Real soldiers doing what was needed to save the civilians, despite the odds. They accomplished their mission, knowing in advance the high price they'd pay. Real soldiers indeed.
I recently watch the directors cut and was blow away by how much better it is, I already liked the film but the directors cut makes a huge improvement putting this movie even above Gladiator
Yeah the director's cut is amazing, it explains so much of his backstory as a siege engineer etc. There's like a half hour where he's refused to play a role in the pot to oust Guy and they focus on the politics and it's all great.
*Mount and Blade be like* You have encountered Saladins party. You have 50 men fit for battle against their 2000 men (Retreat) (Charge the enemy) (Surrender)
I never understood why so many War-time movies the lead guy will turn to his buddy and ask him something like "Are you with me?", I understand it's a scary situation, it's probably more a thing of moral-support, but could you imagine the buddy just being like "Nah bro, just not feeling it today, you're on your own with this shit" XD. (I suppose Beni did it in the first "The Mummy" movie, but still).
Because he is in charge of those men and their lives, they are his responsability. He (the hero o any hero) is willing to charge alone if he needs to and die, but he doesnt know if his men are willing to die like he does. I would ask them the same, if they are willing to follow me then i have the right to ORDER them to their deaths.
I just watched the charge scene from the first Narnia movie and it's the exact same thing. The two movies also came out the same year and had similar music due to having the same composer.
You know you've been playing too much Total War when you start contemplating the moves that would get you the best fight... For the record, I think they should have charged the muslims in a wedge-formation.
Someordinary PCgamer I was thinking something along the lines of if the arabs had the crusaders behind them, they wouldn't dare simply focusing on the fleeing civilians
Ahh I love to see medieval swords cutting through coats of plates and splatting blood. Like, why would anyone use armor if a sword can cut through it like it was butter? Except a sword can't cut through armor.
Not easily. A blow with tremendous force might be able to burst through. But to give such the blow enough force to do this you'd have to bring the sword way back above your head. What we call telegraphing and can be seen coming a mile away. A blow where you use all you're might which is predictable, slow and easy to dodge or block.
Yeah when you're attacking the mail... when your attacking the man underneath it, he's moving, he's not going to let you tip cut and also he's going to be cutting you at the same time, and when you do an executioner style blow you are opening yourself up
Toledo steel is able to cut through chainmail armor, if you apply the proper strength and angle. Still, Damascus steel was far superior and wide-spreaded from Syria to the rest of Middle East. The muslims had advantage in terms of number, weather and weaponry. Scimitars were not only sharper and easier to make than swords, but also lighter... a strong point when facing a heavy, slow templar knight. Same case as the roman gladius, a keystone for legions. Spanish swords were the best back then (on the christian side) and getting one was extremely expensive. I bet my ass the most notable templar knights used swords made with spanish steel.
When you see the arabs with their clothes riding the Arabian horses charging in full speed is just fabulous and outstanding sight just make me hold my breath.... I think arabs and horses and made for each other like every one of them complete the other
@@raphwalker9123 nope thats your opinion Who got the beautiful horses ever? Who uses horses in poetry to describe beauty? Who got a verse in thier holy book describe the horses? Who said teach your kids :swimming ,archery and horse riding? Its omar the second caliph Who got until these days the best and the most beautiful stables like for example alkhalediha stables in Saudi Arabia Every nation has thier skills thats for sure even the red indians but always and for ever the arabs are famous with horses
Movie makers have never got the idea right: that in hand-to-hand combat you can't slash through armour and chain mail with the edge of a sword - you need a mace or axe. You *can* use the point of the sword to penetrate gaps, but usually in a melée you don't have the space or time for such careful precision.
it wasn't meant to be historic, it was meant to show how morality can be corrupted by herd mentality and divine command theory, it was mean to show how evil crusading was.
@@GorrilazWarfare True, it was not meant to be historic. Still, it took dramatic licence a bit too far - the killing of Saladin's sister did not happen.
@@GorrilazWarfare The crusaders in real life were not the bad guys, remember that the Muslims invaded Christian lands, not the other way around. Those lands were Christian since before Islam even existed, and the Byzantine Emperor directly asked the Pope and Catholic Europe for help against the onslaught. The notion that the Christians were somehow the aggressors is another myth that has somehow come to dominate the narrative.
@@Robertz1986 That's a really good way to revision history to justify the invasions of the crusaders. The fall of eastern roman empire was not a war of religion but simply conquest of empire. The muslims who took over those lands treated christians well and there never was really a "christian land" that you could justify. The idea of "christian land" isn't really a solid justification for any argument because that land is de facto christian and then no longer was anymore. The crudaders were bad, simple as.
@@GorrilazWarfare That isn't true. The Byzantine Empire was reliably Christian. The Muslims invaded the Byzantine Empire, taking the Holy Lands by force, taking North Africa by force, they invaded Visigothic Spain, they invaded France, all long before the crusades they were attacking Christendom. The populations were forcibly enslaved or converted, though in the Holy Land a huge share of the population was still Christian and formed a major component of the crusader forces. You say the invasion of the Byzantine Empire by the Muslims wasn't religious, but neither the Byzantines nor the Muslims of the period agree with you. In fact, the crusades were launched in direct response to a direct personal request from the Byzantine Emperor to the Pope, citing Muslim attacks and atrocities against Christians as the object of the request. My perspective here is actually the traditional and authoritative one, the notion of the crusaders as the bad guys is modern revisionism by leftists in some universities, but most serious academics do not support them, as the evidence simply doesn't support the idea of crusaders as the "bad" guys. Maybe the Muslims invading everyone without provocation and forcibly converting them might be the bad guys? They didn't treat Christians any better than the Christians treated them.
Yes, it's almost like filmmakers want people to be able to distinguish the main character in a chaotic sequence like that, surrounded by dust, where it might not be obvious.
@@kyso6690 nothing wrong with being honorable. I think it's a good virtue people would want to be known as a trusted individual. Now, being stupid as well as honorable, that's a deadly combo. Try to take the moral high ground, but never assume your opponent would be willing to share the same values.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 Tbf Balian never assumed that his opponents would share the same values. He knew Guy would start a war. Being honorable was mainly for himself, so that he could live with himself for doing what he believed was the right thing.
I've always wanted to know the behind the scenes of horse wrangler's job on these sets. How well do they train the horse? How do they conceal the shots to mimic a horse being frantic? All this and more on behind the scene.
It doesn't answer your specific question but 'home of the horse lords' is about the LOTR horses and how they make them do what they want: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rj0wk6hV_0c.html
Yeh but the major difference is you can say how they worship God - Muslims try to follow the way Abraham, Moses, Jesus and every prophet and including Muhammad peace be upon him how they all worshipped God *ALONE*. Christians worship The Father Son and Holy Spirit and have a trinity. So yeh that’s the main difference really
Christians have been the few, and the free. Background: The cavalry vanguard of Saladin's army was attacking a Christian-held city. Baron of Ibelin Balian with his cavalry guards charged Saladin's cavalry despite being completely outnumbered to cover the retreat of civilians into the city.
In fact ..Jerusalem and the road to the battle and the place of the battle is not a desert, but the location of the filming in the desert of Morocco gave the impression that Jerusalem and its surroundings and the place of the battle is a barren desert, I am from the eastern Mediterranean region (the Levant) and its nature is similar to the nature of Spain or Italy and there is water, springs and other means of life..so I think the director was unsuccessful in choosing where to shoot
What the templars (and other orders) were able to accomplish in the holy lands is nothing short of a miracle. There is no reason whatsoever that they should have been as successful as they were, and by all rights they should have collapsed but instead they were able to not only hold onto these lands but exert tremendous influence in the region.
The crusades were essential for the western world to get back into classical society and Hellenistic knowledge...what's so funny is most uneducated political types think the west was always classical but while they were living in houses of mud and shit the islamic world was discovering astronomy and algebra and medicine/anatomy
Mattias Wennerhult thanks? I don't know if that's supposed to be a discerning opinion but typically people use source material or citations to prove their point
One of the things that is glossed over. The Arab world were basically the holders of "greek knowledge." During this time frame, while Europe was burning and pillaging itself into oblivion, the Muslim world was building hospitals and schools.
I dont know man, i mean he is the leading commander of the cavalry. But leading a charge with a fooking sword to meet toe to toe with the enemy spear cavalry unit, shits will kill you immediately.
It's really stupid to run into a cavalry formation with a long sword. I can't see in any situation that he won't get dismounted immediately, especially he's the first in line.
I don't mind humans killing each other for the sake of their foolish beliefs. What I do mind is their sacrificing horses in the process. The quality is excellent and it's a fine movie; one of my favorites.
@@rayray6490 Which is *so* weird, cos the most badass guy of British legend was St George (argue about the details later) - he killed a frickin' dragon - and *he* used a *lance*. Not a poxy anyone-can-wield-it sword, but a motherfucking lance, because knights were epic and only knights used lances. Literally every schoolkid knew that thirty years ago. Conclusion: Hollywood is a big bag of c*nts.
Did Saladin's forces even have heavy, lance wielding cavalry? I was under the impression that they used lightly armored archers on small, fast horses to stay out of range.
In this conflict they did the Muslims learned a lot from the Europeans when they held Jarusalem, when the original Franks started their crusade 100 years earlier they stomped on the Muslim forces because they were so lightly armored .
@@GhostofRhurValley I'm sorry the mouslims weren't so many as this movie shows a Muslim Knight was more talented and strong than any of crusaders Knights
The first encounters the Europeans had with Muslim forces was very one sided because the muslims weren't use to fighting people in full chainmail armor . The armys of that region were lightly armored to make travel through desserts less grueling , which is why the crusaders suffered a lot in there marches , im not European im not telling you this because im proud, its fact , Some 100 years later the muslim cavaliers armed with spears and armor destroyed the occupying armies because they saw the importance of being better armed when facing the European .
@@mahmoudeldya5135 A muslim knight was stronger and more talented come on dude we get your muslim but put your feelings aside were talking facts here ,the Europeans were way better armed in the first crusade .
It’s funny how they always portray the crusaders, who were mostly doing it for blood and money, as heroes when they’re the first to retreat (and usually end up caught)!
I love the movie but for the glaringly clumsy hero story of a blacksmith that learned how to ride and fight like a Knight after an afternoon of training in the woods. Guy would have had been trained by a master of arms from childhood, would have been squire to a great knight until he earned his spurs. And Orlando bloom beat him and led troops in a cavalry charge.. Ugh. Looked great at least.
considering who long it would have taken them to travel to jerusalem from france he had a lot of time for training. Also as he said he served as an engineer in wartime so he's got at least some experience. Also just because Guy might have had a lot of training (those romaticised stories about knights an squires are often far from the reality of being a knight) but he also just lost a major battle, been in custody and through a siege he ain't at peak perfomance.
@@user-qz6zo4qn6u whaaaaat but Muslims were more advanced at middle ages and before Muslims the advanced communities were in the middle east and North medetrain and only in this region the Muslims were superior untill1600 or 1700 or something like that and now Europe aren't one of the greatest continents now the greatest continents are Asia and North America and now there is any Europe after ww2
@@user-qz6zo4qn6u can you imagine that white man killed 60 million from white man and after this Britain France and Germany are not any more the greatest military in the world
@@user-qz6zo4qn6u and what does that has to do with anything? They already lived there for centuries by the time of the Crusades, while the Crusades were mostly men marching from all over Europe. It's their home, so what?
a charge which make no sense, a man with no commanding and fighting skills and a scene which tries to effects us emotionally...such a failure. such a disappointing scenario line.
The curved line is more effective, they split into two to engage both sides of the encircling force so half couldn't slip past and get to the civilians anyway.
back when CGI was not used and movies were realistic and great unlike today full of CGI shit!! These one is some of the true great movies... and also when men had honour and respect for others even to their enemies!!
