this is what's wrong with western cinema. You got Ghassan Massoud to play Saladin and your main character is William Turne- excuse me, French William Turner in the Holy Land. Just... you could have done so much better by focusing on Saladin instead.That's the best line, though. Massoud seriously slays it there.
As to this movie, it is for better or worse the most liberal movie that could be made about the War on Terror.
Yeah I could talk for a long time about the historical problems in this movie, and quite frankly I think the history of the time is more than entertaining enough without adding shit in. Raynauld never raped Saladin's sister, do we really need that detail? He was a ruthless brutal warlord who was more than evil enough in life without attributing fictional crimes to the man. Myself I'm an atheist, but I still found the themes of religion as some sort of all corrupting evil to be incredibly grating. And it only made the Hospitaller's status as some sort of bizarre maybe-angelic figure all the stranger. You clearly don't like religion, but this Hospitaller who pops up and vanishes at random with the only rhyme or reason for doing so being, 'something profound must be said here' is clearly an angelic figure. Get your message straight movie.
I felt the line was acknowledging that there was not physical worth to it, but that its spiritual/symbolic worth was immense.It's weird, because Saladin actually is praying when he enters Jerusalem, but then he has the "Nothing, Everything" line, which even in candid conversation Saladin would never have said. Whatever his politicking the man was the head of the single greatest jihad movement till that time, and was doing this at the very climax of the fada'il al-Quds literature (merits of Jerusalem, basically religious justification for the importance of Jerusalem). He would never have proclaimed such a thing. It's weird. Maybe we're getting the line wrong? I dunno.
Sadly we're not. I want it to be wrong, but Ridley Scott, or meddling execs, or test audiences or something just needed the movie's heroic figures to not be religious. So yeah, Saladin just throws that line in, just so you know he totes doesn't give a fuck. He's one of those 'cool' religious people audience, like that aunt of yours who's a tattooed lesbian Christian but doesn't go to church because they're too repressive. Do people like that exist now? Yeah. But not in the goddamn 12th century.It makes me sad they didn't add the part where Reynald planned to raid Mecca with a fleet until one of Saladin's admirals defeated it
And yeah, Saladin's sister's caravan went on hajj, but it was not stopped by Reynald although Saladin did specifically put extra guards on the caravan because of his aggression. They were never in serious danger of being attacked, though.
It's weird, because Saladin actually is praying when he enters Jerusalem, but then he has the "Nothing, Everything" line, which even in candid conversation Saladin would never have said. Whatever his politicking the man was the head of the single greatest jihad movement till that time, and was doing this at the very climax of the fada'il al-Quds literature (merits of Jerusalem, basically religious justification for the importance of Jerusalem). He would never have proclaimed such a thing. It's weird. Maybe we're getting the line wrong? I dunno.
I didn't take it so. "Nothing" looks like a cynical rejection of religious sentiment by a man who absolutely wouldn't have said it, but the "everything" part is what matters. Jerusalem is nothing as a place, but everything as a religious symbol, and this is just as good as anything else you care to name. Crucially Saladin doesn't quantify "everything" (everything to whom?); its value is universal, even when it goes unacknowledged. It is, I think, a concession that religion might be wrong or harmful, but the belief behind it is sincere. This is a theme that's later repeated in Prometheus, the human ability to maintain belief even in the face of overwhelming evidence.It's a decent line, and Massoud's acting throughout the movie was fantastic, but I don't like what it represents. Political actor or not (and yeah Saladin was a savvy politician at the very least) the man was still a devout Muslim, Jerusalem means a lot. And on that note, this is what's wrong with western cinema. You got Ghassan Massoud to play Saladin and your main character is William Turne- excuse me, French William Turner in the Holy Land. Just... you could have done so much better by focusing on Saladin instead.