It's hard to believe Ridley Scott's handsome epic won't become the cinematic touchstone of the Crusades for years to come. Kingdom of Heaven is greater than the sum of its parts, delivering a vital, mostly engrossing tale following Balian (Orlando Bloom), a lonely French blacksmith who discovers he's a noble heir and takes his father's (Liam Neeson) place in the center of the universe circa 1184: Jerusalem. Here, grand battles and backdoor politics are key as Scott and first-time screenwriter William Monahan fashion an excellent storyline to tackle the centuries-long conflict. Two forward-thinking kings, Baldwin (Edward Norton in an uncredited yet substantial role) and Saladin (Ghassan Massoud), hold an uneasy truce between Christians (who hold the city) and Muslims while factions champ at the bit for blood. There are good and evildoers on both sides, with the Knights Templar taking the brunt of the blame; Balian plans to find his soul while protecting Baldwin and the people. The look of the film, as nearly everything is from Scott, is impressive: his CGI-infused battle scenes rival the LOTR series and, with cinematographer John Mathieson, create postcard beauty with snowy French forests and the vast desert (filmed in Morocco and Spain). An excellent supporting cast, including Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson, and David Thewlis, also help make the head and heart of the film work. Many critics pointed out that Bloom doesn't have the gravitas of Russell Crowe in the lead (then again, who does?), but it's the underdeveloped character and not the actor that hurts the film and impacts its power. Balian isn't given much more to do than be sullen and give an occasional big speech, alongside his perplexing abilities for warfare tactics and his wandering moral compass (whose sole purpose seems to be to put a love scene in the movie). Note: all the major characters except Neeson's are based on fact, but many are heavily fictionalized. --Doug Thomas

I persuaded my girfriend to take me to this for my birthday treat. I have yet to make it up to her for a trully miserable night at the movies. This film is dire. Firsty I doubt whether Ridley Scott has ever seen a blacksmith in real life but they certainly look nothing like little Orlando Bloom. He is to weak to carry a bag of shopping let alone a film. Liam Neeson then appears. He advises Orlando that he is his dad and that he had forced himself on mum.He invites Orlando to join him on the crusade, he refuses. However changes his mind after murdering a revolting monk. As this travesty of a film rolls along it is accompanied by what sounds suspiciously like the Gladiator soundtrack .Bloom hardly convinces as a leader of men. His little boy looks being better suited to something along the lines of High School Musical. I love Ridley Scott films normally.Alien,Bladerunner, Gladiator,Thelma And Louise. I even liked Hannibal. The only good thing I can say about this film is that it looks marvellous. With a proper leading man this could have been brilliant. Trully a missed opportunity

Even before I viewed this film I sensed that the representation of the reason for the Crusades would likely be distorted. My suspicions were proved correct right from the outset. The viewer is quickly led to believe that the Crusaders seized Jerusalem. In fact they had re-captured the city from Islamic conquest. As expected too, the Crusaders including the Christian religion are presented in a totally negative light. Saladin is portrayed as benevolent, magnanimous and religiously pure. Of course, the Crusading hero is neither religious or politically minded. His attitude enables him to misguidedly define the earthly Jerusalem as the 'kingdom of heaven' thus leaving the viewer with that impression too. Nowhere in the bible is the city described in this way.
These predictable, PC distortions aside, the action is engaging as are the principal characters.
I'd put this film in the same category as that other piece of Hollywood distortion of history and character, Braveheart: 95% fiction, 5% so so.

The 194-minute director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven gives the film more room to breathe, but it won't make converts of the unbelievers. Instead, it's a more leisurely paced version of the film for the faithful who liked the theatrical cut and want to revisit its world and characters in a little more detail. Closer in style and tone to sixties roadshows than Scott's Gladiator, and all the better for it, in many ways it's the richest and most ambitious of the recent batch of epics. It's more of a journey in the extended version, and a bloodier one (the added violence will please the gore hounds), although there are a few moments that tip over into self-indulgence and could have been tightened or omitted entirely.

The extended opening allows more character detail, but at the expense of more of Michael Sheen's caricatured greedy priest, now revealed as Balian's brother. Orlando Bloom's limitations are also given a little more room than they had in the theatrical cut, but he certainly never stoops to the lows of Gerard "I'm wonderful, me" Butler in Beowulf, Colin Farrell's Alexander or Clive Owen's truly catastrophic non-performance in King Arthur that left that film with a void at its center. Edward Norton's performance as the Leper King suffers a little from using different takes than the theatrical version, and at least one of his expanded scenes is simply longer without really being any better than its equivalent in the shorter version. The real winner in the extra footage stakes is Eva Green, who I think I'm falling in love with and whose part is considerably expanded and much more complex, allowing her a mass of contradictory motives (few of them noble), impulses and emotions that were smoothed away in the theatrical version. The subplot involving her son also helps add more of an emotional charge to Baldwin's death, with the shot of his leprous face no longer gratuitous but essential. In fact, in this version of the film, there are even a couple of genuinely touching sequences.

While the added complexity in this cut is more in the characters than in the plot, some of the problems of the theatrical version have been addressed. The shipwreck is just as rushed in this cut as in the theatrical version, but the pacing problems in the astonishingly spectacular siege finale are much improved by the addition of a fairly minimal amount of footage. It no longer seems quite so hurried and there's more of a sense of the human cost after the battle at the Christopher Gate that was lacking in the shorter version by the simple expedient of including characters we briefly get to know among the dead. There IS one massive miscalculation after the siege where a redundant swordfight has been added: not only is it completely ineffective, dwarfed by the sheer scale and weight of what has come before, but it's also unnecessary, winding up a plot point no-one cares about any more and simply underlining the events of the previous scene.

It also now comes with added Bill Paterson, which is rarely a bad thing, especially since his brief scene as a compassionate Bishop establishes the incompatibility of fanatical adherence to religious law with the actions of a loving savior that is one of the film's major themes. Although most of the Christian clerics here are transparent hypocrites, they are also counterbalanced by David Thewlis' Knight Hospitaler just as the `good' Muslims are counterbalanced by fanatics as both Saladin and Baldwin have to walk a tightrope with their own people to prevent war.

Thanks to a strong script this is easily Scott's best film since Blade Runner. Unlike Gladiator it doesn't feel like it was written on the hoof, and he has enough confidence in the material not to overdo the stylistics at the expense of the storytelling: here the visuals serve the picture, which isn't always the case in his past work. Even John Mathieson, probably the worst cinematographer to ever win an Oscar, finally delivers the goods. CGI is used sparingly and very effectively when it is (none of the poor FX problems that plagued parts of Gladiator here, thankfully). Instead, much of the spectacle is shot for real - not only is it usually cheaper, but it's certainly a lot more impressive to look at.

The transfer quality is not as good as on the theatrical version, but it's more than acceptable. The extra features on the 4-disc set are impressive, including a deeply depressed screenwriter mulling over its US failure. Of the additional deleted scenes included as extras, there's nothing that needed to go back into the picture: most are ideas that didn't really work while a couple are just plain silly. The DVD also includes an interesting collection of trailers and TV spots that try to sell it as everything from The Passion of the Christ II in an outrageous piece of false advertising involving adding a "Don't worry, God is with me" line of dialog not in the film (particularly ironic considering its Humanist viewpoint and the crisis of faith of its hero), a family movie, an epic adventure, a country and western rock video and a kick-ass heavy metal teen bloodbath: anything to avoid mentioning Muslims or, God forbid, history. Can't think why this didn't take off at the US box-office...

If you are going to watch this movie make sure its the definitive/directors cut. It makes far more sense than the theatrical release/DVD it is, however, still left wanting.
As you would expect for a Ridley Scott film it looks sumptuous, truely breathtaking in places but this cant make up for a flawed script and some poor casting. Orlando struggles with poor characterisation and lacks the gravitas to lead such an epic, starkley highlighted when he shares the srceen with the likes of Jeremy Irons and Liam Neeson (perhaps a better choice?) Even Ed Norton who wears a mask for the whole film comes out of it better. Eva Greens performance is fleshed out in an entire sub plot and benefits greatly in the process, one of the standout performances of the film.

Whilst making far more sense than the theatre release the editing is still a bit 'jerky' at times with some puzzling and uneccessary scenes restored (do we need to see Guy fiddling with his sword and then getting it on with his wifes maid to understand that he's a bit of a bad 'un - any worse than his wife who's already 'stalked' Balian into bed)

Generally a bit more gory than the original but not gratuitously so the film is far more watchable but can't overcome its in built deficiencies (poor scripting and slight misscasting) Its a worthy attempt at trying to bring to film a complex and violent period of history whilst obviously trying to draw parrallels with the situation in the middle east today. It succeeds on some levels and not on others but I found that whilst it was historically innacurrate it DOES portray the 'spirit' of the times well and is even handed. I would find it hard to accept that muslim or christian could complain about how their ancestors are portrayed.

The extras are exhaustive and far more interesting and engaging than your average DVD .. I havn't been as interested since the LOTR extended versions so you will always get your moneies worth with this purchase.

Ultimately very watchable but not overly engaging or involving, i was left thinking 'close but no cigar' however it IS the best of the recent clutch of 'sword & sandle' movies and in time, as with many of Ridleys films, feel sure this will be seen as a flawed classic.

Ridley Scott is one of the greatest film makers of the last thirty years. His breadth is incomparable, and his mastery of story is superb. However, just occasionally, his desire to make a point can become a little obtrusive.

Kingdom of Heaven is a film with a message: mercy saves the day. Fairly early in the film, Balian (Orlando Bloom) spares the life of an Arab who he takes to be the servant of the man he has just killed. "Your qualities will be known among your enemies before ever you meet them", is the man's response. Later it turns out that the man is not the servant of the man killed, but his master, and the right hand man of Saladin. A little later, Balian is captured while defending Kerak, and the same man frees him, repeating his quotation. Balian's mercy is strongly contrasted with the butchery and warmongering of his crusader enemies Raynald and Guy. Eventually, Guy and Raynald together start a war which leads inevitably to the destruction of their army and the siege of Jerusalem. After defending it skilfully against several attacks, Balian accepts Saladin's merciful proposal to allow all the people safe passage to a Christian country. Right at the end of the film, Balian refuses Richard the Lionheart's request to join in a crusade to retake Jerusalem.

The film concludes with the written text: "Almost a thousand years later, peace in the Kingdom of Heaven remains elusive".

This is a beautifully filmed story, with a perfectly timed plot, a strong undercurrent of romance, genuine excitement and wonderfully accurate depictions of the culture and historical background of the times. However, the storyline is not historically accurate: it is largely contrived in order to hammer in Ridley Scott's point. What is slightly odd is that this is almost exactly the opposite point from the message of his previous epic Gladiator ("I will have my revenge").

I really, really like this film, but, for once with a Ridley Scott production, I see it as a flawed picture (even though, basically, I agree with the message). The point was a little too obvious the first time I watched it. On subsequent viewings, I feel like shouting out 'I get it, I get it!'

Nonetheless, still warmly recommended, if not in the first league of Scott productions.