Balian of Ibelin travels to Jerusalem during the crusades of the 12th century, this film is 2hrs 24 mins 7/10 and there he finds himself as the defender of the city and its people. director riddly Scott leads an all star cast but flopped in cinemas i saw it in the cinema its all right Martin Hancock ... Michael Sheen ... 3Nathalie Cox ... Eriq Ebouaney ... David Thewlis ...Liam Neeson ... Orlando Bloom ... Kevin McKidd ... Marton Csokas ... Eva Green ... Brendan Gleeson ... Jeremy Irons ....Edward Norton so this film is a strange one indeed it gets caught in between gladiator and Alexander Orlando bloom character is a relucent leader an but grows into his role this film is slow story not the best story from riddly Scott is quiet strange i gave it 7/10 because the battle sequence are good but there is something missing i cant put my finger on it liam nesson gets a 24 minute cameo showing his character king godrey as his reign coming to an end and entrusting his blacksmith soon It is the time of the Crusades during the Middle Ages - the world shaping 200-year collision between Europe and the East . A blacksmith named Balian has lost his family and nearly his faith. The religious wars raging in the far-off Holy Land seem remote to him , yet he is pulled into that immense drama. Amid the pageantry and intrigues of medieval Jerusalem he falls in love, grows into a leader, and ultimately uses all his courage and skill to defend the city against staggering odds. Destiny comes seeking Balian in the form of a great knight,Godfrey of Ibelin, a Crusader briefly home to France from fighting in the East. Revealing himself as Balian's father, Godfrey shows him the true meaning of knighthood and take s him on a journey across continents to the fabled Holy City. In Jerusalem at that moment--between the Second and Third Crusades--a fragile peace prevails, through the efforts of its enlightened Christian king, Baldwin IV, aided by his adviser Tiberias, and the military Clearly, director Ridley Scott does not agree with the above somewhat simplified . In "Kingdom of Heaven", wars and battles are fueled by an assortment of motivations including land, money, political consideration, natural desire for violence, lust for fame, love of the common people, among others. Even more importantly, this "idea" thing does not prevent leaders from practicing tolerance, reaching compromises and even recognizing equality with alien faiths, as the movie tries to show us. .It's difficult to refrain from comparing the attack of Jerusalem with the attack of Minas Tirith, and this very comparison can be construed as an unreserved compliment on Kingdom of Heaven.Another comparison that can be made is the depiction of a mighty army, done so unimaginatively in two similar movies last year. In Kingdom of Heaven,we see first a solitary figure on horseback at a distant mountain gap. "Saladin's army of 200 thousand is here" says Balian. "There's only one person", comes the reply from a follower. "No, they're all here" Balian quietly responses, at which point the angle of the camera starts to rise, first revealing the patch behind the mountain gap, filled with soldiers. Then, as the horizon of our vision continues to extend, layers of mountains and vales continue to appear, together with Saladin's mighty army deployed in an apparently haphazard, but ultimately strategic fashion. This must be seen to appreciate. Of the cast, I must first mention Edward Norton. As the leper king of Jerusalem, he appears all the time behind a mask which covers his entire face, showing only his eyes with disfigured corners. But it's the voice that is so mesmerizing. Ever since Fight Club, Norton's voice has such a timbre that soft as he sounds, there are lurking behind tantalizing hints of subtlety, intrigue, compassion,power, and twenty other different and conflicting emotions all at once.. Liam Neeson and Jeremy Irons, playing father and mentor respectively, do not exactly have the most challenging parts in their careers.Eva Green retains the girlish defiance in The Dreamer, but adds to it the maturity and allure required for the role of Sibylla (as portrayed by the script, but not necessarily as recorded in history).And there is good old Brendan Gleeson, in the customary role of big bully fighter which he has perfected in Gangs of New York and Troy. Kingdom of Heaven is just about better than Alexander

Kingdom of Heaven is not a movie I would normally consider when picking a movie to watch, however, my friend saw it and decided to watch it so I joined him. I am so glad that I did. The scenic shots were amazing and the battle scenes were breathtaking. The story line was enjoyable however I feel that it got very convoluted and extremely difficult to follow about half way in. For example You have no idea what condition causes the king of Israels problems until you are almost done watching the movie. Nothing was added to the film by keeping that from the audience except that it leaves the audience in confusion for many parts of the movie. The plot was a little too complicated. Maybe it was just me but I feel like the movie jumped around in terms of focus way to often and with too much intensity. Besides those points the film was enjoyable. As an audience member you really begin to take the side of the protagonist even when you sometimes feel like you do not need to. I understand that a point like that is something almost every movie contains but it felt especially compelling here. All in all I did enjoy the film even with its one significant downfall.

This film is based on real historical characters and addresses, fictionally, the loss of Jerusalem to Muslims in 1187, after the defeat of the Crusaders at the Battle of Hattin, against the forces of Saladin. Directed by Ridley Scott, the film has a screenplay by William Monahan and the cast is headed by Orlando Bloom, Eva Green, Liam Neeson and Jeremy Irons.The film deals with the crusades from a new point of view. In other movies we see Christian expeditions. In this film, we see a precise moment in history, where Jerusalem, captured in 1099, is lost again. Many of the characters is based, slightly, in real historical characters, as part of the script as well. Although I'm not an expert, it seems a film that seeks to portray things with some historical accuracy. Thus, costumes and scenery seem to have been designed with some care, in order to meet these standards. The script is interesting. Of course, the story is romanticized and not entirely correspond to the facts, but its quite entertaining and holds the audience until the end. The action scenes are excellent, particularly the battles and the final siege, where the fertile imagination of Hollywood left its mark in the original way the siege engines are being put out of action by the besieged. The scenarios are good, representing well what may have been Jerusalem during that historic period.The actors fulfilled their role on a regular basis. Orlando Bloom is equal to himself and Eva Green made some effort to look more oriental, surprising at the end by purposely overshadowing her character in maternal grief. One of the most emotive and memorable characters is King Baldwin IV, played by Edward Norton (who never shows his face in the film). He's the author of some of the most deep, philosophical and meaningful quotes. The soundtrack, written by Harry Gregson- Williams, is very good and merges harmonically sounds of medieval and Muslim inspiration with the traditional film music.

This movie/story is part fairy tale, part propaganda. It's one of those stories in which the events are placed in a time in history, but everything else about it is made up. No need to go into any more detail than so many others have about the politically incorrect people, places, circumstances and events--it all serves Ridley's idea of the way the world should work, not the way it really is, ever has been or ever will be. People who like this movie, and even many who don't, also rave about the "beautiful cinematography." Well, most of that cinematography is digitally rendered, and much of the movie is shot against a green screen (like 300). How much more beautiful would it have been if filmed on location? Jerusalem--the real place--and the surrounding area is some of the most varied and beautiful terrain you'll ever see, but the movie rewrites the geography so that you have Jerusalem set next to an impossibly flat and featureless plain that runs for 100s of miles in all directions--stupid. There's nothing to admire about this movie.