User Reviews

It seems that most reviewers here want sword fights and action.

Arn is more interesting than that: it is a surprisingly complex film about honour and medieval notions of chivalry and values.

We REALLY enjoyed this - the characters are fleshed out and the plot develops at a drama pace, rather than at a dramatic pace. It seems a lot of thought went into the characterization and settings - this did cost $30,000,000 making it the most expensive Swedish film ever - and it did very well at the box office.

Those wanting just action had best look elsewhere those wanting both action and character, and a real exploration of the values of knighthood then this will definitely be your cup of tea and something to savour.

It is kind of like Braveheart in its values, and less like Kingdom of Heaven than you'd expect. Yes, it is quite elegiac, and that fits its Nordic roots well.

Overall, one of the better films about the crusades and the choices made for people living in a time when individual freedom was lost and subjugated to church and kings.

Recommended

Once I heard about this movie I felt pride for my country for making such a big production, hoping for it to be able to challenge big productions such as Troy, King Arthur and maybe even 300. I hoped so, but I expected otherwise. I know my epic movies pretty well, and in the trailer some months before release I notices some bass tones of the music score were identical to a part of the Gladiator music. I feared a cheap American epic movie ripoff with flawed actors and fake-looking special effects. Luckily, I did not see what I expected.

Arn has one big difference from the epic movies we know - it is made in a country where an epic movie of this size has never been made before. Naturally, many will expect to see the same of what we've seen in epic movies so far. Many will expect to see a hero or a group of heroes slaughtering hordes of enemies for the pure obsession of it that they call glory, but they won't. What they will see is the tale of the medieval life told in the most simple way. A mother promising away her son to God to serve him. The obsession of power between kings. To get to know your worst enemy and respect him as a man, and to meet anguish of having to kill him on the battle field without really knowing why.

During the first half of the movie at some point the storytelling got a little over hand, which is understandable while the balancing between being informative and entertaining is a hard thing to perfect. Though, it would be a shame going to the theater to see this film waiting for the heads to start rolling to the right and to the left, missing out the whole experience of having an honest story about the medieval life being told right in front of your eyes by common people.

This is the first part of the story of Arn. Now I have my hopes up for the second movie to round up this tale as well as or better than this first part started it.

Impressive film. i expected purely a crusades film. but it is much more. essentially it is about Arn and his life from childhood to adult. eventually finding his true love but this love is forbidden since he has "sinned with the flesh" as those crazy Christians put it. so he is sent away to the crusades where he encounters Saladin, the oppositions leader. and they come to respect one another as men of honor and wisdom. since this film involved severing of limbs and cutting throats i am puzzled why this film got a pg rating when films like die hard get a 18 rating. the answer is purely because the financial backers of the film had pull with the censorship board. after all this is the most expensive film production in Scandinavian history. cant wait to see the sequel.

I'm sorry I can't think of a better title for my comments. I thought of comparing it to "Kingdom of Heaven", the film trend in Hollywood, and a bunch of other things. But the one thing that really stands out for me is that it's just a good movie.

But the film's history reminds me of a personal anecdote regarding one of my former managers early in my film career, and his effort to get a medieval epic off the ground in the late 80s regarding Robert the Bruce. Without going into too much detail he lost control of the project, and the film that eventually came out of his efforts was "Braveheart", only "Braveheart" was the market competitor that was designed to compete with my manager's film, which never got made.

So it is with "Arn the Templar" in regards to "Kingdom of Heaven", only unlike my old boss's film "Arn the Templar" got off ground, and flourished into an impressive medieval Nordic epic. There's little to criticize about this film, other than the drama itself never really hits a high point. But perhaps that's as it should be, because it seems a bit more real. There's little in the way of over dramatizing the characters, which obviously holds back a more emotional film. This in turn allows the background itself to become a character.

We're taken to medieval Europe and Outremar. The landscape is barren, harsh, and most of all for the audience, real. The north is rich when love is in bloom, but cold when violence reigns. In the wastes of Jerusalem all is hot, parched, and full of death. The desert runs with blood.

The other plus in regards to this film are the costumes. The actors are made to look of the land. Those who trudge the desert are covered in dust, dirt, and caked mud via perspiration. And the costumes look to be of the period. Unlike another film I reviewed, "1066", the armor in this film looks like armor of the period as with the rest of the costumes. Such authenticity helps offset some of the notable lack of energy in the drama. In fact this film's art direction is perhaps superior to "Kingdom of Heaven".

Why is that? Because there is no CGI in this film. SFX for this film go back to golden era Classic Hollywood; i.e. no miniatures and no CGI. Everything you see is real. Which would help explain why this film was so expensive to make for Scandinavian film makers.

Negatives, and there're a couple. There's maybe two, possibly three oddly cut sequences where the alleged 180-degree camera rule is violated, and shots are put together in an unconventional way. But it's so minor that you hardly notice it. The only other criticism I'd make is that the film feels like a Scandinavian effort to make a Hollywood film. Not that that in itself is a bad thing, after all Europes Scandinavian types are finally mining their culture and history for some quality films.

All in all I liked what I saw. In fact I liked it better than "Kingdom of Heaven" for a number of reasons. First and foremost there are no real villains as such, and therefore unlike Ridley Scott's film this movie doesn't present us with one-dimensional sociopaths as the cause of main emotional propellant for the action. That is to say we don't need individual characters to help push the geo-politics. Outremar is there, and so is Saladin's army and the political forces driving both. We know this. Nations fight. They always have. They always will. The collective mind that nations create will always vie for power. It's the story of the individuals that are caught up in the maelstrom that we're interested in. This is what Arn the Templar is all about.

So, in the end does this film deliver? I think it does, but it does lack that extra bit of emotional muscle to really push it into the classic film category. That, and it does get somewhat reminiscent of classic films in the end. Still, this is a very solid piece of commercial cinema that should entertain.

Enjoy :-)

NEW SCREENING 12/13/2010

I ordered a DVD import of the entire mini-series, and all I can say is ... my god, no wonder this thing was so expensive. The producers essentially shot an 8+ hour feature film for was supposed to be a TV series. Mini-series or no, if you spend this much time and care setting up the shots and getting all the particulars right, then is it any wonder this project cost so much?

From Arn's child hood to his eventual death, we look at his life and that of his love interest. But in a movie of the week format, not even a regular dramatic TV format, but a series that took the care and production values of a feature film, and injected them into an epic that makes the old epics pale in length. Imagine taking Coppola's "Godfather" and making a TV series out of it where every shot and prop was tended to with extra care. Well, that's what the mini series is.

Good stuff... even if I can't understand Swedish :-)

Check it out.

Sweden in the 1100s is the backdrop for the troubled love story between nobleman boy-turned monk-turned-knight templar Arn and neighboring girl Cecilia- before he is sent off to Jerusalem in the crusades and she into a convent- plus the rivaling royal clan struggles for power in the nation. I haven't read the bestselling books which this is based on, and knowing this is a part-saga and soon TV-series to be, I can somewhat overlook the gaps in storytelling.

What I do enjoy is a sound, intriguing (especially the scheming between the church and royal clans) and reliable medieval tale - with heavy doses of romance, monastery/convent dramatics and a little touch of "Kingdom of heaven"-battling in the end - that unfortunately never quite peaks. As a cinephile Swede, I know the country's market a bit, and notice that the filmmakers are SO focused on keeping a safe, steady course not to fail with such a big production ship like this, that they end up with no real climactic cinematic highlights to speak of. Rougher camera-work and sets might've heightened things a bit?

For that reason it's very evenly paced, never boring and quite nicely produced. But with a major flaw: Arn remains very stiff and sketchy as an adult character. We never personally get to know him (he has SO few lines!) as to really understand why Cecilia loves him.

All in all, 6 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

I must say this one surprised me, it was better than i thought it would be. Joakim Nätterqvist did an awesome performance, i've met him several times since he's my cousins ex so i know him personally and this just what he needed, might this be a new start for a career for Jocke? who knows.

To the movie now...

When title shows up and the beautiful music is being played in the background i'm getting a good felling about it. But then the narrator starts to talk and i have to say he didn't fit in any good, it was just like watching Animal planet. The narrator didn't fit in at all, in fact some people in the audience actually started to laugh, that's rare.

I've heard that some have said that this is the best Swedish movie ever made. For me that's not true, i say that Evil is the best Swedish film. But Arn is just what we in Sweden needed. For all the shitty movies that have been made this was a lift. Perhaps now Sweden will be marked on the map again in film making. Since Bergman died it has been rough for us to get attention in movie making. So i hope Arn goes internationally, due to the fact that they speak more English than Swedish.

But when i've heard from Joakim Nätterqvist that they were gonna re-cut the movie to suit a more younger audience i was a bit worried, i didn't want it to be an Astrid Lindgren movie. But it didn't turn out that way, some parts were actually pretty violent and contained some gore. I've seen worse though but that's something i would like to warn all the sensitive audience's for.

The music for the movie was perfect in my opinion, i don't know who wrote it but my hat goes of for that person.

Arn Tempelriddaren- "Turned out to be surprisingly good!" 8/10

I must admit I am pleasantly surprised by this project. The scope of the story and the cinematic achievement were quite good. It's true, the story had some holes, big holes in it, but considering the time of the story it covered and the multitude of sub-plots I think they made quite a good job at it. Take into account that the story starts somewhere in rural Gothland, a kingdom before the formation of Sweden, then stretches for many years.. and distance, all the way to the Holy Land and the fall of Jerusalem. It is a story about the coming of age of a true knight, his unfortunate love story, sibling betrayal and it's consequences, military rivalry among those who should be united and an unexpected friendship with an honorable enemy. I was also pleased with some of the acting (good on the part of Joakim Nätterqvist, good enough for Sofia Helin) although I cannot understand the choice of an actress that looks much older than her characters' love interest. But the fight scenes where decent enough, the battles were made to look quite realistic, even though you can tell there probably weren't enough money for lots of extras to have. What I did not like at all was how much religion was added, but, I guess it all adds to the flavor of the times, supposedly. All in all, a movie I would recommend for anyone who likes historical films and.. Swedish cinema.

it could be defined in different ways. as historical movie, as example of romanticism in hard - idyllic period, as adventure of a kind of self made man, as return to the books of teenager age. in fact, it is more than a correct/good film about a character who becomes useful guide in the essence of Medieval life. because, without be a lesson, it is a precise - delicate pledge for values and gestures and responsibility. and this does it seductive. because it gives an universal story. because it is an admirable work. not only for the fans of genre. but for remind. what is real significant in each life.

Colorful and breathtaking epic about Sweden history and Crusades in the Dark Ages based on two novels written by Jan Guillou , being Scandinavia's most expensive film production ever . The picture narrates on Crusades age and set on Sweden backdrop in 110s , the starring is Arn Magnusson (Joakin Natterqvist) son of a high-ranking Swedish nobleman turned monk , being educated at a monastery under his preceptor Father Henry (Simon Callow) and is trained in the fencing art by Brother Guilbert (Vincent Perez) . Then , there happens a stormy love story between the nobleman young and a beautiful girl named Cecilia (Sofia Helin) . Meanwhile , there are violent rivaling royal clan struggles for power in Sweden , the Sverkis and the Folkes (Stellan Skarsgard and Michael Nyqvist of Milennium saga) . But Arn is sent to battle as a knight Templar to do sacrifice for the forbidden love . As he is excommunicated , banished and obligated to fight on Holy Land as knight Templar against the Saracen . While Cecilia is sent into a convent ruled by a rigid Superior Mother (Bibi Andersson) . Arn goes to Orient land and there he manages to save Saladin who is battling King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem . Arm 'll confront Templars knights enemies as well as Muslims .

The movie developed in the third Crusade and being based on epic events and historic characters , thus it appears Saladin -played by Soman- who created the dynasty Ayyubida and vanquished Crusaders in Alepo and Hattin battles and reconquers Jerusalem (1187) that had previously been won by Geoffrey Boullon in the first Crusade , also appears the Great Master Templar -well played by the British Steven Waddington- who asks help Arn for the third Crusade and defeat Saladin . This is a lavish European co-production between various countries as Sweden|UK|Denmark|Norway|Finland and Germany . It's Sweden's most expensive film production ever made . The executive producer Johan Mardell and director Peter Flinth confirmed that the movie ran over budget during production . However , Swedish Public Service withdrew support from the project only months before its release, citing lack of quality and unsatisfying amount of material as main reasons, then the studio instead claimed the disagreement was due to budget concerns . In the motion picture there are historical deeds ,overwhelming battles , gorgeous landscapes and gorgeous scenarios . Production design is magnificent , as the forts , convents , the striking outdoors and the impressive Jerusalem city. The battles are very well staged with thousands people and others by means of computer generator special effects . It's spectacularly filmed on location in Dunfermline, Fife, Lothian, Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK , Erfoud, Morocco , Lidköping , Västra Götalands län, Sweden (Arnäs buildings),Trollhättan, Sweden . Evocative and glimmer cinematography is spellbound and evocative musical score with some oriental sounds during Jerusalen scenes . Rating : 6 , Acceptable and passable historical film .

Why we try to rewrite history's events?? I searched what so-called The Battle of Hattin 1187 between the Crusader states of the Levant and the forces of Salah ad-Din, and I found on Wikipedia that "Saladin captured or killed the vast majority of the Crusader forces" and "As a direct result of the battle, Muslims once again became the eminent military power in the Holy Land". The question again is: why sometimes we try to rewrite history's events in a misguided manner??? At the same time, we must admit if we must evaluate a movie we must put previous discussions about writing history wrongly are set aside. Because, we have a work of art; and not documentation of historical events. Although, this fact does not take away much unfortunately.

The film starts on a battlefield where Arn (Joakim Nätterqvist) is saving a group of Arabs, one of whom is Saladin (Milind Soman). At the same time Cecilia (Sofia Helin) is under control of a very mean nun (Bibi Andersson), and has a baby, which is, of course, taken from her.

We soon switch to Arn's life in his younger days, as a monk being trained in knowledge and warrior skills. We then see the relationship between the two and how it is forbidden as they come from different clans. Both Cecilia and Arn are punished. She must remain in a nunnery, and he is sent off to fight.

Before he has any chance of returning home, he must take part in the battle for Jerusalem with Saladin. After doing that, he is sent to the desert under a new master that doesn't like him.

But, he survives only to fight again at home when the rival clan claims the throne.

Nätterqvist and Helin both were extremely good. The battles were exciting, and the music was excellent.

OK so I read the reviews and decided to have a look at it myself. As opposed to going into a long and probably boring review:)

For

lovely scenery believable acting good music good values (rare these days)

Against

Suffered from it being too short (should have been an epic and used the other 30mins) Not enough budget (battle scenes fairly poor) Wandered a little at times

At that said - great movie - lovely to see the templars getting a reasonable treatment as they're easy targets some times:)

Go watch it and see for yourself

This is a movie which is very much like a Hollywood adventure, but in Sweden. This movie could have been really bad if it wasn't for the good acting(Stellan Skarsgård, Bibi Andersson, Michael Nyquist, Gustaf Skarsgård, Sofia Helin and more), the wonderful music and some very good fighting scenes. It's nice too see a Swedish high-budget movie that can be seen by anyone who loves epic tales with good drama. Joakim Nätterqvist is surprisingly good in the leading role as Arn and he will probably become one of Sweden's next big stars. This is a very good movie that i can recommend to anyone who likes adventure, epic, drama and Swedish movies.

It seems to me that very few who reviewed this movie has actually read any of the books. That's alright, it only means that you were less disappointed than me. I personally hold Jan Guiliou as my favorite writer, an because the Arn series was the first of his books i ever reed, it has been a standard i compare his work with. The book series is the most amazing books i've ever reed. The characters and plot really sticks out as interesting for someone who are more interested in history than the common man. This is why i had great expectations for the movie, and was overly filled with joy when i heard they were making it.

I'm sure my review has hinted that i wasn't satisfied with what i saw, and this is correct. I'm not going to complain about the actors and locations, which in some choices wasn't remotely comparable to the books, what i however want to complain about is the extreme liberty the director has taken in changing so much of the original plot, that i couldn't recognize the original book i loved so much.

First off, Who makes 2 movies out of 3 books ?, they couldn't possibly have thought that was a good idea. The first movie is "The road to Jerusalem" and 15 minutes of "The knights templar" i felt empty and disappointed when i left the movie theater that evening.

Another thing is that the films are just a love story. Guiliou's original books was a story of life in Sweden during the middle ages, where the love story between Arn and Cecilia was the red thread that combined the books. In the movie this is the main plot, the secondary plot, and the rest of the story is left for scraps.

My recommendation is that instead of watching the movie, you read the books. They are more entertaining, and you won't feel that you just wasted part of you're life.

Sometimes I wonder whether the writer (and the screenwriters) did not want to tell us that in the Middle Ages at least,Muslims were more tolerant, chivalrous ,human and clever -the Europeans could eat their heart out as far as maths,medicine ,architecture and astronomy were concerned-than the believers of the"true" cross.Mother superior (played by Bergmanian Bibi Andersson I did not even recognize)is actually more sadistic and more dreadful than Saladdin and his warriors.

It's never boring but it's never really exciting as well;as an user points out,it never peaks although there's a good chemistry between the two principals -who anyway do not share many scenes-The ending may seem original till you realize it is actually borrowed from Anthony Mann 's "El Cid" (1963).We were told the authors had a mini-series in mind and I'm sure it would have worked better that way.But you could do worse than rent this epic story which keeps you interested till the end ,in spite of a certain monotony.