Kingdom Of Heaven: Critic Reviews

[A] handsome but curiously remote Crusades epic.

Ridley Scott's plaintive epic about the Crusades is an ostensibly fair-minded, even-handed account of one of the least fair-minded, even-handed chapters in human history.

Even a persuasive supporting cast gets Heaven only so far.

Is Orlando Bloom enough of a star to sustain a $100 million costume drama? The answer turns out to be yes.

As Balian and his people withstand the might of Saladin's fiery projectiles, siege towers and the usual computer-generated swarm of soldiers, it's hard not to think we're really watching The Lord of the Rings IV: Legolas Defends Jerusalem.

A mostly lumbering, occasionally rousing epic that walks a bizarre line between historical fact and Hollywood wishful thinking.

The movie does what any self-respecting politician would do: sidestep the issues, soft-pedal mortal costs, talk a fat game, and divert your attention away from history with exercises in spectacle and power.

Filmed in Morocco, in Spain and in computers, Kingdom fills a vast canvas with breathtaking spectacle. In contrast, most of the performances are blandly ordinary.

A $130 million epic with much to marvel at and great battle scenes, but it dazzles the senses while barely touching the heart.

Scott continues to be a master of chaotic mayhem.

Never straying from issues of war and peace, organized religion and an individual's relationship to God, Kingdom of Heaven earns the right to rattle its swords.

One imagined that a movie about the Crusades would be gallant and mad; one feared that it might stoke some antiquated prejudice. But who could have dreamed that it would produce this rambling, hollow show about a boy?

A spectacular battle for Jerusalem, as only Ridley Scott could direct.

Even when the drama falters, the movie shimmers with palatial splendor, explodes with adventure and reeks with bloodshed and horror.

The cinematography, supporting performances and battle sequences are so meticulously mounted that they still compel, even when Bloom fails to.

The climax features a dandy battle, but getting to it requires sitting through nearly two hours of posturing and pontificating.

Dramatically, the problem is it's a lot easier to root for someone battling tigers and gladiators than it is to cheer on a guy wondering about the meaning of life. This is why Waiting for Godot has never been made into a summer movie blockbuster.

The biggest shortcoming of this crusader story is not that Scott twists the facts (he does), but that he can't elevate the story to something more than an alluring re-creation.

The religious sentiment accumulates into a tower of politically correct Jell-O.

Genuinely spectacular and historically quite respectable.

The battle sequences here are actually worth the cost of admission, and there is exemplary supporting work by Liam Neeson, Jeremy Irons, Edward Norton and especially Syrian actor Ghassan Massoud as the legendary Muslim leader Saladin.

Scott's battles are ferocious things of grim beauty -- bloody, personal and deafening crashes of armored men and horses colliding at full gallop.

Considerably more ambitious and significantly less satisfying than Gladiator.

No one should be offended except, of course, those who like movies that excite the mind as well as the pulse.

Since we barely know what's at stake -- we're too confused and bored to care -- all this fighting means nothing to us, and yet Scott still hopes to rev us up with it.