Kingdom of Heaven
 

Just saw it...........a good flick.........makes you think about how religious fanaticism evolves and its repurcussions.......its not your typical uber-triumphant flick that seems to be pumped out lately.......I think its more a movie that creates debate and makes you think about the reality of where religious extremism can lead to.

and yes, there were times in the movie that prompted me to think about Bush and his administration

I can't wait to go see it.

Its more a thought-provoking movie than a heroic, us vs. them, good vs. evil thing. It might leave some ppl who are used to that cold.

By the way, the chick in it, Eva Green I believe her name is, is just beautiful.

You should watch that movie where she has a bunch of Sex Scenes. She's got a really nice rack :thumbsup

Awesome to hear Bansheelinks!

I'm gonna check it out! :)

From what I've heard the movie shows the story of the crusades from both sides
The Christians and The Muslims in an unbiased fashion.

I will probably take a look at it

I can not wait to see it. But god only knows when it will come out here.

Thats very true. Its also a good morality study............is it worth hanging on to what you feel are principles if thousands may go to their deaths because of it? When is it best to adjust this? Lots of interesting questions it raises.

As far as Muslims go in the treatment in the movie, it was very unbiased. They were not demonized. However, religious fanatacism in general was skewered, as of course it should be.

very intense story that has a touch to one's soul

We saw the movie last night. It was great.

I love the distinction in the movie between religion..and holiness.

Holiness defined in the film not by adhering to a religious doctrine, but by doing the right thing.

It was a good movie, but it will never be a classic.

Saw it today. Excellent movie. :)

ya ya ya...how were the fight scenes though...

I'm not claiming its "Lord of the Rings" or "The Godfather" or "Shawshank Redemption"..........just that its a good film that provokes a lot of thought.

I think Ridley Scott accomplishes what he set out to do in it, and that is give an accurate portrayal of the psychology behind the Crusades and religious fanatacism. No its not Lord of the Rings but I think ppl. should still go and see it. Its entertaining and thought-provoking.

oh yeah.........and the fight scenes were awesome

:thumbsup

I'm not going to go and see it because it does not represent what really happened.

It was dumbed down due to threats from certain Muslim groups.

If it was unbiased then I'd go and see it.

I'm going this week

The movie was "dumbed down" because of threats from Christian groups as well.

You say you won't see a fictional movie because it's biased, but you probably watch Fox News. :1orglaugh

the previews look good, we will see!

GREEN SLAMS SCOTT FOR REMOVING HER SEX SCENES

Sexy actress EVA GREEN has slammed director RIDLEY SCOTT for removing most of the raunchy sex scene she had with screen hunk ORLANDO BLOOM from new movie KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.

Green enjoyed playing Bloom's lover PRINCESS SYBILLA in the film, but was devastated to discover Scott had deleted "the best bits" because he deemed them too shocking.


http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlf...sex %20scenes

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0309987/

Apparently Eva Green gets very naked and raunchy in "The Dreamers"........the Bertolucci film

Might have to rent it

:thumbsup

I don't watch Fox News because I don't get it where I live, nor do I watch much TV anyway.

The film was dumbed down because of threats from Muslim groups.
The Crusades were endeavours to retake land taken by the Muslim jihads.
The overtone was religious (as was pretty much evertying else in those days).

When the Argentinians took over the Falkland Islands the British (my people) launched a "Crusade" to take them back. The only difference here was that religion was not involved. The concepts, however, remain the same - the retaking of land lost to conquest by an enemy.

I can understand how adult webmasters dislike Christianity, but I don't understand the downright hatred for that religion. In the great scheme of things, Christianity is the least of your worries. BTW I'm not Christian. I'm not religious at all. But I was born a Muslim.

Maybe your government should put Muslims in charge of the morality in your country, instead of Christians. Then see for how long you have a job, or even a life.

The Crusaders never had that land to retake it. The Crusaders were foreign invaders. Nothing more, nothing less.

The problem is fundamentalists in either Christianity or Islam. You would not want to live in a country run by either.

It didn't belong to the Europeans. But it did belong to Christians. Christianity back then was more like "one people".

It certainly wasn't there for the Muslims to take.

I wouldn't want either.

But if I had to choose, I'd choose the Christians. As would you.

Looks like Orlando Bloom got to bang her for free :disgust

Did it explore the aspect of the 10s of thousands of Jews that were slaughtered on their way through Europe to the holy land, or was that part ignored?

Actually it belonged to the Eastern Christians who were very different from the Western Christians. Christianity was actually more like two people, since the Great Schism had already occured dividing the church into two. The Crusaders were foreign invaders to both the Muslims and the Eastern Christians, since during the fourth crusade the Crusaders actually attacked and plundered Constantinople, the capitol of Eastern Christianity. Not very Christian of them.

Do not fall into the trap of glorifying the Crusaders. For the most part they were nothing more than bands of barbarian, uneducated thugs. The Eastern Christians and the Muslims were civilized scholars by comparison.

i just watched this today... great movie in my opinion.

are these her?

http://www.1001famosas.com/famosas1/...evagreen05.jpg
http://www.1001famosas.com/famosas1/...evagreen01.jpg
http://www.1001famosas.com/famosas1/...evagreen09.jpg

I'm taking from the lack of response, that the answer is; Yes, this aspect of the Crusades was ignored.....

it was not a movie about the crusades.

you suck at baiting people.

I heard that it was a good movie.

Exactly. Its not a movie about the crusades.

I loved it. Ridley Scott is good at hitting powerful themes inside grand settings.

I sooooooo want to see that movie

Dreamers Eva Green clips


http://img220.echo.cx/img220/9384/scar043016jm.jpg

http://rapidshare.de/files/1487941/n...03-01.avi.html

http://img220.echo.cx/img220/9602/scar043029tx.jpg

http://rapidshare.de/files/1488166/n...03-02.avi.html

http://img246.echo.cx/img246/9753/scar043044bc.jpg

http://rapidshare.de/files/1488597/n...03-04.avi.html

http://img246.echo.cx/img246/7642/scar043050tn.jpg

http://rapidshare.de/files/1488424/n...03-05.avi.html

They were more than invaders, they were there to make their fortunes. Something that happened just recently in the Middle East.

Some of the Crusaders were very successful, coming out of the Crusades very rich, some came out dead. Again like the recent Crusade.

No it said they went to where they talked Italian and go until they stop talking Italian.

I think they went through the Balcans where they killed more people than they did in Palestine.

Saw it last night and it's really about Good v Evil and a man with principles succeeding over those led by fanatasism and greed.

I found in todays world Pinochio more believable.

Plus the fact that a blacksmith turns into a great fighter and leader and a wife is allowed to covort with anyone she chooses. Did Ridley Scott ever read a history book or was it about an easy way to get arses on seats?

yep..........they are her

:thumbsup

I think I need to check out that Bertolucci flick with her in it. I heard it was controversial because of all the sex in it.

I did not like the film

Hey you ignorant, self-hating piece of shit why don't you actually stick to what you know (what is that again?).

Most of the crusaders (particularly with regards to the first crusades) where already very wealthy individuals who owned plenty of land within Europe.

The crusades weren't the cause of paranoid Christian fanatics, they where the result of fact. From the time of Mohammed's death Muslims quickly took control (from Christians) of Palestine, Syria and Egypt (once the most heavily Christian areas in the world). In the eight century Muslims had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century they conquered what is known as Turkey today (which was heavily Christian before than). The old Roman Empire was than reduced to little more than Greece, and by the Othordox Christians than reached out asking for Catholics in the West to come aid them in the East (at the time Christians where basically treated as slaves in Islamic countries).

In 1095 Pope Urban II called upon the knights of the Christendom to push back the Islamic conquests and aid their Christian brothers in the East, and that is what lead to the crusades as we know it. At the end of the Crusades (after many years of battle) muslims (unlike shown in the Kingdom of Heaven bullshit movie) where preparing to invade Europe, and where it not for the death of one leader, and poor management by another it is almost undeniable that it would of went ahead. The only thing that stopped it from eventuating was the rising economic strength of Europe. Without the Crusades, Christianity might well have followed Zoroastrianism, a rival to Islam that was driven to non-existance.

Don't even bother with the people on this board... they don't care about what really happend. Only thing they care about is Money, Bashing Christianity, Bashing USA. If it doesn't meet that criteria then it doesn't matter what you say :(

You're blatantly ignoring the fact that Urban II, in fact, did use the prospect of wealth to convince people to go on the first Crusade. Surely you won't deny that many crusaders were adventurers looking for a better life?

religion has nothing to do with conquering, invading and slaughtering others. sometimes religion is used as a pretext, but it is not the cause. if there were no christianity and no islam at the time... they would be fighting for any other reason... maybe for The Great Magic Coconut. does it really matter? pondering the reason itself is irrelevent and no less retarded than saying "its the will of god". Rome did not conquer the world for a god. Neither did the Huns. Neither did the Mongols and so on and so on and so on.

arguing about right and wrong in history is just as stupid as arguing about whose god is better. war has been happening since the dawn of civilization, well before the crusades, happen today in the year 2005 and will continue until the end of time.

power, glory, wealth and security are not religious ideals.

"war is the natural state of man"

:2 cents: