My blog has moved!

You should be automatically redirected. If not, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

The Kingdom of Heaven - Worst Movie on Earth

Yesterday, we watched Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven and, in spite of the director's angelic last name, it was terrible. The worst movie on earth. Maybe on Mars there are worse movies. Or maybe there is a worse piece of celluloid toilet-paper in the astral plane between heaven and earth, but this is the worst one here on terra firma, at least from 2005. I'd say it's a piece of rubbish, but that would be unfair to actual pieces of rubbish. Of course, I'm intentionally exaggerating in order to make a point. Do you get my point?

Here are just a few of the reasons I hated this film:

  • It was boring. Too many anachronistic speeches given by agnostics about the supreme virtue of post-modernism: tolerance.

  • Orlando Bloom was terrible. Never has a role been so poorly cast. He simply does not possess enough IT to pull this off. Liam Neeson could have done it. Russell Crowe would have been terrific. Even Stan Laurel would've done a better job. Sure, Orlando did fine as a fairy in The Lord of the Rings. But his only other cinematic claim to fame is that he was completely overshadowed by Keith Richards. . . oop, I mean Johnny Depp, as Captain Jack Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean.

  • Kingdom of Heaven is supposed to be set during the period of the Crusades, but naturally, it is historically inaccurate in every scene. Just about the only accurate piece of information in the film is that there actually is a city named Jerusalem and people live there. Beyond that, it's pretty shaky as a historical drama.

  • Ridley Scott has made a piece of propaganda, pure and simple. Christians are bad. Europeans are bad. Muslims are noble.

  • Big Brother director employs double-speak and double-think. In real life, Muslim armies conquered and took Jerusalem from Christian inhabitants. In real life, Muslim armies attacked and conquered Spain and occupied it for 700 years. In real life, Muslim armies tried to invade France and were repelled by that nation's one and only military hero, Charles Martel. In real life, it is Muslim warriors who behead innocents. In real life, it is Islam which cries that it is no sin to kill infidels and martyrdom is a free ticket to paradise. But in the movie, everything is reversed.

  • The anti-clericalism is so thick, I nearly gagged. What kind of parish priest says, "God has abandoned you." Or do we think the Patriarch of Jerusalem was so ignorant of Christian dogma that he would object to cremating human remains saying, "You can't do that. Then they won't be resurrected until Judgment Day." OK, I'm sure he would've opposed cremation, but not because he expected people to be resurrected before Judgment Day. Duh. Everyone will be resurrected on Judgment Day, cremated or ingested by maggots. I'm pretty sure that, no matter his flaws, he knew the Nicene Creed.
Wikipedia has this nugget: Historians such as Jonathan Riley-Smith called the film "rubbish," "ridiculous," "complete fiction" and "dangerous to Arab relations." Fellow crusade historians Jonathan Phillips and Amin Maalouf also spoke against the film.

Thomas Madden, Crusades expert and chairman of the history department at St. Louis University has this to say at National Review Online.

Sphere: Related Content


Carl said...

I agree on all points with your
excellent review. I only wish I
had not wasted my $ on seeing it in a theater. But then, even a $3
rental would have been exhorbitant
(sp?). May I have permission to pass this review on to my catechumens so they know what propaganda they've been watching?
Thanx much!

Pastor Scott Stiegemeyer said...

Certainly you may use it.

I am curious to know where you are pastor. Forgive me if I should know this already.

Carl said...

I'm in "The Land of 10,000 lakes: Minnesota North District. BTW, speaking of movies, I just went to see "Walk the Line". Great film!
Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon really "nailed down" the personalities of the "Man in Black" and his wife, June Carter.
Not much redeeming value in the theological dept. but it was very entertaining and revealed the strained relationship between Johnny and his dad and the inability of his dad to forgive him. I'll say no more, as I don't want to spoil it for you if you plan on seeing it.

The Cubicle Reverend said...

I hated this movie! It was ooozing political correctness.

Carl said...

Really? In what ways?

Carl said...

Hey, I just realized that you probably meant "The Kingdom.." movie, right? Sorry about that.

The Cubicle Reverend said...

Everyone got along and was happy in Jerusalem, when that was far from the truth.

Egyptoid said...

Ridley Scott has made a piece of propaganda, pure and simple. Christians are bad. Europeans are bad. Muslims are noble.

that's not what was being said and you know it!
some of the persons labeing themselves christian were barbarian, and some of the muslim also were barbaric =======
the main message was about the interior of your heart.
is that what disturbs the average viewer about the movie?

Vargas said...

I am certainly no post-modern Christian but I think the film's portrayal of the moral corruption of the Catholic Church isn't far off the mark.

And yes, the portrayal of muslims in the film was more noble than they really were as well.

Bob Waters said...

Don't you think Nappy counts as a French military hero? Charlemagne? Maybe even De Gaulle?

I think there have been at least four military heroes in the millenia-long history of France. And how about Joan of Arc? See? Five. And only one-fifth of them schizophrenic women!

Anonymous said...

It is because it speaks out against religion for what it was and what it is. May you all cure yourselves from the disease of religion.

Matthew 24:34 "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

I'm pretty sure that generation has passed, and your LORD does not come.

New Curriculum at Concordia Theological Seminary