Kino or shit?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=mTjUu1Bt29o
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saladin_the_Victorious
youtube.com/watch?v=ZdoTMH7Cwy8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

orlando bloom is a terrible actor but its a good movie nonetheless

very good but let down by shitty romantic subplot

directors cut is literally kino

The director's cut is pure kino.
>tfw you will never charge at numerically superior mudslimes with your bros
>tfw you were born in the wrong century

Why live.

The subplot works in the director's cut though.

Zack Snyder's best film

Why don't you form your own opinion you disgusting little faggot?

Pretty shit
>le crusader is evil barbarian who kills and rapes
>le arabs and saladin are noble and fair
also historical accuracy is shit, why is Balian a peasant smith from france ? He was a crusader noble

17th century, Battle of Vienna, last major Ottoman threat to Europe, the largest cavalry charge in history, with thousands of winged hussars leading them, religious overtones

Why hasn't Scott made this epic yet? Would make money like crazy considering today's climate, and markets itself for people saying it's islamaphobic. Much better option than Exodus

>le crusader is evil barbarian who kills and rapes

Because that's exactly what most of them were?
They made even muslims seem civilized in comparison.

user, the muslims and the crusaders were generally the same, only the religion was different

While the theatrical cut was pretty shite, the director's cut is actually a big improvement.

It's pretty good.

Pretty mediocre movie that only is watchable because of the setting. The acting is bland and boring, the story is not engaging, the movie doesnt really have any good action scenes either. It's basically a historical fiction wank for people who are thirsty for crusader fantasies(because there are so few) as opposed to being a good movie.

It's a shame because this is a great setting but nobody wants to deal with it because of the modern day controversy. This is the "best" we got.

Troy or Kingdom of Heaven?

Which one was more kino?

this guy gets it, Richie was cruel and a genius leader, so was Salad, everybody seems to think that saladin was some kind of buddhist turbo strategist, while Lionheart was a murdering maniac

f@m the crusaders got BTFO so hard it was kind of sad

they even attacked other christian settlements out of greed

In this Crusade, yeah.
And to the Catholics crusaders, Orthodoxy probably seemed a lot like Islam

>It's a Saladin was a good guy and the crusaders were assholes episode

Shit. Scott is a hack.

>brutally murder anyone deemed "infidel" because the pope says it will get you into heaven
>not assholes
"counterjihad" loser detected

You can thank the faggot crusaders for weakening the orthodox kingdoms on the Balkans and opening the doors for the ottoman shits.

Director's cut version is better and paints a better picture of things.

Saladin?

uh...you don't get to bring parthians

>tfw no Verhoeven's Crusade

Just started watching this, 15mins in

>Hello Orlando Bloom, I'm Liam Neeson and I fucked your mother.

Cuck!!!!!

>Parthians
>During the crusades

jesus christ get your history together

>You will never serve Saladin
>You will never protect the holy land from crusader infidels

I've only seen the DC and I loved it

I'm surprised that the theatrical cut got such bad reviews, what makes it so bad?

Basically hacks an hour of story out of it and just makes the whole thing a stupid action movie with a completely incoherent plot.

20mins in...jesus fuck the editing is bad. This whole thing was shot without any planning at all. Orlando Bloom defines wooden acting.

I'm out.

>Before I lose it, I will burn it to the ground. Your holy places - ours. Every last thing in Jerusalem that drives men mad.

>I wonder if it would not be better if you did.

>le arabs and saladin are noble and fair

In the nineteenth century, Saladin achieved a great reputation in Europe as a chivalrous knight, due to his fierce struggle against the crusaders and his generosity. Although Saladin faded into history after the Middle Ages, he appears in a sympathetic light in Gotthold Ephraim Lessing's play Nathan the Wise (1779) and in Sir Walter Scott's novel The Talisman (1825).

The contemporary view of Saladin originates mainly from these texts. According to Jonathan Riley-Smith, Scott's portrayal of Saladin was that of a "modern [19th-century] liberal European gentlemen, beside whom medieval Westerners would always have made a poor showing."[117] Despite the Crusaders' slaughter when they originally conquered Jerusalem in 1099, Saladin granted amnesty and free passage to all common Catholics and even to the defeated Christian army, as long as they were able to pay the aforementioned ransom (the Greek Orthodox Christians were treated even better, because they often opposed the western Crusaders). An interesting view of Saladin and the world in which he lived is provided by Tariq Ali's novel The Book of Saladin.[118]

Notwithstanding the differences in beliefs, the Muslim Saladin was respected by Christian lords, Richard especially. Richard once praised Saladin as a great prince, saying that he was without doubt the greatest and most powerful leader in the Islamic world.[119] Saladin in turn stated that there was not a more honorable Christian lord than Richard. After the treaty, Saladin and Richard sent each other many gifts as tokens of respect but never met face to face.

Kys Ahmed

Saladin is based. Even the kaiser visited his grave to pay respect. Kind of weird to think that wars arent fought by soldiers any more, but just using explosives.

Crusaders sacked Constantinople and left it irreparably fucked so it just decayed until nothing was left and the Ottomans took it

The Director's Cut is a masterpiece.

>t. Butthurt Catholic Scum

Face it, your "church" is nothing more than a bunch of really aggressive heretical pedophiles.

Wow, Saladin was awesome.

>nothing
>everything

The Crusaders and the Muslims were both equally fucked.

At the end of the day I'm glad for the crusades though because without it the cancer of Islam would have spread

does making a man a knight
make him a better fighter?

Last good film by Ridley Scott.

>without it the cancer of Islam would have spread
>Islamic world stretched from Spain to China
>Byzantine empire ransacked by crusaders causing it's collapse
>Constantinople bankrupted and later captured by Turks no European army came to it's aid

You may want to rethink that user.

maraschino

...

The crusaders were pretty fucked up at times (this includes cannibalism). Specifically when they were under siege in a city they had previously conquered. But there is a good reason for this: Remember the fall of Rome had ushered in an age of Barbarism and the only light given came from the Catholic Church.
The strength of the Crusaders or Fransh as they were called by the Muslims was to adopt good ideas. These include Arab medicine, math and astronomy.
That has always been the strength of the West: Adopt what works.
The crusades also ushered in some innovations invented by the Crusaders: These include Hospitalers (Hospitals) and Banking (Knights of Malta).
...
just some thoughts, carry on.

Liberal sjw revisionism.

Fuck off.

Do you have any firsthand sources that contradict that? Your neckbeard ramblings and buzzwords really don't mean shit.

Directors Cut is legitimately good

flawed movie but Ed Norton was my favorite part strangely

The Crusaders did nothing wrong

Crusaders fucked Christianity harder than Muslims ever did
Constantinople fell in 1204, Turks just scooped it up 200 years later

#notallcrusaders

Yes they did. They got greedy.

Conquering the lands which Muslims did was justified. Taking Jerusalem was greedy and selfish.

#prayforjerusalem

I did not give the cup to you, Sup Forums

ERE wasn't that powerful in 1204 either, Turks already had completely shaken them first at Manzikert, then decimated them at Myriokephalon later. It was crusaders that slipped easily to the capital.

How is Jerusalem not a land that muslims had conquered and stolen from Christians?

Thou arth a companion of grand stature...

history will not remember you

IIRRRRONNNCLAADDD.

Was getting cleft intwain part of thou plan?

kys catholishit heretic, crusaders were subhuman

It's pretty kino in my opinion. Bloom's acting isn't that great but it doesn't ruin it for me. It's a great period film. Very comfy as well.

Serious letdown and this is coming from a Scott fan.

I liked the guy they casted for Saladin, but everything was shit. I hated how PC this movie was and I say this as someone who rooted for Saladin against the Crusaders. Like Orlando Bloom's rendition of Balian. The real guy was nothing like that.

Honestly, Scott should've just made a film from Saladin's POV and it would've been perfect.

Watch the DC.

If you DID watch the DC and still don't like the movie, I recommend reassessing whether you truly like Scott.

As the other user pointed out
>europe was barbaric lets have this post modern talks about pointlessness of exsistence

You can keep your koolaid for yourselves.

>Europe was barbaric

All was good in the world.

>Christians were just meddling in Muslim lands for greed and war

Oh, and I suppose the fact that muslims had conquered north Africa up into spain and were now in continental europe had nothing to do with it.

also
>Europe was in terrible shape during the crusade
>what was the 12th century renaissance

would be better without orlando "perfect at everything" bloom

Actually also a pseudo spiritual reason.
If the crusaders could conquer Jerusalem and hold it, they speculated that God would possibly have brought about the new heaven and new earth as prophesied in revelations. In other words bringing about divine purpose through human intervention. A silent maxim of the Catholic church to this day.

>the movie doesnt really have any good action scenes either
agreed with everything you said except this

youtube.com/watch?v=mTjUu1Bt29o

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saladin_the_Victorious

You guys should check out the Egyptian Saladin the Victorious if you want to see more of Saladin and Richard being bros.

mudslime sandnigger propaganda. Scott is a demented retard.

what is jerusalem worth Sup Forums?

The Ibelin part of the movie is mega comfy.

Fuck people like you
>m-muh historical accuracy
Kys cancer.

Absolutely kino

My Saracen
youtube.com/watch?v=ZdoTMH7Cwy8

daily reminder that Saladin is overrated

the only reason Richard didn't put his head on spike was Richard's autism when it came to making allies so he was always outnumbered 2-3 times by mehmets

The DC is top kino.

The theatrical cut is still very good.

shit.

pic related is true kino

YOU'RE A BIG SARACEN

Muslims were going through a Golden Age at this time. They wrote down everything, unlike western shitters who were suppressed by the Church.

Total shit.

Loved it as a kid. Hated it when rewatching it.

great OST

History buffs btfo of this movie
its OK but history wise its wildly inaccurate

Would have been perfect without orlando bloom.
His aesthetic doesn't fit.

Muslims were more civilized than Europeans up until the past couple centuries, especially during the crusades. Islamic extremism is a new thing. Even today, they still care about their people and the future more than urban westerners.

desu I wanted his hair for so long

He just looks so small and dainty in the movie.
I can't get into it.

Check'd
He was more at his place playing Paris in Troy imo

have to agree with this. the movie comes through despite him but they could have done soooooo much better. they could have picked a man.

Yes.

Hmm. Knights of Malta? Sounds bretty good lemme look this shit up right quick.

Oh yeah you mean that after one training session with his pops he was a terrific fighter Orlando Bloom? Yeah that was a little bit of a stretch.

Kino......... shit.