Didn’t see “1492” but your description of “Kingdom of Heaven” is what I constantly read on FR. Then I saw it, and I really didn’t see the denigration. There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell. They also got their asses handed to them, which was gratifying. I also had to agree with the overall lesson that “it’s just a city of landmarks, it’s not worth that much bloodshed.” Especially since I know how the story ends anyway.
“There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell.”
But, the Crusaders were depicted as aggressors, invaders, and the Muslims were depicted as defending themselves against murderous Christians, which is quite the opposite of the actual history behind the events.
“I also had to agree with the overall lesson that its just a city of landmarks, its not worth that much bloodshed.”
In the film, the Muslims didn’t “get” that lesson and walk away from Jerusalem, the Crusader did. It’s very obviously a message that he only wants the modern day “Crusaders” to worry about. No need for the Muslims to stop fighting to keep all the lands they conquered, they just get a pass.
Didnt see 1492 but your description of Kingdom of Heaven is what I constantly read on FR. Then I saw it, and I really didnt see the denigration. There was an asshole Crusader, a king who was trying to keep the peace, and the Muslims were brutal as hell. They also got their asses handed to them, which was gratifying. I also had to agree with the overall lesson that its just a city of landmarks, its not worth that much bloodshed. Especially since I know how the story ends anyway.Well, how about we start here with trying to provide some balance to the movie and your post: