Kingdom of Heaven ends with Richard the Lionheart heading on the third crusade, this film starts with Richard the Lionheart coming back from the third crusade. A very loose film connection, both being directed by Ridley Scott.
Damn, I always forget about Kingdom of Heaven. Yeah, O.P. you are spot on with your assessment. Would've been pretty cool if they cast the same actor to play Richard.
They weren't played by the same guy -- Iain Glen in "Kingdom of Heaven," Danny Huston in "Robin Hood" -- but they did look somewhat alike, close enough you could say it was the same guy, 10 years later.
================
4) You ever seen Superman $#$# his pants? Case closed.
That's not the only connection. Ridley Scott condemns the Crusades and venerates Muslims in both films and, in both cases, changes history to do it. Both movies would have been far more entertaining without all biased moralizing.
I don't think Muslims were 'venerated' in RH -- they were barely mentioned.
They were certainly portrayed (relatively) positively in KOH but perhaps that just counterbalances hundreds of movies in which the Muslims are complete villains and the Crusaders noble knights on white steeds.
================
4) You ever seen Superman $#$# his pants? Case closed.
I don't think Muslims were 'venerated' in RH -- they were barely mentioned.
In the scene where the Crusades and the Muslims are mentioned, the Crusades are condemned and the Muslims are venerated.
They were certainly portrayed (relatively) positively in KOH but perhaps that just counterbalances hundreds of movies in which the Muslims are complete villains and the Crusaders noble knights on white steeds.
What hundreds of movies are these? Can you name even three? Can you name one?
reply share
In the statement Robin makes in which he says the Muslim woman he killed looked up at him without fear for herself, only pity for his own soul.
reply share
You're sure you're not making a mountain out of an ant-hill?
No, I don't think so. All I said was that the film changed history in order to condemn the crusades and venerate Muslims. If I had followed up those remarks with some long diatribe about how unfair it was blah blah blah, that might be making a mountain out of a mole hill. But since my comments took less time to read than watching the scene itself, I think I'm being proportionate.
reply share
No, I don't think so. All I said was that the film changed history in order to condemn the crusades and venerate Muslims. If I had followed up those remarks with some long diatribe about how unfair it was blah blah blah, that might be making a mountain out of a mole hill. But since my comments took less time to read than watching the scene itself, I think I'm being proportionate.
But how is the scene -- where he talks about the Muslim woman he killed -- changing history in any way? That is your one piece of evidence to suggest that the whole film is venerating Muslims. That is making a mountain out of an ant-hill. It's one line in the whole film.
reply share
Because no such massacre ever occurred. When King Richard asks Robin if God will be pleased with his crusade, Robin responds that he won't because of the massacre of the garrison of Acre where the crusaders massacred "innocent men, women and children".
This is false. There was a massacre but it did not include women or children. It consisted soley of Muslim soldiers from the city's garrison.
That is making a mountain out of an ant-hill. It's one line in the whole film.
It's not one line, it's a monologue. And it doesn't matter. The main theme of an entire movie is often summed up in one scene and, yes, sometimes even with one line. Usually, one or two lines is all the filmmaker gets to make his point because he's under pressure to keep the story moving. Since there is only one scene dedicated to the subject of the crusades, how many lines do you think he should have used? I thought the point was made clear enough.
reply share
I mean arguably, the Crusaders did leave their neighborhood and go make trouble in somebody else's neighborhood halfway across the world, right? So, who started it? I'm a Christian, meaning born and raised Catholic although I'm not a good Catholic, but when it comes to the Crusades I'm thinking that the Crusaders kinda picked a fight with the Muslims and everybody in Middle East but I don't know a lot about the Crusades.I'm just saying. Lena
I mean arguably, the Crusaders did leave their neighborhood and go make trouble in somebody else's neighborhood halfway across the world, right? So, who started it?
It all depends on your point of view. By the early 8th century, the Muslims conquered Syria, Palestine, Egypt, North Africa and Spain. They invaded France as well but were turned back and driven out. These lands were all part of the old Roman Empire which had been completely Christianized by at least the 6th century. At the start of the crusades, 400 years after the Muslim conquests, many people living in the Holy Land were still Christian.
In the 10th century Greek Christians in the eastern half of the old Roman Empire attempted to recover some of these lands in Syria and had some initial success but in the 11th century the Muslim Turks regained Islam's losses and went on to conquer Asia Minor as well. The Greek Emperor, Alexis asked the Pope for reinforcements from the West and the result was the "First Crusade" which succeeded in recovering Jerusalem and the holy places 1099. The way they viewed it, they were simply leaving one part of the Christian empire to help their brethren in another part of the Christian empire.
The "Third Crusade", the one King Richard (and supposedly Robin Hood) participated in was a response to the loss of Jerusalem to Saladin and the Muslims in 1187. They were attempting to help the Latin Christians of Jerusalem recover much of the territory they had lost in Saladin's campaigns.
reply share
My original post was written as I was diving head first into a migraine. So I'm not really sure what I was saying actually. Gobbledygook mostly I'm not afraid to admit. But most importantly, totally interesting stuff you wrote. Sounds like you know a lot about this topic and the era. Which leads me to my next question. I got rid of cable recently and I don't plan on spending money on cable anymore. Are you aware of any sort of Hulu computer app where I can stream shows that deal with this era like middle age or medieval documentaries? I would love to find out more about this topic. I just don't want to have to buy cable to get it. Are you aware of anything like that that you can refer me to? Again, thanks for the info...
Are you aware of any sort of Hulu computer app where I can stream shows that deal with this era like middle age or medieval documentaries?
Sadly, no. The few documentaries I've seen on the Crusades weren't very well researched.
Here's a website that's very informative and it has some links to other sites. Perhaps browsing around there might turn up some documentaries. Most of my knowledge of the subject comes from books.
Exactly. Also include '1492'. It also features his trademark narrative: muslims are spiritual and honest, Christians are savage imperialist.
I don't know what his aim was with 'Black Hawk Down', but he ended up mainly insulting muslims. I happen to live in a place in which everyone knows what a Somali looks like, and the casting was so bad.
In 'Gladiator' Christianity and Islam is not yet invented, but still includes the ugly white westeners and the noble darkskinned people.
I don't know what his aim was with 'Black Hawk Down', but he ended up mainly insulting muslims. I happen to live in a place in which everyone knows what a Somali looks like, and the casting was so bad.
Similarly, the casting crew of Kingdom of Heaven patted themselves on the back for getting real Arabs to play the part of Saladin and the Muslims not knowing (or caring) that the real Saladin was a Kurd.
Both films include scenes where Muslims pray apart from each other instead of shoulder to shoulder though I'm not sure if the custom is different in different places.
In 'Gladiator' Christianity and Islam is not yet invented, but still includes the ugly white westeners and the noble darkskinned people.
Gladiator takes place at the end of the 2nd century AD so Christians were definitely around. Persecutions against Christians occurred during the reign of Marcus Aurelius.
reply share
I went through the catacombs of Rome. It's always somebody in the hot seat somewhere in the world. Not to slam religion, because I got a pack of atheists after me on IMDB as well, so just playing devils advocate here, but all of this religious warring throughout mankind kind of calls into the question that notion that humans were created in God's image. How exactly then? I mean humans are pretty mean....If God is good as most religions seem to believe (including myself), and we humans are made in his image? Hmmmmm....kind of calls into question all of this conquerin' and crusadin' and rabble rousin' in his name...
Orlando Blooms character raises that issue when the bishop advises him to abandon the people and flee Jerusalem in kingdom of heaven & I think at another point he tells him to convert to Islam and repent later. I think Scott is also trying to make that point in Robin Hood when Richard asks Longstride that fateful question and he talked about the Muslim woman pitying the Crusaders. I'm not necessarily certain that Scott is pro Islam and anti Christianity. When you calculate in prometheus and the religious context of some of his other films, I think what Scott is just probably taking a stab at is the way religion kind of mocks the benevolence of God and uses God as an excuse by humans to make war with each other and harm each other when in fact that's probably not what God intended to begin with. Just my opinion.
Orlando Blooms character raises that issue when the bishop advises him to abandon the people and flee Jerusalem in kingdom of heaven & I think at another point he tells him to convert to Islam and repent later. I think Scott is also trying to make that point in Robin Hood when Richard asks Longstride that fateful question and he talked about the Muslim woman pitying the Crusaders.
One wonders at the validity of Ridley's point if he has to change the facts to reach his conclusions.
reply share
Yeah but I also read that Ridley is an atheist. And yet he might think that we were created through lizards. So really I kinda have a soft heart for him. The poor guy thinks we were created by a bunch of lizards from outer space but he doesn't understand the concept of God or the higher dimensions? Ouch..... So I have a soft spot for him....bless his little heart... stuck in the 3rd dimensionsional organic atheistic plane. Ridley, if there is no God, and lizards are our creators, who created the lizards?
I'm just sayin'.....at least he's thinking about it ...even though he can't get out of evolution groupthink 101.......which is why I won't hold my breath for a fictionalized history movie on the Cathars who believed that the bodies were a mere dirty tunic housing the soul...replete with STRAW on the floor of their luxury medieval high rise condos...
With Ridley, it's just entertainment as far as I'm concerned with him. He's done a good job of entertainment. Don't get me started about how I think that English literature in high school is a waste of time. I took a lot of slack on the Argo board for liking Argo. Simply because it wasn't true to history and it was inaccurate. Honestly it was just an entertaining movie. I have a real problem with literature in high school teaching people history. Which is why, I think it should be an elective course. And maybe history should be elective too, or part of a reading list and not textbooks ....And we should focus more on real-life courses that can actually teach kids how to survive in the real world after graduation. But I guess that's a debate for another day. Unless you want to debate it now. I always love a good debate. Unless people want to start attacking me personally and then that's a turn off.
I always love a good debate. Unless people want to start attacking me personally and then that's a turn off.
You mean, like people calling you an obnoxious jacks$$, and crude abuse like that? Couldn't agree more; that's a real turn-off.
BTW, Ridley Scott said that the movieverse Balian character in KoH was 'an agnostic, like me'. So on his own showing, no atheism, no lizards. Just saying.
reply share
The atheism was sarcasm. Don't really believe he believes we originated from lizards. And I stick with my original assessment with your original post. Not interested in going further with you.
also most of the images in the end credits that are done similar to the scott free logo are from Kingdom of Heaven. The majority of the armor, surcoats and weapons were the same that they made for Kingdom of heaven, you can see Soldiers wearing Balian of Ibelins family crest on their surcoats in the film.
Another interesting thing that ties the films together are the Characters of William Marshall and Guy De Lusingan in each film. Guy was exiled from Aquitaine by then Duke Richard for Killing William Marshalls uncle the Earl of Salisbury.