Classic-Castle.com

Agreed.
I'm glad he got what he diserved. But we don't see it. We see him paraded around on a donkey then it cuts strait to fighting.

I don't get it. Why does everyone think Alexander was a bad movie? I would say there are a few racey parts that I do not prefer, however, the movie was overall really interesting. The one battle against the Babylonians (i think), was one of the most imspiring battles of any movie that I have ever seen.

No, that was Darius' Persian Empire army fought at the Battle of Gaugamela.... a battle which IMO was not shown in its massive scale. 60,000 Greeks & Macedonians -vs- 400,000 troops from all over the Persian Empire.

The battle would've been better if it wasn't for all that stupid dust clouds.

Although Gaugamela is now in modern Iraq and part of Western Iran.

Hey, the dust clouds make it more realistic.

My favorite part was when Balian used the ballistae to pull down the siege towers.

Yeah I loved that part. Shows that Belian is better than Gandalf at defending a walled city from a siege attack. LOL. History trumps Fantasy any day.

The Directors Cut of Kingdom of Heaven is now being shown exclusively at some theater in L.A.

I'm hoping it will come to DVD sometime soon?

From what I can interpret, The Directors Cut in some aspects is totally different from the shortened movie that was released in theaters over the summer.
That wasn't Ridley Scott's fault though, that's the fault of 20th Century Fox.

News article about the Director's Cut:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051223/film_nm/kingdom_dc

A movie goer review:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0320661/board/t ... 0#32265170

Yes, I am really looking forward to the Director's Cut. I was very impressed with the original movie when I saw it; they got the feel of Jerusalem as a meeting place for different cultures just right, and the siege was incredible - probably as good as the Siege of Gondor. And I thought the movie did the 'feel' of the Crusades very well. I even managed to live with Orlando Bloom bing the main character. Sure, the movie wasn't totally accurate to history, but it was a lot better than Braveheart, and the wrong details were pretty much minor things.

So this DC should be a lot better. They say there's gonna be almost an hour more of stuff in it. Let's hope so.

- Matt

I liked it pretty much.... but I didn´t like the "Hollywoodism" (how they made the muslims "bad-guys" etc) but maybe I´m just nit-picky....and I hate Orlando Bloom but that´s a totally different matter

Maedhros wrote:(how they made the muslims "bad-guys" etc)

Did they make the muslims bad guys? I actually didn't get that feeling from the movie... actually, I thought some of the Crusaders were the true villians, with the muslims being an intelligent, unstopable opposing force... both sides have their fanatics, but it seemed that the Crusaders were doing most of the provoking. The Clergy were even abusive to their own people in Jerusalem...

That said, I am aware that I am from the country that spawned Hollywood, so maybe I am biased.

Anyway, this was a GREAT movie that gave me a lot of good ideas for my story, so I'm looking forward to seeing what the director's cut has to offer too.

Maedhros wrote:
(how they made the muslims "bad-guys" etc)


Did they make the muslims bad guys? I actually didn't get that feeling from the movie... actually, I thought some of the Crusaders were the true villians, with the muslims being an intelligent, unstopable opposing force... both sides have their fanatics, but it seemed that the Crusaders were doing most of the provoking. The Clergy were even abusive to their own people in Jerusalem...

I'll agree with Ottoatm on this one.

"Convert to Islam, repent later"

But there were no "heroic" type characters with the Saracens though.

I've seen the movie 2 times and here is what I have to say:

1-They didn't show Muslims as "bad guys"; actually we(I'll continue on as saying we because I'm one) attacked Jerusalem because the crusaders didn't hold on to the truce and they attacked the caravans.
2- I think the role of Balian was too much for Orlando Bloom. He was better off as playing the blacksmith(Pirates of the Caribbean) and side character (Legolas, not a major fella).
3-The charisma of Salahaddin beats them all. "Nothing... everything!"

Maybe I´m just a bit bitter since westerners have a habit of forgetting that the Christians were the true villains (if there were any) of the crusades....

For example Salah al-Din (or Salah ad-Din.... or Saladin for the eurocentrics out there ..... whatever you prefer) was renowned even among the Christians for his sense of honour and justice..... in the movie he seems rather cruel and heartless. Well, I assume you have to be pretty cruel and heartless to be a warlord but then dear Orlando should have been a bit more rough around the edges as well, no?

This thread is getting dangerously off-topic. Locked.