"Kingdom of Heaven"

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
The massacres occurred during the first Crusade. I believe that this story takes place afterwards.

Yep, must be shortly before the third crusade, so before 1189. If they show how Saladin sieges Jerusalem (which wasn't really a big siege, as GePap already said), they show probably the prelude to that crusade, the Christian defeat in the battle of Hattin 1187, and the following loss of most areas conquered by Christians, mainly during the first crusade and its aftermath.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sprayber
I never understood this line of reasoning. What are the fears over? That because of a movie Muslims will rise up and start killing people. That already goes on among those already willing to do such things. Is it the fear that everday lawabiding Muslims may start killing people in the suburbs? If all it takes is a movie to do something like this then there is a greater problem than everyone is willing to admit. At most people will be upset and not watch the movie or protest. We already get that with Christians, gays, blacks and any other group of people. Why are the muslims so special that they can't be offended just like the rest of us. Afterall it is a right of all Americans to be offended at least a few times in our lives. If not then we feel left out.

Remind me never to hire you as a policy consultant . In the "War on Terror" we kind of need Muslims to be on our side. Muslims being pissed that the "War on Terror" is really some sort of new Crusade, with this movie showing the American people's real views on Christian-Muslim relations (if it showed Muslims in a bad light) and that help may dry up quickly.

Remember, the Muslim stats in the ME are quick to anger over any percieved slight. Their population isn't that friendly to the US in the first place.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Really though, we need to make a movie called, "Historic Big Fight Scene" and just have it run for 2 hours straight, nothing but fighting.

There was a sketch in The Fast Show about a film called "The Long Big Fight", based on the same premise.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui




Remember, the Muslim stats in the ME are quick to anger over any percieved slight. Their population isn't that friendly to the US in the first place.

The public in the ME is angred over everything and anything their goverment or religious leaders tell them they should be angred at. I don't see much of anything that they aren't pissed at. You seem to think we should run everything passed them, even a hollywood movie, before its done. Why don't we just ask their permission to take a **** why we are it. It makes about as much sense as asking them if a movie can be made or not.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Sprayber


The public in the ME is angred over everything and anything their goverment or religious leaders tell them they should be angred at.

... and coming from an American, no less.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by General Ludd






... and coming from an American, no less.

And your puny little nation of curling and celion deion worshipers are next

[Sprayber]

Oh dear me, hope I didnt offend any Canadians when I referred to them as a nation of stupid sports and horrible entertainment personalities. I sure hope they don't start bombing things and killing people.

[Dinner]

It looks to be some what better then the run of the mill Hollywood stuff though I doubt it will be historically correct in the least.

[GePap]

From what I have seen, Bloom plays a criminal turned knight defending Jerusalem as Saladin's armies come to take it after beating the Crusader Kingdom's armies (as BeBro explained). From the previews, you see dozens of trebuchets firing flaming ammunition at the City (I hate it how Scott tries so hard to make medieval battlefields look modern, with all this "firepower" shooting off), so obviously the Siege of Jerusalem is depicted as this HUGE battle.

[Dinner]

Well... It was captured something like 30 times over the years and unsuccessfully sieged god knows how many times. I'm sure one of them was a big battle.

[GePap]

BAH!

What I have noticed is that the trailers for this movie get worse as time goes. The first one was regal and grandiose-now they have ones set to rock guitar-what the ****!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sprayber
The public in the ME is angred over everything and anything their goverment or religious leaders tell them they should be angred at. I don't see much of anything that they aren't pissed at. You seem to think we should run everything passed them, even a hollywood movie, before its done. Why don't we just ask their permission to take a **** why we are it. It makes about as much sense as asking them if a movie can be made or not.

Oh dear, you still don't get it

If there was a French blockbuster about how the Americans are evil and used Vietnam to portray it, you'd have the Limbaugh's and O'Reilly's of the world going on about how the French aren't really our allies and yadda yadda... and all the anti-French stuff does tend to make a difference in how the countries treat each other. I don't think the 'freedom fries' debacle went down so well.

I could definetly imagine similar discontent with a movie about the Crusades that shows the Muslims in a bad light. It'll just make it harder for the pro-US leaders over there to keep holding to that position if the more anti-US people are 'proven' right.

It's just bad PR.

[GePap]

This movie won't do anything, really. That kurd Saladin is handled like the great and respectful enemy (he has always gotten very good press in the West), and in the end the Muslim's win.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, I realize that now. But I'm saying if it was handled like traditional Hollywood fare and the Muslims were seen as the ultra evil villians.

[Dracon II]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
No, I realize that now. But I'm saying if it was handled like traditional Hollywood fare and the Muslims were seen as the ultra evil villians.

Indeed.
My point was that the crusades is currently a vulnerable point of analogy in the minds of many people w/reference to contemporary politics and international relations. It is frequently cited by extremist muslims, and (once) by Bush in an incredible faux paz. I was just saying that any smidgen of evidence that the movie was biased in favour of the crusaders might be taken by analogy as an indicator of how Americans view the war on terror.... which can't be construed as a war on islam if it wants any credibility overseas.