Medieval movies.

Users who are viewing this thread

NikeBG said:
Cèsar de Quart said:
Do you get the point? The further away you go, the less accurate things are portrayed.
So, if I get it right, "10 000 BC" was actually supposed to be a historical movie. :wink:

Good one. Probably was supposed to.

There is the very popular belief that there is an "official history" that wants to hide things, either because of dark purposes, or because historians know that they can't know everything, and that they can't explain some things, so they deny the evidence of Greek spaceships, time travellers, prehistoric bulletholes in Neanderthal skulls, super-advanced Turkish maps, etc.

This belief also includes this: There have been other civilizations before the Neolithic, of which we know nothing.

Of course, the fact that there's no evidence for these claims means nothing to these people.
 
I start with Robin Hood 2010, Robin Hood BBC, Robin Hood Prince of Thieves, Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven and Ivanhoe are my best movies
 
De Groene Jager said:
I start with Robin Hood 2010, Robin Hood BBC, Robin Hood Prince of Thieves, Braveheart, Kingdom of Heaven and Ivanhoe are my best movies

Ivanhoe, which one? There are many versions, and only one of them is worth the watch.
 
Cèsar de Quart said:
What about "Season of the witch"? It almost starts at a "Crusade, 14th Century", in a desert. Sorry? Did you even checked if there was a crusade in the desert in the 14th Century?

And did you see the ridiculous helmets the 2 main character wore in that scene.  :lol:
 
I remember those movies

Braveheart
Sword of the Valiant: The Legend of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
Valhalla Rising (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0862467/)
Ironclad
First Knight
The Reckoning
Kingdom of Heaven
13th Warrior
Knights of the Round Table

They're great movies, but with some historical inaccuracy.
 
Cèsar de Quart said:
Do you get the point? The further away you go, the less accurate things are portrayed.
This has a lot to do with the fact that the further away you go, the more work is required to make something historically accurate.

Also, filmmakers are typically following far behind historians. The more historians learn, slowly, the filmmakers gradually make things more historically accurate. And the further back in history you go, the less historians really know.


Personally, I like Kingdom of Heaven. It is definitely not perfectly historically accurate, but compared to what is generally available, it is generally good. I am willing to suspend my disbelief.

My personally niche in Medieval History is with Medieval martial arts (a field most people knew nothing about not very long ago). While the martial arts shown in Kingdom of Heaven aren't perfectly historical, and it's hard to believe they would practice with sharp swords, it still portrays that there is some kind of martial system in existence. It implies sophistication in the martial arts and I like that.

Though actually, the representation of Medieval and Renaissance Martial Arts has been rather pitiful in film-making. Hopefully that will be changing as time goes on.
 
Well the worst inacuracy with Robin hood was not the armour or the D-Day landing craft. It was rather the outcome of that "invasion". The French, summoned by the English barons themselves, actually won.

"Kingdom of Heaven" is a piece of crap, along with that "Eagle" or whatever it is called in English that Roman themed movie. "13th warrior" is crap too and so is "First Knight".

I did like "Excalibur" though, despite it being overly theatrical.
"Flesh and blood" is kickass.


 
Palaiologos said:
"13th warrior" is crap too
The 13th Warrior isn't exactly historical to begin with - it's based on a book ("Eaters of the dead", IIRC), which was partially inspired by history or historical myths (Beowulf, Ibn Fadlan's accounts (although the real Ibn Fadlan was a secretary to the ambassador, not the ambassador himself) etc).
 
Merlkir said:
13th Warrior is awesome and so are first 40 minutes of The Eagle.


mmmmmmmmmm..........

Whats that other movie called? "The last centurion" or somesuch?  the 30 last minutes aside, where every holywood cliche makes its appearance, its a decent effort.
I think that the first 20 minutes of "Eagle" are any good-up until the garrison makes that sally to free the patrolmen that is. Attacking in testudo for heaven's sake.
 
ares007 said:
Palaiologos said:
"Kingdom of Heaven" is a piece of crap
care to explain?

It would only appeal to the average modern day westerner who feels a sort of guilt for the crusades. The propagandistic "noble arabs vs unscrupulous crusaders" theme tires me. And so does the commoner blacksmith turned knight, then champion and uber-general of "the people" theme. Especially the persistence that Balian ,or whatever his name was, was doing everything for "the people".
It was too mainstream for my liking.

EDIT:Forgot to mention that Orlando Bloom is tottaly unfiting for any medieval role.
 
Palaiologos said:
mmmmmmmmmm..........

Whats that other movie called? "The last centurion" or somesuch?  the 30 last minutes aside, where every holywood cliche makes its appearance, its a decent effort.
I think that the first 20 minutes of "Eagle" are any good-up until the garrison makes that sally to free the patrolmen that is. Attacking in testudo for heaven's sake.

Right. I found Centurion quite boring tbh. I liked The Eagle right up to the point he wakes up after the collision with a chariot.
 
Palaiologos said:
ares007 said:
Palaiologos said:
"Kingdom of Heaven" is a piece of crap
care to explain?

It would only appeal to the average modern day westerner who feels a sort of guilt for the crusades. The propagandistic "noble arabs vs unscrupulous crusaders" theme tires me. And so does the commoner blacksmith turned knight, then champion and uber-general of "the people" theme. Especially the persistence that Balian ,or whatever his name was, was doing everything for "the people".
It was too mainstream for my liking.

EDIT:Forgot to mention that Orlando Bloom is tottaly unfiting for any medieval role.
I generally agree about Orlando Bloom, but I thought he did a good job in Kingdom of Heaven.

You are certainly correct that it has unfortunately become mainstream to adopt an apologetic stance for the Crusades. However, I don't think the movie is necessarily doing that. The message in Kingdom of Heaven has more to do with the folly of dogmatic religion (it is not anti-God or anti-religion, just dogmatic religion). Seriously, there were as many evil Muslims in the movie as there were evil Christians (possibly more). In fact, the best people in the movie were very highly placed Western nobles (in addition to Balion). But let's not talk much about religion as I think it is a touchy subject and can get threads locked :wink:

Concerning the black-smith-turned-knight theme. Yeah, that seemed a little repetitive, especially because Orlando Bloom played a blacksmith-turned-hero in another movie :razz: . However, there is more to the story. He is not just a blacksmith, he is the son of a knight. The theatrical version does not really tell much about him in the beginning. The director's cut has a lot more.

Also, it has a great soundtrack :smile:


Of course, the movie is not without it's faults, but the points you mentioned did not stop me from enjoying the movie even though I seem to have the same or similar political stance in these matters as you do.
 
Well the movie, if seen from a purely cinematographic perspective is rather good. But since i felt the movie was trying to adopt a certain political stance(and rather blatantly at that), i have to judge it politically too. Movie scenarios that clumsily try to pass a mainstream profile are loosing in the long run i believe.
But i think you are right. It was the dogmatic religion that the movie was criticizing. I remembered some scenes now that you've mentioned it.
 
Merlkir said:
13th Warrior is awesome and so are first 40 minutes of The Eagle.

13th Warrior is pure adventure. I love it every time I watch it.

About Kingdom of Heaven, it's somehow interesting to see how the script reflects two attitudes: one, "let's make a good historical move by adding pieces of Medieval mentality and showing some interesting characters and situations". The other: "let's make a Hollywood blockbuster".

They clash at some points, even more in the Extended version. Still, it could have been much better if the main role would have been played, as they said, by Kevin Bacon.
 
Back
Top Bottom