"Braveheart" was great. "The Gladiator" was excellent. "TLOTR;trilogy" were perfect. "Troy" was not bad. "King Arthur" was bad(especially Clive Owen). "Alamo" was terrible. "Alexander" was......:eek:
Today, I saw Kingdom of Heaven in theater.
So, at first, I worried about "Kingdom of heaven". But I believed Ridley Scott. All his movies were success. That's right. He did it again! Like a Gladiator, I felt warrior's soul in this movie. It has worth to see.
By the way, did you recognize Edward Norton in this movie? I didn't. How could I know?! When I saw end credit, then I realized he was in it. :o :p
Today, I saw Kingdom of Heaven in theater.
So, at first, I worried about "Kingdom of heaven". But I believed Ridley Scott. All his movies were success. That's right. He did it again! Like a Gladiator, I felt warrior's soul in this movie. It has worth to see.
By the way, did you recognize Edward Norton in this movie? I didn't. How could I know?! When I saw end credit, then I realized he was in it. :o :p
This post was last modified: 05-15-2005, 06:38 AM by Kenji.
Kenji Wrote:"Braveheart" was great. "The Gladiator" was excellent. "TLOTR;trilogy" were perfect. "Troy" was not bad. "King Arthur" was bad(especially Clive Owen). "Alamo" was terrible. "Alexander" was......:eek:
Today, I saw Kingdom of Heaven in theater.
So, at first, I worried about "Kingdom of heaven". But I believed Ridley Scott. All his movies were success. That's right. He did it again! Like a Gladiator, I felt warrior's soul in this movie. It has worth to see.
By the way, did you recognize Edward Norton in this movie? I didn't. How could I know?! When I saw end credit, then I realized he was in it. :o :p
I think I will wait for the DVD on this one. The previous epics really left me jaded toward the genre.
![[Image: logo2.jpg]](http://www.ween.net/feebles/logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
I put the laughter in manslaughter
Kenji Wrote:"Braveheart" was great. "The Gladiator" was excellent. "TLOTR;trilogy" were perfect. "Troy" was not bad. "King Arthur" was bad(especially Clive Owen). "Alamo" was terrible. "Alexander" was......:eek:I saw this on Friday. This movie is SO MUCH better than Gladiator (recent movies least deserving of Best Picture IMO). I was expecting this movie to either demonize or glorify one side or another (Christian or Moslem), but it actually doesn't. Both sides have their good and bad. This movie really makes me want to learn more about the Crusades (any recommendations??).
Today, I saw Kingdom of Heaven in theater.
So, at first, I worried about "Kingdom of heaven". But I believed Ridley Scott. All his movies were success. That's right. He did it again! Like a Gladiator, I felt warrior's soul in this movie. It has worth to see.
By the way, did you recognize Edward Norton in this movie? I didn't. How could I know?! When I saw end credit, then I realized he was in it. :o :p
BTW, no, I did not recognize Norton, either, not even the voice, which I normally would pick up on.
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. ... The piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.
~ Howard Phillips Lovecraft
jimbow8 Wrote:BTW, no, I did not recognize Norton, either, not even the voice, which I normally would pick up on.
He was putting on mask on face.
jimbow8 Wrote:I saw this on Friday. This movie is SO MUCH better than Gladiator (recent movies least deserving of Best Picture IMO). I was expecting this movie to either demonize or glorify one side or another (Christian or Moslem), but it actually doesn't. Both sides have their good and bad. This movie really makes me want to learn more about the Crusades (any recommendations??).Better than Gladiator? My husband and I love that movie. He really wanted to see Kingdom of Heaven, but we were hesitant because sometimes those are disappointing. We'll have to go see it.
stacyzinda123 Wrote:Better than Gladiator? My husband and I love that movie. He really wanted to see Kingdom of Heaven, but we were hesitant because sometimes those are disappointing. We'll have to go see it.I liked Gladiator but am not a huge fan. Basically, I think it was a standard action flick masquerading as a historical epic.
This one holds truer to the historical epic, IMO. I'm no expert on the Crusades, and I know there were liberties taken (like combining historical figures into one character and condensing the timespan), but I think this one holds up better.
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. ... The piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.
~ Howard Phillips Lovecraft
jimbow8 Wrote:I liked Gladiator but am not a huge fan. Basically, I think it was a standard action flick masquerading as a historical epic.
This one holds truer to the historical epic, IMO. I'm no expert on the Crusades, and I know there were liberties taken (like combining historical figures into one character and condensing the timespan), but I think this one holds up better.
I really enjoyed this movie too. I am a sucker for these kinds of movies. I must say that Orlando Bloom had me worried as the hero in this one. He just didn't seem to fit the part, but after seeing the movie I was very impressed with him in this.
The one complaint (actually not really a complaint, just an observation) is what my wife and I have come to call the "Braveheart" speech. Have you noticed that all the movies in this genre have to have the big moral boosting speech before the big battle that has the odds stacked againts them? Actually the "braveheart" speech in this one was pretty good.
"No other success can compensate for failure in the home." D.O. McKay
"Never raise your hand to your kids. It leaves your groin unprotected."
~ Red Buttons
Too literal? I'm sorry you feel I have a Literal Agenda!
The Mad American Wrote:I really enjoyed this movie too. I am a sucker for these kinds of movies. I must say that Orlando Bloom had me worried as the hero in this one. He just didn't seem to fit the part, but after seeing the movie I was very impressed with him in this.Are you referring to the really short one he gave while standing on the short wall? I wasn't really impressed with that speach actually thought it was kinda lame.
The one complaint (actually not really a complaint, just an observation) is what my wife and I have come to call the "Braveheart" speech. Have you noticed that all the movies in this genre have to have the big moral boosting speech before the big battle that has the odds stacked againts them? Actually the "braveheart" speech in this one was pretty good.
I associate that kind of speech with Henry V's St Crispin's Day speech, especially as given by Kenneth Branagh.
[indent]What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.[/indent]
The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. ... The piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.
~ Howard Phillips Lovecraft
Went to see the movie last night.
While I enjoyed the movie I cannot even begin to compare it to Gladiator. In my opinion there was TONS of action in the movie which I usually enjoy, however they could have spent just a bit more time with character development and story line. The one aspect of this movie I was interested in seeing was how they would portray the christians and how they would portay the Muslim's.
I think they did a fairly good job of keeping even to both parties in that respect. I don't want to get into the details as it might prove a bit of a spoiler but it definately is worth watching -- either at home when it comes out on DVD or at the theatre so you can enjoy the action on the big screen.
ShadowLord
While I enjoyed the movie I cannot even begin to compare it to Gladiator. In my opinion there was TONS of action in the movie which I usually enjoy, however they could have spent just a bit more time with character development and story line. The one aspect of this movie I was interested in seeing was how they would portray the christians and how they would portay the Muslim's.
I think they did a fairly good job of keeping even to both parties in that respect. I don't want to get into the details as it might prove a bit of a spoiler but it definately is worth watching -- either at home when it comes out on DVD or at the theatre so you can enjoy the action on the big screen.
ShadowLord
I, too, saw this film this wknd and was a tad disappointed.
I went in expecting classic Ridley Scott - and I came out wondering if he was involved in it in even the slightest capacity.
Some of my complaints were that it was too long, for one. Another was that many of the scenes ended without any impact. Generally, Ridley ties up individual scenes with a wallop courtesy of biting dialogue. Many scenes in this film simply ended and had me wondering, "Is that it?" Also, the dialogue was not as scathing and less punctual than Ridley generally works with. In the end, I actually questioned whether or not he had any involvement in the screenplay - and moreso, if he was actually the director or merely a producer of the film. (And the fact that he didn't use Hans Zimmer to score it had me baffled - as I thought a better score might have lifted this film to a different/higher level.)
Me? I like movies that keep my butt planted in my seat long after the credits begin their roll. With this, I couldn't wait for it to end.
(Maybe something's wrong with me, considering last weekend I actually left "Hitchiker's Guide" before it ended. It was brutally bad. IMHO, of course.)
I went in expecting classic Ridley Scott - and I came out wondering if he was involved in it in even the slightest capacity.
Some of my complaints were that it was too long, for one. Another was that many of the scenes ended without any impact. Generally, Ridley ties up individual scenes with a wallop courtesy of biting dialogue. Many scenes in this film simply ended and had me wondering, "Is that it?" Also, the dialogue was not as scathing and less punctual than Ridley generally works with. In the end, I actually questioned whether or not he had any involvement in the screenplay - and moreso, if he was actually the director or merely a producer of the film. (And the fact that he didn't use Hans Zimmer to score it had me baffled - as I thought a better score might have lifted this film to a different/higher level.)
Me? I like movies that keep my butt planted in my seat long after the credits begin their roll. With this, I couldn't wait for it to end.
(Maybe something's wrong with me, considering last weekend I actually left "Hitchiker's Guide" before it ended. It was brutally bad. IMHO, of course.)