Roshomon meets Kingdom of Heaven

It just dropped on HBO Max after a disappointing theater run. I remember people making fun of the trailer because it was Affleck and Damon in a historical epic.

But GOT DAMN this is another Ridley Scott history banger. The way they present the story, the set pieces, the script, performances, etc. All fire. I loved this movie.

Not quite as good as The Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut or Gladiator, just a notch below. But i'd venture to say it will get a renewed life once people actually see it. Damn good movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgygUwPJvYk&t=2s

Then again a movie like this probably should have been a tandem theater/streaming release from the get-go.

Thought it would've had a BANGER ending one scene before it did, lol.

But yeah, really nice stuff here from Ridley. Affleck MVP.

*spoiler*

If you mean the assault scene i felt it wasnt actually as "gratuitous" as people were saying. I think the length was necessary to present little differences between each character's version.

It had little nuances between each person's point of view when it was their turn to tell the story. (The way she half closes the door in one version vs fully slams it, the way she laughs in one version vs not a single laugh in the other, the way she playfully kicks her shoe off vs it falls off because she is running for her life, how she says no playfully vs begging no)

I think Adam Driver's character legitimately believed it wasn't a rape, even though it obviously was. He was so evil and out of touch he died thinking he didn't do anything wrong.

the mother and baby playing in the field

Yeah. The end titles were enough

If you end the movie with her staring off into the middle distance in the crowd, that's a fucking banger ending.

Could have ended with him telling Richard the Lionheart he is just a blacksmith. He added the ending scene of Orlando Bloom and Eva Green riding on horses together. He needs a "end it here" guy.

the same movie three times with not much appeal at all

Yeah, every segment went exactly how you'd think it would go, and the two knight's segments especially covered so much similar ground that they seemed redundant. I could see this being more interesting a few decades ago, but for modern audiences, I think every misrepresentation in the two knights' accounts is obvious the second it's presented.

But I will say everything looked great, the period details were really immersive, and the acting was strong, so I didn't mind spending time with the film, even if the story let me down.

Incredibly strong awareness of the political and social dynamics of the time period, which is ... rare for a move about the late middle ages. Getting the right mix of intense reaction to a rapidly changing world driven by:

-vast demographic shifts due to brutal mid-century plagues, most clearly visible in this story by the occasional allusion to rising labor costs

-immense tension between people in power desperate to preserve the authority of the foundation for that power, The Church, as it squanders that authority in a century bracketed by the *huge* overreach of "Unam Sanctam" and the crisis of legitimacy created by the papal schism

-VERY slowly shifting gender dynamics driven by increased lay (and female) participation in the culture of the church and spurred in the secular realm by increased literacy and consequent indulgence in non-religious literature (a point of connection between Jacques and Marguerite)

But it wasn't just an "I did my research" show and tell, though I'll happily admit that I'd be a HUGE sucker for something with way less of a compelling story if they get the historical context down so successfully. Rather, they integrated all of this into a narrative, making these characters, to varying degrees, subjects of history rather than agents of it. The story drives home how much of these heavily ceremonialized rule of law is driven by a barely-subtextual rule of power. It places Jean de Carrouges in a growing category of impoverished nobels and Marguerite in a growing category of women who had just enough agency to truly endanger their own lives.

AND they actually stopped periodically to make it funny with the subtly demented work of Alex Lawther as King Charles, who came to the throne at some absurdly young age and was ... exactly as normal as you'd expect a child king in the 14th century to be. Watching that actor struggle to keep a crown on his head, get distracted mid-sentence, and clap like a seal was completely wonderful and a totally beautiful reminder that the people who demand to rule us have been, pretty much since forever, absolute baby brains.

The different perspectives played really nicely, propped up by some great performances. Horrifying to watch but really skilled how even both of the accounts that were clearly *rape* (jean de carrouges' and marguerite's) actually played very differently, where the former really focused on Jacque's action as the rapist while the latter focused on Marguerite's own pain and terror. I loved the slight comedy sprinkled in as neither Jean nor Jacques was capable of telling their own account without ridiculous self-aggrandizement (former as loving husband and honest worker, latter as sexy and charming, self-made man of the world) that ultimately falls apart as they reveal what screwed up doofuses they are.

And Jodie Comer is terrific, playing all things to all people in each of the different versions and kind of slowly emerging as actually herself by the conclusion. Just a really smart, well-crafted movie that was apparently a giant flop? Man, I'm looking forward to our financial ministers of culture finally figuring out how distribution is going to look in the post-COVID world. I have preferences, obviously. I love movie theaters but I'm also really lazy so whatever. But it bums me out that I nearly missed this movie and assume there must be all kinds of good stuff that I'm missing for mostly silly reasons.

When he inevitably goes we will lose like 90% of our HollyWood Historical Epics. As a history major and teacher i am super blessed a director like Ridley Scott existed and was successful enough to make these movies. I read "Warriors of God" and never thought i'd ever see a major Hollywood blockbuster about the Crusades with Saladin as a central character.

I'll even watch his shitty movies like "Exodus" for the set pieces and costumes.

>When he inevitably goes we will lose like 90% of our
>HollyWood Historical Epics. As a history major and teacher i
>am super blessed a director like Ridley Scott existed and was
>successful enough to make these movies. I read "Warriors of
>God" and never thought i'd ever see a major Hollywood
>blockbuster about the Crusades with Saladin as a central
>character.

I knew he'd been pretty invested in historical epics lately, but The Last Duel is the only one I've seen and as I said above, it was *thrilling* to see actual history so well integrated with the story.

So yeah - no idea that Ridley Scott was doing god's own work like this. Thank you for the heads up

>I'll even watch his shitty movies like "Exodus" for the set
>pieces and costumes.

It's one of the most detailed historical epics ever made. Down to the Muslims and Saladin having their own shaved ice in the middle of the desert.

nm

watched it over the holidays with my brother and sister-in-law

sister-in-law called it "#metoo game of thrones" lol - the best part of this movie was making fun of it after it ended