Kingdom Of Heaven: The Directors Cut (2006)

Just watched this for the second time and as a huge fan of Ridleys, this may have ascended to being one of my favorite of his films and one of my faves of all time. A true epic with the feel of the old school classic Hollywood sword and sandal masterpieces, even down to an intermission and musical overture playing before each half, I feel sorry that such a true classic of my beloved epic school of film-making went so unappreciated on it's butchered theatrical release. I said in my Ben Hur thread that 'they don't make them like this any more' - well, Ridley tried and got his arse handed to him for his troubles by Fox which is an utter crime.

So many things to love about this let me start with the performances. So many favorite actors in this I almost don't know where to begin, Alexander Siddig who always seems rock solid but seemingly goes unloved in all his performances, David Thewliss as a voice of conscience for our hero, Jeremy Irons as the grizzled Marshall, Brendan Gleesons near-mad villain, Ed Norton in an unrecognizable mask having his Hugo Weaving in V For Vendetta moment, the utterly divine Eva Green (I can't quite believe how neutered her character was in the theatrical considering how integral she is to the DC plot), Liam Neeson as yet another father figure, Gassan Massouds brilliant turn as Saladin, giving this most celebrated historical figure the required gravitas, Kevin McKidd in an all too brief role. The supporting cast is stellar from top to bottom. Of all the actors though I kind of feel sorry for Martin Csokas, in that I think this may be one of his best filmic performances I’ve seen him give and if this film had done better he would have received a much deserved career bump as a consequence, as it is I haven't seen him better than playing the slimy Lord Guy.

Much criticism has been leveled at Orlando Bloom and his supposed lackluster performance in this, but I honestly got the Ari Gold vibe watching him in this, that is, he's not the world’s greatest actor, but he is a great movie star. As a consequence I feel he carries the film pretty well. Some moments I felt may have gotten away from him - though considering the talent surrounding him it must have been a touch daunting - but I found myself quite moved but his final "None have claim, All have claim" speech at the walls of Jerusalem.

Ridleys direction is beyond brilliant. Pensive when required or utterly edge-of-the-seat gripping as well, the final forty five minute siege of Jerusalem is worth the price of admission alone. This is very much Ridley channeling Lean and Kubrick and giving his all as a consequence.

As far as the overall thesis of the movie goes, I remember feeling acutely uncomfortable when I heard that Scott was doing an epic story of the crusades considering both the politically sensitive time the film was being released into regarding western-Islamic relations and my, to be honest, lack of faith on Scotts ability to handle such subject matter delicately after the blunt trauma that was Black Hawk Down.

As it turned out, my fears and trepidation were so completely unfounded it wasn't funny. Here is a film that is not anti-Muslim or pro-Christian, but anti-fanatic and pro-humanist (or anti-religion and pro-holiness as it semantically positions itself). The films basic thesis, that there are good, caring men and women on both sides of the cultural and religious divide, and on all sides of a conflict are myopic, selfish and evil people who would see a black and white simplicity blanketed over our grey and complex world that are the antagonists in such inter-religious or cultural relations was perfectly realized.

From the outset when Balian is betrayed and undermined by a man who is not only his own brother, but a keeper of supposed religiosity as a priest as well, the tone is set for what is to come. As the film finally concludes with the incredible 45 minute siege of Jerusalem we are left feeling that not only are our true villains of the piece the uncompromising fanatical Guy de Lusignan and Reynald de Chatillon, but that Saladin was not only a great general but a humanist to rival Nortons King Baldwin as well. As a consequence the film becomes a plea for rationality in the face of those that have and always will hide behind scripture - regardless of which scripture that may be - to forward their own very human and very tribal agendas.

A reminder that humanism is not confined to one religion over another and that in the end religion is simply another flag to fly under while pushing the very worst our species has to offer, another tribal colour people stand behind tom excuse the worst of our impulses, this may be one of the most beautifully directed, historically appropriate films to be released that no one ever saw.

I have never seen the theatrical cut of this, knowing when it was released that it was not Scotts film and that his true cut would follow, but I do know what was cut out, to the point the film essentially loses all its meaning. That’s a tragedy in my opinion. This film as it was meant to be released deserved not only to stand alongside the great epics of the classic era, but was a timely and wonderful plea for peace in the face of the very worst of our tribal instincts.

If there is any justice, the true cut of this film will live on to become beloved. It is Ridleys masterwork and for me, second only to Blade Runner as his greatest film.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hill 

I got the blu-ray of the Director's Cut for $8.50 at the Half Price Books down the street ($10 but I had a 15% off coupon).  Great deal considering I paid $25 for the DC DVD when it first came out and Amazon had it at 50% off.

 

And yet there are no special features on the blu-ray.  No booklet insert.  And worst of all, no overture at the beginning of the film.  I don't miss the intermission, but is it really still the DC with these elements missing?

I had the blu in hand until I noticed this fact as well. I'll hang onto my gorgeous tin bookletted box set personally. Don;t know why this film has been on my mind the last 24 hours but it has. I don't do annual watches of many of my favorite films these days, but I do find myself coming back to this one at least every twelve months. Think I may be due for a rewatch soon.

I actually class it as Ridleys most visually stunning film - which is really saying something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Daywalker 

Over Blade Runner? Thats pretty stunning but i'm sure in 30 years what film people will continue to talk about visually and otherwise it won't be KOH.

Well one's seen as a classic and the other's barely been seen by anyone, so forgive me if I'm not in awe of your Nostradamus-like abilities of prophecy there Johnny.