"Medieval as Modern: The Historical Accuracy of Kingdom " Topic

….of Heaven

Old… but still interesting….

"A film based on a well-known historical episode elicits an immediate question: "How accurate is it?" For a controversial episode of history such as the Crusades, the issue of historical accuracy becomes even more relevant. When Ridley Scott released his Crusade epic Kingdom of Heaven in 2005, his film provoked widespread controversy from historians and derision from film critics. The film's historical denigrators were divided into "Muslim historians offended at the film's purported misrepresentation of the Saracens and non-Muslim historians offended by misrepresentations of the Christians."[1] Film critics thought the film's theatrical cut shallow and truncated.[2]

However valid these criticisms were, many of them were muted by the release of a 192-minute director's cut of the film in 2006, which was both more historically accurate and artistically satisfying. Important historical episodes like the crowning of the young King Baldwin V were added back into the film, and the characters' motivations were made clearer with the extra running time…."

link

Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

That's a smart take on the kinds of strategic thought that goes into story telling in mass media, especially with a potentially politically fraught topic. Whatever one might think of the film, or any other film, it is worth thinking about the complexity of the decisions the writers and director of a 100+ million dollar gamble have to make.

I only saw the theatrical release of the film and didn't care for it, for a number of reasons. But that's not to say that the sorts of changes that would have made it appeal more to me would have been viable for them in a global market.