Posted on 05/07/2005 8:34:45 AM PDT by TheSorcererwiththeCosmicKey
Some more from Rotten Tomatoes movie reviews:
"Yawn. Are the Crusades over yet? Wake me when it's time to leave."
-- Boo Allen, DENTON RECORD CHRONICLE (TX)
"More than ever, Hollywood has become a cinema of fantasy and escapism. But every so often, a powerful director manages to marshal its forces to make a statement or impart a vision that's courageously relevant to what's going on in the real world."
-- William Arnold, SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
"Ridley Scott's breathtaking historical epic is let down by patchy script."
-- Angela Baldassarre, SYMPATICO.CA
"If the intriguing but ultimately derivative Kingdom of Heaven had arrived before these recent period epics, it may have stood a better chance of enthralling us. "
-- Kit Bowen, HOLLYWOOD.COM
"Scott once again proves himself an inept director of action."
-- Robert W. Butler, KANSAS CITY STAR
"Just isn't the larger-than-life, heartrending Crusades masterpiece we were praying Gladiator's director would deliver."
-- Annette Cardwell, FILMCRITIC.COM
"The world's longest and most inscrutable luxury car commercial."
-- Walter Chaw, FILM FREAK CENTRAL
"The Christian knights are mouldy cynics. The Saracens are polished snakes. The twists are marvellous. And dying with an axe in your head is a fine art. "
-- James Christopher, TIMES OF LONDON
"William Monahans well-crafted script keeps the politico-socio side of things well balanced"
-- Robin Clifford, REELING REVIEWS
"... we can see the rising tide of history and admire the skillful way it's depicted. But, somehow, that tide never builds enough power to sweep us away."
-- Carol Cling, LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
"The human drama is cut short in favor of all the battle scenes... they should have thrown this lame Christian script to the lions and made another Gladiator."
-- Cherryl Dawson and Leigh Ann Palone, THEMOVIECHICKS.COM
"Knights! Castles! Broadswords! Catapults! Flaming balls! Severed heads! Burning oil! Gushing digital blood!"
-- David Elliott, SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
The fact that a character is named in the credits does not make him the subject of the movie.
Actually, if the movie had been made with Saladin as the subject, it would be infinitely more interesting, if no less controversial. But not as effective as propaganda.
The title of this movie itself is a triumph of propaganda, subtly implying clear equivalence between a murdering horde killing, pillaging and capturing slaves for their slave markets and for the Caliph, with Christianity.
That simply capitalizes on the abysmal ignorance of the average film viewer, most of whom don't have the intellectual means of separating reality from fantasy, or history from propaganda. For many, this movie represents history, with no qualifications whatsoever.
If this movie had been capitalized entirely by Saudi Arabia, it could not be a more effective means of pure, unadulterated propaganda.
"He is not."
I thought it was the other hottie who was really gay? Actually, it seemed to me I was hearing they were all gay, and then I just put my hands over my mental ears and started thinking "LALALALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" and that was that.
I can't deal with all this gayness, and if these gay fellows thing the public will pay to see them romancing each other they are way wrong. 10% (at MOST) of the populace does not a film audience make. And make that 5%, since I sincerely doubt the lesbians will be interested.
The cable channels pay for the movie. They get the money from the cable companies who get it from you.
You are still paying, just not as much. In fact, you are paying even if you decide not to watch it.
I think the correct term now is "bi."
Whatever he is, it's sure annoying.
Few here will find this movie worthwhile, as it's the same old same old Ho-wood depiction of Western Civilization as the uber-bad guy of the world.
Read post #10 on this thread. And grow up.
Heck, my library will have it for free on DVD within a few months. Then I'll watch it. Then I'll be "paying" even less.
Off topic... but...
Anyone know how many children the Muslims killed of the Childrens Crusade?
At the British Independent Film Awards, Orlando Bloom declares: "I'm not gay. I've got a girlfriend."
History is a pi$$er, ain't it?
Ian McKellen who played Gandalf is openly gay.
Viggo Mortensen is a heterosexual, used to date some actress - Cameron Diaz? Gwyneth Paltrow? - who split with him because of his inattention to 'personal hygiene'. So maybe his hairstyle in LOTR was for real! Believe he also has a son by one of his former flames.
Me, I loved Miranda Otto (Eowyn) and Cate Blanchett!
Of course "Brokeback Mountain" will star two straight men portraying gay cowboys. Some one missed the boat on what people want to see when they go to westerns.
I wonder how many Iranian kids were killed as fodder against the Iraqi's.
Anyone know how many children the Muslims killed of the Childrens Crusade?
I wonder how many Iranian kids were killed as fodder against the Iraqi's.
And there lies the problem with this film. Fanaticism is not created equal on both sides - then or now.
The agnosticism of Bloom's character, Balian, and how it is expressed is about as anachronistic as King Richard the Lion-hearted riding a Sherman tank.
So is the idea of a peaceful, ecumenical group of Muslims and Christians in 12th century Palestine.
I dunno the answer to either, either. I think, the numbers are kinda commensurate, and the analogy appropriate.
All of them?
Really.
Any idea how many children crusades there were.
Seems I recall there were at least two but I am not sure anymore.
My memory is going the way of my hair...LOL..
I think I may have to revisit some history to refresh the grey cells...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.