"Kingdom of Heaven"

[DinoDoc]

There's nothing wrong with doing a movie about the Crusades, Dracon.

[BeBMan]

Well, everything is historically sensitive. If there can't be made movies anymore about a certain topic because someone may not like them the entire movie industry would die a sudden death.

[GePap]

The main bad guy of the film is Reynald de Chantillion (French to boot), who is responsible for attacking caravans of pilgrims to Mecca and carreid out raids in the Hijaz vs the main ports serving Mecca and Medina- essentially made war between the Crusader kingdom and the Muslim forces inevitable.

My problem with the film is that there really wan;t much of a fight for Jerusalem, as opposed to the grand spectacle shown.

[Dracon II]

Wasn't saying there's anything wrong with making a movie out of the crusades... or giving it a good story. Just saying that when dealing with events like the Crusades, or the Holocaust, or any other historical situation that is so sensitive to the cultural fabric of our society (to use a terrible cliche... it's 3am forgive me) we've gotta make the story as correct as we can... even if it means sacrificing a good story. This movie might be the only source of historical knowledge on the crusades that many people get... so we can't be misinforming them. Any cultural artefact (to use pomo language) of the magnititude of a hollywood film, has a significant effect on the historical and cultural ontology of a large number of people... especially when the artefact purports to depict historical reality (anyone watching King Arthur would think the Romans were all about freedom and British nationalism... **** & bull). Thus the depiction of this film should be approached with the same sensitivity that the writers of that contraversial Japanese textbook should have done.
I'm not saying that the film hasn't done that... I haven't seen it. But I know what Hollywood has done... so I'm cautious.

[Provost Harrison]

I am sure, somehow, that the Americans will be the hero in this film

[Dr Strangelove]

If this thing tanks I wonder if it will mean the end of the Hollywood (historical) epic. Historical epics were popular in the 1950s and 1960s, then they died out until "Gladiator". "Troy" was a bit of a dissappointment, while "Alexander" completely tanked, so I'm thinking that 3 strikes will mean the genre will be "out" for another 2 or 3 decades. That would be a pity.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Dracon II
Wasn't saying there's anything wrong with making a movie out of the crusades... or giving it a good story. Just saying that when dealing with events like the Crusades, or the Holocaust, or any other historical situation that is so sensitive to the cultural fabric of our society (to use a terrible cliche... it's 3am forgive me) we've gotta make the story as correct as we can... even if it means sacrificing a good story. This movie might be the only source of historical knowledge on the crusades that many people get... so we can't be misinforming them. Any cultural artefact (to use pomo language) of the magnititude of a hollywood film, has a significant effect on the historical and cultural ontology of a large number of people... especially when the artefact purports to depict historical reality (anyone watching King Arthur would think the Romans were all about freedom and British nationalism... **** & bull). Thus the depiction of this film should be approached with the same sensitivity that the writers of that contraversial Japanese textbook should have done.
I'm not saying that the film hasn't done that... I haven't seen it. But I know what Hollywood has done... so I'm cautious.

On the one hand I agree with you - I also would like to see more historical accuracy in movies. On the other hand fictional stories are done all the time and are absolutely legitimate in books and movies. As long as they don't sell fiction as facts I don't have a prob with it if it is "only" entertaining.....

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
"Troy" was a bit of a dissappointment,

Understatement. "Troy" blew.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by BeBro
On the one hand I agree with you - I also would like to see more historical accuracy in movies. On the other hand fictional stories are done all the time and are absolutely legitimate in books and movies. As long as they don't sell fiction as facts I don't have a prob with it if it is "only" entertaining.....

I think Dracon is also looking at it as pissing some Muslims off when we don't need any more of them pissed off. That is quite a valid concern. Though if the enemy is a Frenchman, then, well... we just get Chirac mad, and who cares about him anyway .

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Understatement. "Troy" blew.

Not anywhere close to how badly Alexander blew.

I just saw Phantom of the Opera. The two male leads were atrocious at times. The guy playing Raoul had a voice so soft he almost could have sung the part of Christine. The guy playing the Phantom had a great deal of difficulty hitting the higher notes. At some point you could tell that they deliberately covered for his errors by swelling the background music. The woman playing Christine and the rest of the cast were quite fgood however.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Not anywhere close to how badly Alexander blew.

Pun intended?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


Pun intended?

Maybe, but we really don't know now do we? I mean, they were both Greek, so they might have had the same hobbies.

Sometime back someone made the claim that oral sex was probably not practiced in the ancient world, instead ancient gays did it like that really horny male dog next door tries to do it to your leg when he gets off of his leash.

[Provost Harrison]

Your dog analogies are really not making sense. You mean they had anal sex or they just humped each others legs?

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Your dog analogies are really not making sense. You mean they had anal sex or they just humped each others legs?

The latter. After all, they hadn't invented toilet paper yet.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


I think Dracon is also looking at it as pissing some Muslims off when we don't need any more of them pissed off. That is quite a valid concern.

Yeah - hence my comment in the first post. But of course we don't know yet how the movie handles that topic ....I just thought it is already out in the US, since often (US) movies start earlier there than in Europe....