Re: Kingdom of Heaven
.. i’ll paraphrase Simon.. do u have a history teacher? do you have a lawyer. Use your lawyer to sue your history teacher.
ooay burrito kay .. since when was this thread about “me” and/or Punjabis? take this Punjabi bashing somewhere else ..
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Where did that ass Zia come from??? Its like someone puked in this thread by mentioning his name!
Anyone seen it yet?
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
I liked the movie..it was very Ridley Scot..in the sense no proper ending..
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
^ sir there was no particular ending to the problem this movie has background of. We are still living in that uncertainity period. Time and places have changed, but its kinda going on ever since the first crusade started.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
^ well obviously..but Ridley Scott has a style of movies..contrast Troy Kingdom of Heaven or Gladiator...or Blackhawk down (his movie again) with other war movies..it's that bitter sweet ending he loves...
Anyway I am happy to report Saladin was presented quite accurately..although historical quibble I don't think cross bows were around in the time of the 3rd Crusade...
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
While I am looking forward to the movie, I doubt it is worth the $8 bucks ... so no rush, it will come around on Starz or something similar.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Awesome movie, loved it! Nice to see Alexander Siddig from Star Trek Deep Space Nine (Doctor Bashir) as Nasir too, he played a Pakistani in Vertical Limit too.
I think Salahuddin Ayubi's character portrayal was handled pretty well, and the actor who played him did a good job.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
I saw the movie.
As accurate as the portrayals may be of the events and the characters, I found this to be a boring movie:
The conflicts and drama between the characters is non-existant even though there was a lot potential there.
Battle scenes were poorly choreographed -- bunch of body falling down and arms flailing at each other. Small group fights and ambushes were good.
Balian had a great speech writer at hand. Whenever an impromptu speech was needed, Balian came through. At the parapet, at the council meeting, and meeting Saladin, Balian is as agile with his words as he is with his sword.
This movie would have made a decent 6 episode tv serial but for a movie it lacked drama.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
…is now being whipped for its supposed symapthetic portyrayal of Musims by all the new con groups. tsk, tsk 
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Saw it loved it.
However, that notion of the surrender from the saracens....yeah my A$$.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Had the displeasure of seeing it last night......What a pathetic plot and cinematography and lack of a coherent flow to the story.....Furthermore, it looked like the muslims (saracens) were not natives of Middle East, rather Somalia or Tamil Nadu.....Salahuddin's deputy was a desi actor, who has also done Star Trek....and the actor who played Salah Uddin looked like draq queen....all 4'10'' and 90 pounds of uncharasmatic swagger....his head gear/turban outweighed his whole body....the women they had playing his sister looked like the somalian super model imaan, and did not look a Kurd from anywhere....The Muslims were shown in the prototypical hollywood fashion, dark, unhygenic, with crooked and hooked noses.....and to top everything off....Salahuddin could not break the seige of Jerusalem because of the courage of determination of Bailian and had to negotiate a peaceful surrender......What a load of hogwash....
Another idiotic thing was every nationality be it the French, German, Italian and so on could speak english fluently with a British accent, while you could not even understand a single word coming out of any of the Muslim characters....
Even though in the olden days of Hollywood muslims were not shown in a not so flattering light, butchers, violent, fanatics and etc., but they were at least shown to have a physical and domineering presence with witty, succinct and coherent dialogues......
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
CheGuvera is a moron! Instead of listening to his trash... I would suggest go listen to the review by Ebert and Roeper..
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Great movie, I loved it. Very well balanced (as much as they could do) and surprisingly unbiased.
:k:
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
ChewedViagra, that deputy guy ISNT a desi actor! He was born in Sudan.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
^^ Focker, you've provded my point even more....that Salahuddin army, instead of looking like native to the areas of Syria, Iraq and Kurdistan....rather looked as if they all came from Sudan, Somalia and Sub Saharan Africa.......
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
Beta, jub baray baat karahay hon, tu beech mein nahi boltay…
Ebert and Roeper have just been confirmed as eminent ethnograhpers and historians and from now on they would be authenticating and apprising the Muslims what ethnicity they belong to and how their physical appearance should correlate as such…
Ebert and Roeper can’t even tell a Sardarji apart from a Muslim…They probably think Guru Nanak was Salahuddin’s spiritual advisor…
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
There is at least 'some' accuracy to Scott's movie, but a number of innaccuracies. The accurate stuff includes:
1) Yes, the Muslims were generally quite tolerant towards Jews and Christians, and the Muslim forces were quite kind and magnaminous towards the Crusaders especially after defeating the Crusaders.
2) Yes, the Muslims did have superior technology and education, when compared to the crusaders. Much of that Muslim science and technology made its way into Europe through Spain, which was under Muslim rule for hundreds of years.
3) Yes, the "Saracens" (Muslims during the Crusades) are the ones who were the final victors in the Crusades, defeating the Crusaders and sending them back to Europe.
The inaccurate stuff includes the following:
1) Saladin is depicted as an "Arab". Though he led Arab armies, he himself was a Kurd. Kurds are a Muslim people of Aryan descent. Saladin was more likely an Aryan, not a Semite (Arab). The original Aryan homeland is Afghanistan.
2) Saladin's forces are shown to be in large numbers. This is false. Saladin's forces were always smaller than the Crusader forces. Compared to Europe, the middle-east has been a relatively sparsely-populated region. Europe has always been more densely-populated, and this was the reason that Europe had large armies that swarmed over lightly-populated Palestine
3) Saladin's forces are shown to be using large numbers of forces to defeat the Crusaders. This is false. Saladin's forces were usually at a disadvantage in numbers when compared to the Crusaders. The only thing that saved the Muslim forces was the fact that they had superior tactics and generalship and superior technology.
4) King Richard of England is pretty much absent in the movie. The truth is, that Saladin and Richard fought and King Richard was defeated. He was taken prisoner by Saladin.
There are other innaccuracies, but they are too numerous to mention here.
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
^ King RIchard was part of the third crusade...which is shown at the end..Richard and Saladin fought each other to a stalemate..not to victory and defeat..
The Crusaders were superior as far as armour was concerned...the Arabs preferred light and highly mobile forces..and as a result often suffered heavier losses in direct battles.
The Arabs were numerically inferior till the battle of Hittin because Saladin had united Syria and Egypt..
Also the Muslims referred to the Christians as Franks (Franj)
Ridley Scott is NOT a documentarian..
Re: Kingdom of Heaven
And you termed a Sudanese guy, as a Desi. Shows how much YOU know.