What can I say? Well, for starters, I no longer think Kingdom of Heaven is that badly done.
Let's start with how this film gets rolling. In the "plot convenience theatre" department: Arthur and all his knights need to be sent out on a mission to rescue this VIT (very important teenager), a mission so important that getting him back is the last thing the Roman army will do before departing. So, this kid is hanging out at some isolated plantation on the wrong side of Hadrian's wall??? Ladies and gentlemen, our human McGuffin is in place.
And, in the same scene, what is it with the way Christians are being portrayed in these films? Is it some attempt to balance the fact that, fifty years ago, Christians were always portrayed as superior to Pagans, so now it is some kind of payback?
In Kingdom of Heaven, a lot of the Christians were portrayed as venal, violent, and dim. How could King Arthur do worse? Venal, violent, cowardly, dim, and to top it off, pointlessly sadistic! How sadistic? Well, they do this dorky "torture Pagan children just because" routine. How pointless? Well, they have Keira Knightley in a dungeon, and all they can think of doing is breaking her fingers. How pathetic- and uncreative. This is Keira Knightley...
Which brings to our film's antagonists: the Saxons. Let's play "You are the Saxon commander!" Despite apparently getting lost on the sea crossing and landing several hundred miles north of all the other Saxons, you have just come across a hastily abandoned Roman plantation. The plantation's carts and draft horses are gone, and the serfs have fled, but a fully furnished large luxury villa, outbuildings, tilled fields, and livestock remain. Do you say to yourself:
A. FREAKING GREAT! THIS is why we invaded England: free pre-built fiefdoms! They even left the tableware, excellent. Now for the hard decision: keep it for myself, or give it to one of my successful captains instead of having to pay him? OR,
B. WE HATE BUILDINGS! Burn! Burn the blasted thing to the ground. Kill everything that moves! We're Saxons- that's what we do! Sure, it is winter in Britannia, and the livestock we are pointlessly killing might come in handy to feed my army, but us Saxons prefer sleeping outside, on the ground, and eating- well, whatever. That's what makes us superior
Most historical Saxon commanders, in fact, chose option A. But, I guess Bruckheimer and company didn't think that invading land to take over and run things was eeeevil enough. So, the producers brought in the gang from "The Road Warrior," took away their dune buggies, and called them the enemy. Frankly, I suspect that their behavior would leave most historical Saxons going "huh?"
One thing a lot of Saxon commanders would have liked, though, was all the groovy crossbows they had. Did someone time travel to eleventh century Genoa and buy them all? If they did, it would seem easier to come back with Lee-Enfield rifles and solve all their problems. Must be one of those time machines that only allow for the transport of non-gunpowder weaponry.
The "am I watching a Godzilla film?" moment came after the rescue of teen McGuffin from the Saxon marauders and right before a battle on a frozen lake. Clive Owen gives an "inspirational" speech. The whole scene was re-dubbed from what Owen was originally saying, however, and the synchronization is horrible. Clive's lips start moving a full half second before we get any words. When I see that, I expect to hear Godzilla sounds or Hong Kong Martial-arts film sound effects immediately following. Hard to believe this film was done in English. Since Owen's speech was pretty cheesy, I shudder to imagine what Owen was saying originally, to be dubbed over with that cheese.
The "battle on the ice" itself- it is just like Alexander Nevsky, except for the fact that it isn't good. Just a badly shot muddle of people on the ice more reminiscent of the "Monty Python Women's League" battle re-enactments than Eisenstein.
After the Nevsky homage, we are treated a the most awkward, painful so-called "love scene" featuring Clive and Keira. There was a time in film when they would have just faded out when it was obvious what would happen. That would have been such an improvement. With these sort of scenes, do it right or don't do it at all! Poor lighting, camera angles straight out of "Battlefield Earth" and the old Batman TV show, enough camera movement to give some viewers motion sickness- even a porn film director could have done better.
Of course, any film like this needs a final, climactic battle. Okay, so you have the best fortification in Britannia in the form of Hadrian's wall, and you let them through, supposedly as part of a trap. It appears that for this plan to work, the Saxons had to charge past the fortress and into battle, instead of thinking that maybe they would want to keep the fortification and let the natives attack them while they had the nice building; it is a good thing these road-warrior Saxons hate buildings and fortifications. And where did all the petroleum for these fire-traps come from?
Lancelot was impressive, though. Why use a crossbow, if you can throw your sword forty feet and have it stick? And then, of course, the final wedding scene with the flaming arrows being shot into the sea (winner, 2004's most retarded Freudian image in film). But anyway, we have this great image of the wedding of Christian and Pagan, on the rocks. It just has a certain "love boat" kitschy quality to it which ruins any alleged message.
"Kingdom of Heaven" looked like a mish-mash when I first saw it. But, compared to this, it is a masterpiece.
Let's start with how this film gets rolling. In the "plot convenience theatre" department: Arthur and all his knights need to be sent out on a mission to rescue this VIT (very important teenager), a mission so important that getting him back is the last thing the Roman army will do before departing. So, this kid is hanging out at some isolated plantation on the wrong side of Hadrian's wall??? Ladies and gentlemen, our human McGuffin is in place.
And, in the same scene, what is it with the way Christians are being portrayed in these films? Is it some attempt to balance the fact that, fifty years ago, Christians were always portrayed as superior to Pagans, so now it is some kind of payback?
In Kingdom of Heaven, a lot of the Christians were portrayed as venal, violent, and dim. How could King Arthur do worse? Venal, violent, cowardly, dim, and to top it off, pointlessly sadistic! How sadistic? Well, they do this dorky "torture Pagan children just because" routine. How pointless? Well, they have Keira Knightley in a dungeon, and all they can think of doing is breaking her fingers. How pathetic- and uncreative. This is Keira Knightley...
Which brings to our film's antagonists: the Saxons. Let's play "You are the Saxon commander!" Despite apparently getting lost on the sea crossing and landing several hundred miles north of all the other Saxons, you have just come across a hastily abandoned Roman plantation. The plantation's carts and draft horses are gone, and the serfs have fled, but a fully furnished large luxury villa, outbuildings, tilled fields, and livestock remain. Do you say to yourself:
A. FREAKING GREAT! THIS is why we invaded England: free pre-built fiefdoms! They even left the tableware, excellent. Now for the hard decision: keep it for myself, or give it to one of my successful captains instead of having to pay him? OR,
B. WE HATE BUILDINGS! Burn! Burn the blasted thing to the ground. Kill everything that moves! We're Saxons- that's what we do! Sure, it is winter in Britannia, and the livestock we are pointlessly killing might come in handy to feed my army, but us Saxons prefer sleeping outside, on the ground, and eating- well, whatever. That's what makes us superior
Most historical Saxon commanders, in fact, chose option A. But, I guess Bruckheimer and company didn't think that invading land to take over and run things was eeeevil enough. So, the producers brought in the gang from "The Road Warrior," took away their dune buggies, and called them the enemy. Frankly, I suspect that their behavior would leave most historical Saxons going "huh?"
One thing a lot of Saxon commanders would have liked, though, was all the groovy crossbows they had. Did someone time travel to eleventh century Genoa and buy them all? If they did, it would seem easier to come back with Lee-Enfield rifles and solve all their problems. Must be one of those time machines that only allow for the transport of non-gunpowder weaponry.
The "am I watching a Godzilla film?" moment came after the rescue of teen McGuffin from the Saxon marauders and right before a battle on a frozen lake. Clive Owen gives an "inspirational" speech. The whole scene was re-dubbed from what Owen was originally saying, however, and the synchronization is horrible. Clive's lips start moving a full half second before we get any words. When I see that, I expect to hear Godzilla sounds or Hong Kong Martial-arts film sound effects immediately following. Hard to believe this film was done in English. Since Owen's speech was pretty cheesy, I shudder to imagine what Owen was saying originally, to be dubbed over with that cheese.
The "battle on the ice" itself- it is just like Alexander Nevsky, except for the fact that it isn't good. Just a badly shot muddle of people on the ice more reminiscent of the "Monty Python Women's League" battle re-enactments than Eisenstein.
After the Nevsky homage, we are treated a the most awkward, painful so-called "love scene" featuring Clive and Keira. There was a time in film when they would have just faded out when it was obvious what would happen. That would have been such an improvement. With these sort of scenes, do it right or don't do it at all! Poor lighting, camera angles straight out of "Battlefield Earth" and the old Batman TV show, enough camera movement to give some viewers motion sickness- even a porn film director could have done better.
Of course, any film like this needs a final, climactic battle. Okay, so you have the best fortification in Britannia in the form of Hadrian's wall, and you let them through, supposedly as part of a trap. It appears that for this plan to work, the Saxons had to charge past the fortress and into battle, instead of thinking that maybe they would want to keep the fortification and let the natives attack them while they had the nice building; it is a good thing these road-warrior Saxons hate buildings and fortifications. And where did all the petroleum for these fire-traps come from?
Lancelot was impressive, though. Why use a crossbow, if you can throw your sword forty feet and have it stick? And then, of course, the final wedding scene with the flaming arrows being shot into the sea (winner, 2004's most retarded Freudian image in film). But anyway, we have this great image of the wedding of Christian and Pagan, on the rocks. It just has a certain "love boat" kitschy quality to it which ruins any alleged message.
"Kingdom of Heaven" looked like a mish-mash when I first saw it. But, compared to this, it is a masterpiece.