Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation | Release Date: May 6, 2005
7.8
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 360 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
273
Mixed:
55
Negative:
32
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
10
zombiehampsterOct 28, 2010
I originally saw the Kingdom of Heaven theatrical release first, and my opinion of it was mixed, much like how I feel about Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. The film seemed poorly edited and was missing something. Then came the Directors Cut andI originally saw the Kingdom of Heaven theatrical release first, and my opinion of it was mixed, much like how I feel about Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. The film seemed poorly edited and was missing something. Then came the Directors Cut and it all made sense. Americans were robbed of an excellent story once again due to low expectations on what the general public would like. Whether or not his is true is another story all together. What I feel is true is that the directors cut elevates the movie to something more than another action story. It adds so much more to the dynamics of the characters, fleshing them out in much greater depth and detail, and providing more of a connection from one character to the next. The stories protagonist, Balian (played by Orlando Bloom) is a mixture of several different personalities from the period, but his view of the world at the time could be considered very tolerant/progressive. Bloom carries his role well, playing him as a reluctant "hero" who is more practical, preferring to rely on his mind as well as his fighting prowess. He tends to fall in line more on how the ideal knight, sans the arrogance, would act if he actually defended his oaths. He gets a lot of flack for this role for some reason, but I feel he fit very well. The rest of the cast is very well thought out, with Eva Green skillfully playing the role of Sibylla as a strong, intelligent woman who understands all too well what must be done to maintain power. Her character is probably one of the most tragic ones in the story, although the list of those is pretty long. Jeremy Irons portrays the grizzled and cynical veteran Tiberias, who does some chewing of the scenery, but not in the bad way as far as I'm concerned. His character is probably one of my favorites, as his expressions and manner of his delivery is perfect for his role. There are very few characters that I did not appreciate in this one, but needless to say it would take up a lot more text. Liam Neeson, Edward Norton, Marton Csokas all do excellent jobs in their roles as Balians father, King Baldwin IV, and the comic book villain that is Guy de Lusignan. The three that stood out the most for me were Ghassan Massoud as a very honorable and respectful Salah'ad-din, Brendan Gleeson as the vicious but entertaining Raynald de Chatillon, and finally David Thewlis as the Zen-like Hospitaller. Ridley Scott is one of my favorite directors of all time, and this movie definitely displays why. This movie is awash in his trademark visual aesthetics (gorgeous color palettes, the ever present snow flakes fluttering about, etc), excellent writing, and some of the best music I have ever heard in a movie. Any movie. All in all he weaves together a very complex, but not entirely historically accurate, story between the second and third Crusades. As much as the trailers would have you believe it, this is no action movie. The pacing is good but sometimes on the slower side, and if you live for constant scenes of blood and violence, then you will be disappointed. Kingdom of Heaven is a glimpse back in time through the eyes of Scott and Monahan and they did an amazing job. Collapse
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
10
AdanedhelDec 9, 2011
"What man is a man if does not make the world better"

those signed words on the smithy touch my soul every time i watch this epic film. i regret i didnt go to watch it to the cinema, though in home still is a very good movie to watch.
"What man is a man if does not make the world better"

those signed words on the smithy touch my soul every time i watch this epic film.
i regret i didnt go to watch it to the cinema, though in home still is a very good movie to watch.
the phography is beautiful, the cast is amazing, the dialogs are deep and well done. the action is intense in a very good way, you dont see favoritism for the muslims or the catholics.
balanced.
epic.
After watching it i have learn what it takes to be a real knight.
Expand
3 of 3 users found this helpful30
All this user's reviews
8
pauljohnsonNov 23, 2011
While Balian as a central character is under developed, Bloom did a fairly good job with what he had to work with. His rise to becoming a "Perfect knight" doesn't seem palpable enough, it would've been good to have seen him make a fewWhile Balian as a central character is under developed, Bloom did a fairly good job with what he had to work with. His rise to becoming a "Perfect knight" doesn't seem palpable enough, it would've been good to have seen him make a few mistakes, or perhaps take an action that has a consequence greater than he first anticipated. The themes running through the film are all good themes to work with, and the film definitely tries to analyse them, but it does take a couple of re-watches in order to figure them out completely, which I think is good. I gave The Dark Knight praise for doing that, so this gets praise too. The themes of Balian attempting to be an incorruptible knight seeking redemption for his sins (by committing none in the Holy Land) worked quite well, even though at times it seemed like he was sticking to his principles a bit too much. I think it was a good twist how Balian refuses to commit a little evil for the greater good by having Guy executed, however Seyblla, who is willing to commit a little evil for the greater good eventually dooms the kingdom by doing so. In a sense, they're two sides of the same coin.

The film also highlights the other reasons why people went on Crusade. Its so universally believed now that the Crusades were just about religion and nothing else, as is the recent wars in the Middle East, that people forget about the commercial aspects of the Crusades. It's no secret that trade between Italy and the Crusader States helped to fester the Italian Renaissance by bringing massive wealth, and it was also no secret that Pope Urban who initiated the First Crusade, stated that the Holy Land was a land that "floweth with milk and honey". People were attracted to the Middle East because there was a great deal of riches there, and the film definitely brings out the fact that in the end, religion is just an overtone, while at the core, they're only fighting for betterment of themselves; something which Balian does not wish to do. In terms of cinematography, the movie is beautifully shot and edited, and highlights Ridley's signature big sweeping shots. The battle scenes are all well done and frighteningly realistic. The acting is also to be commended, mainly for Edward Norton, Jeremy Irons, the always great Liam Neeson, Alexander Siddig and Massoud (I really hope that's the right one), who portrayed Saladin. In all a good movie, that could've been helped here or there, but definitely worth a watch nonetheless.
Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
10
LilDMar 11, 2013
In my opinion, Kingdom of Heaven is one of the most underrated movies I have come across. It is one of my favorite movies of all time and receives very little attention compared to its bigger brother, Gladiator. The extra scenes in theIn my opinion, Kingdom of Heaven is one of the most underrated movies I have come across. It is one of my favorite movies of all time and receives very little attention compared to its bigger brother, Gladiator. The extra scenes in the Director's Cut explain the story considerably better. Although more loosely based than we'd care to admit, the time period of the Crusades is an awesome atmosphere that I am surprised is not utilized as much in film. I found Orlando Bloom actually a decent actor in this one and the film has one of the best soundtracks in a movie. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
7
cameronmorewoodNov 15, 2012
Watch the Director's Cut. The theatrical release was a disjointed mess skewed by bad editing and money-hungry last-minute changes.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
8
aggiefanatic95Feb 6, 2012
I liked Kingdom of Heaven, but had a few things that I disliked. I loved all of the fight scenes, they were beautifully done, also as a history buff I liked how to showed some intelligent knights are torn on if this is right or not. What II liked Kingdom of Heaven, but had a few things that I disliked. I loved all of the fight scenes, they were beautifully done, also as a history buff I liked how to showed some intelligent knights are torn on if this is right or not. What I disliked the most was the fact that they praised and criticized both Muslims and Christians. It was like a roller coaster. The producers were trying to please everyone which hurt the movie. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
3
AsadQ.Jul 1, 2006
Lightweight plot, the absence of dialogue, and an emotionless protagonist made this one movie I had to turn off before finishing. Too bad - it's a subject I would have enjoyed seeing brought to life on the screen.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
5
MarkK.Jul 6, 2007
Ridley Scott should take lessons in how to use action scenes to aid character development from Peter Jackson. 'Kingdom' drags to a crawl too often. The only effective scenes in 'Kingdom of Heaven' are the siege scenes Ridley Scott should take lessons in how to use action scenes to aid character development from Peter Jackson. 'Kingdom' drags to a crawl too often. The only effective scenes in 'Kingdom of Heaven' are the siege scenes you've already seen in L.O.R. Overall, a 'Kingdom' of a disappointment. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
JonFOct 16, 2005
Disjointed and incoherent. Their is not enough time devoted to develop the characters. Furthermore, some of the battle scenes seem intent on showing violence by have blood spew across the screen. The problem, it looks just plain silly. I Disjointed and incoherent. Their is not enough time devoted to develop the characters. Furthermore, some of the battle scenes seem intent on showing violence by have blood spew across the screen. The problem, it looks just plain silly. I really think this should have been two movies to give time to develop characters, or it just shouldn't have been made at all. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
RaschidA.Dec 7, 2005
Other than Saladdin and his army the rest of the movie is another Hollywood piece of crap. The History Channel did a much better job telling this story. It also has better actors.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
ryancarroll88Aug 27, 2010
Ridley Scott tries to rehash the same grandiose style that did him well in 'Gladiator' for the pitiful 'Kingdom of Heaven' but the terrible script/screenplay leaves no room for the viewer to have any interest in either the surplus battleRidley Scott tries to rehash the same grandiose style that did him well in 'Gladiator' for the pitiful 'Kingdom of Heaven' but the terrible script/screenplay leaves no room for the viewer to have any interest in either the surplus battle scenes, the undeveloped characters, or the nonexistent plot. And as far as acting goes, Orlando Bloom is to Russell Crowe as Shia LaBeouf is to Harrison Ford. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
9
KeithW.May 4, 2005
This is a spectacular quality movie with high values and excellent acting. The beautiful Bloom easily becomes the great screen idol and has the acting talent to sustain a valid place in the the cinema. Ridley once again delivers real, This is a spectacular quality movie with high values and excellent acting. The beautiful Bloom easily becomes the great screen idol and has the acting talent to sustain a valid place in the the cinema. Ridley once again delivers real, intelligent entertaining with the added boomph of superb period feel and detail, which lifts the movie to Gladiator and Ben Hur stature (although it's better than Hur!). An enjoyable, exciting and thoroughly well made movie that deserves to be showered in Oscars and BAFTA awards! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
MiguelS.May 7, 2005
Very good film, not perfect, but good. Visually Stunning. Amazing battle scenes. Ridley Scott is a great EPICS director.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
EricLMay 9, 2005
Really lame. Unlike Gladiator, the central character here is completelly underdeveloped, as well as underperformed by Orlando Bloom. His rise to becoming a great knight (and even more improbably) a master war tactician never feels credible. Really lame. Unlike Gladiator, the central character here is completelly underdeveloped, as well as underperformed by Orlando Bloom. His rise to becoming a great knight (and even more improbably) a master war tactician never feels credible. The movie tries to argue that most of the factions were motivated more by money and power than religion, but come on, even in this modern age, religious fanatacism has everything to do with the situation in the Middle East, are we supposed to believe they were actually less "fire and brimstone" types during the Crusades? Sorry, that just feels very modern to me. Worst of all, while the battle scenes were technically well shot, they did not break any new ground-- they are not even close to rousing. The bottom line is that this movie is a big "so what?" Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
PatWMay 2, 2005
Not even David Lean hey, Terry?
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChrisDMay 5, 2005
An awesome epic movie. We were waiting for a movie like this movie since Gladiator. All performances are awesome. A must see movie this spring.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
BarbN.May 5, 2005
What an over-produced, self-important bore.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
ShaneSMay 6, 2005
Mr. Scott at his best. Without vilifying Christian or Muslim, Mr. Scott has magnificently crafted a film that is both timely and timeless, with a subtle message of a peaceful coexistence. History repeats itself because no one listens the Mr. Scott at his best. Without vilifying Christian or Muslim, Mr. Scott has magnificently crafted a film that is both timely and timeless, with a subtle message of a peaceful coexistence. History repeats itself because no one listens the first time; finally a film with a message and a lesson. We should look to Sir Ridley's masterpiece for a lesson in dealing with the current, ongoing struggles throughout the world. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AndrewB.May 6, 2005
Orlando Bloom has finally decided to act and fight like a man. The biggest flaw of the movie is the fact that the story was at some points choppy and needed more character development. But an entertaining film nonetheless.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
IvorS.May 7, 2005
Highly disappointing, bad casting. Definitely Ridley Scott's worst film till date.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JeremeyM.May 7, 2005
This was such a horrible painful experience I walked out with 45 minutes left. For a movie about the crusades and religious predjudice it falls horribly short. Is completely unblanaced and lacks cohesive timing. The 'deep meaning' This was such a horrible painful experience I walked out with 45 minutes left. For a movie about the crusades and religious predjudice it falls horribly short. Is completely unblanaced and lacks cohesive timing. The 'deep meaning' in this movie would probably only resonate with those who are so hollow in the mind they can't handle the true history of what happened on an even itellectual level. And god forbid we show the Christian army getting slaughtered! Oh that would just be so horrible. But hey, when you can't handle history you can always just walk aroundit. Do yourself a favour, take a two and a half hour nap instead. It's the same effect Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
3
jackbMay 9, 2005
Perhaps not the worst of the recent medieval epics (that would be Troy), but it once again demonstrates the inverse relationship between the quality of a movie and the amount of money that gets spent to make it. Orlando Bloom completely Perhaps not the worst of the recent medieval epics (that would be Troy), but it once again demonstrates the inverse relationship between the quality of a movie and the amount of money that gets spent to make it. Orlando Bloom completely lacks screen presence, and the plot (such as it is) is dull as ditchwater. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
BitBurnJun 5, 2005
Not a bad movie. Not a very good one either. I found the whole thing building up incoherently and emotionless. Not for everyone, I guess.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
AhmedM.Jun 9, 2005
An Excellent movie better than gladiator and black hawk down the script is fantastic, soundtrack is awesome the movie is great and saladin was good.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MonteF.Aug 11, 2005
Though a little too politically correct, this was an entertaining movie with great graphics.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
AaronM.Jan 21, 2006
The movie is a fascinating look at at a fascinating historical period. It really focuses on both sides of the Crusade, and looks deep into the motives that caused it. An epic film.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
GregoryM.Mar 23, 2006
Excellent piece. Balanced and moving.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
SolidS.Oct 19, 2005
I don't know why everybody likes this movie. The story line sucks, the acting is wood, and the action scenes are not up for the task. It is way over rated so I think 5 is very generous for it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
joeOct 19, 2005
Good movie.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
4
DavidTOct 24, 2005
Literally put me to sleep. First hour plods along at snails pace - plot is disjointed and the scripting is bland.
0 of 0 users found this helpful