Leave a comment below!
Sounds like a repeat of the King Arthur hatchet job of last year. The Crusades could be the subject of a great movie. You known what else could? The life of St. Augustine.
A fair and balanced movie about the Crusades is asking Hollywood to do something which it is not capable of doing in this day and age. It is a shame.
A Hollywood movie about St. Augustine would focus on his coercive suppression of the Righteous Donatists, who will be reinterpreted as contemporary free-thinkers of the utmost virtue who cannot stand the hypocrisies of institutional Christianity. They would be allied with the Manicheans and Pelagians.
Augustine would be portrayed as a sex-fearing Puritain, but the writers would take even further creative liberties and show him keeping a secret mistress, whom of course he viciously beats. I shudder to think what they would do to his mother Monica, or to Saint Ambrose, Augustine's mentor.
Yes, please God no Hollywood "Hammer of the Donatists" or some such thing -- unless Mel Gibson produces.
I read his review last week. Very eviscerating. I've given up on the idea that Hollywood (or anyone for that matter) will make the kind of movies I want to see.
The actual stories in history are fascinating and marvelous in themselves that they don't need much "re-imagining".
For all their flaws, I thought Gettysburg and the other one on Stonewall Jackson movies were pretty good.
But Mel Gibson's The Patriot told us nothing about the American Revolution that was meaningful, moving, or important. Such an incredible story, and it's never been told in film that's any good (although the Last of the Mohicans is excellent in illustrating the period to some extent, and the incredible dangers of settlement).
When people (artists and idiot producers) don't really understand either art or history see Troy for example), what can you expect?
Even The Lord of the Rings could not survive at the hands of unbelievers or "dramatists".
Hold the phone, I thought Kingdom of Heaven was pro-crusader and thus Cella friendly?
And if Gibson really had juevos he'd go ahead and make that Inquisition movie he knows he wants to do.
Does one need juevos to make a film about the Inquisition? Oh, really? For the fear of Vatican’s Fatwa?
How about making a film about Mohammed, based on Moslem’s own holy hadith? Now THAT would require at least three of them. Juevos, not hadiths.
Most 'historical epics' give me a headache unless I completely shut of my brain. This often annoys my friends when I begin a running commentary of everything that was wrong with a movie.
Kingdom of Heaven gives the impression of a weird melding of history and american mythology. For one thing, the third crusade which is depicted in the film with the fall of jerusalem was sparked by raiding by christian princes and resulted in the slaughter of their army by saladin. Yes, they did foolishly run out of water. However, the story of Balian is completely contrived, foolish, and american. After all, we couldn't have a nobleman as the lead character. We have to have a normal everyday person(that people can identify with) that suddenly becomes a military genius(as most think they would be).
The best site I have seen specifically contrasting this film is here: http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/
arc...riani051205.htm
Gettysburg was a pretty good film, but had the potential to be magnificent. Unfortunately, Sheen's depiction of Lee stank to high heaven. He played him as a psychotic colonel. Can't imagine why. 
Commenting by HaloScan
