- This is an example of 17th century India. Many people know Aurangzeb, and more people know his grandfather Akbar, but the number of people who have heard the name Dara Shuko is probably far less than the previous number. Dara Shuko is the prince who lost the battle for the throne, the grandson of Akbar and the brother of Aurangzeb. He had hoped to follow in the footsteps of his grandfather Akbar, exploring how to reconcile the conflict between Hinduism and Islam; he was familiar with the Hindu scriptures and regarded the two religions as brothers. Dara Shuko was angrily called "apostate" by Aurangzeb.
If it was not Aurangzeb who ascended the throne, perhaps the contradictions that appeared in India later would not have been irreconcilable and even the country split. But history does not have such assumptions, and we can only imagine the situation in the past from the lines.
In 2005, Ridley Scott, who was good at filming epic scenes, released "Reign of Heaven" about the conflict between Christianity and Islam, but the three-hour film was cut down to two hours. Add to that a few other factors, and the box office fiasco. Later, when Ridley Scott released the DVD and Blu-ray versions, he insisted on adding the edited part, and there were also unhappy moviegoers cheering for the film. "Kingdom of Heaven" finally regained its lost ground and was no longer criticized. The narrative is unmistakable and earns good scores on various rating sites.
I say this to say that without Ridley Scott's persistence and craftsmanship, perhaps Baldwin IV's war with Saladin would have been like some other stories - such as Dara Shuko and Aurangzeb —Likewise, oblivion is in books dealing with medieval history, only occasionally appearing in a small number of discussions. This discussion will be smooth, respectful of historical facts, as beneficial as boiling water, and as tasteless as boiling water. What Baldwin IV and Saladin do together in this film is exactly what Dara Shuko wanted to do, but never did because of the brothers' disagreement.
Ridley Scott has crafted a complete, logical story for the film that connects end to end and is narratively symbolized in a circle. Then, he paints intricate details in one stroke on this circle. He asked tailors to make fine and modern robes, craftsmen to create sharp and practical weapons and armor, and architects to restore the solid and heavy houses of the Middle Ages. He brought in the right actors, rubbed off their original traces, made them look like the ancients in the conflict between Arab and Christian cultures, and dressed them. Then he pulled up "Ridley Blue" and used the camera to show what he believed to be the religious disputes, using fights, diseases, little people, and love to enrich the cold and bloody historical backbone. Ridley Scott has done an amazing job.
As far as the story is concerned, to understand the background of this film, you can get a general understanding by looking at the resumes of Baldwin IV and Saladin, not to mention that the protagonists are half-realistic and half-fictional, and there is no need to care about that much. Faced with such a subject that can make a big fuss, Ridley Scott is not a historian, so while maintaining a restrained and cautious attitude, he devoted himself to expressing and describing that history with art. Despite the discrepancy with history, he did not exaggerate the achievements of Baldwin IV, did not make Saladin shrink in front of the army of Jerusalem like an old vanquished; nor did he belittle the leper and magnify the chaos after his death for the sake of contrarian , causing people to complain about his willful behavior in sending troops in person. It's about image building. Ridley Scott created two equal rulers who were almost perfect in personality, one was Baldwin IV, the real king in Saladin's mouth, and the other was a ruler highly respected by the Arabs , Saladin himself who peacefully received Jerusalem. Such two images are bound to express the director's intention and represent Ridley Scott's historical thinking, but he is still very restrained, like a superb craftsman, skillfully combining this thinking with the character's Characters come together: The modern Scott's desire for rulership and the conundrum of how to resolve religious conflicts became part of the Baldwin IV and Saladin film personality. They blend so well that in their light, the villains on the Christian side and the avengers on the Islamic side are dimmed and irrelevant, just used to drive the plot forward. But it is precisely because of this, and because of the needs of the story itself, that there must be a leading protagonist in front of such two glorious images, that is, the role of Berion found by Ridley Scott. However, although the character was added with strong romanticism in the film and became a legendary hero, he still did not become a representative of the times. Bellion was only of importance when Jerusalem was in distress, and once Jerusalem was rescued, he resumed his old blacksmith status. Berian and his romances are the necessary elements to thaw robes, armor, weapons, heavy castles, and flying flags, but not the characters who wear the robes and own the castle. And because of his semi-fiction, he was able to act in a more personal and childish way, and to say something that Ridley Scott was not sure but thoughtful about, that is, his romanticism and personal The root of heroism. But thanks to the role of Berrian. At a time when the tide of the Renaissance was far from sweeping Europe, he and his little saplings, his personal wishes and small persistence were like a wave of A new wind blows over the land desolate due to war and bloodshed. In this era, there are not only kings who have been corrupted beyond recognition by leprosy but have to uphold their duties, nor are there only Arab leaders who lead their tribes to take back Jerusalem - there are ordinary people in this era, just like us today This person does not have to wear a mask or wear a black robe, he has his own judgment and his own interpretation of the war. Maybe that's not necessarily true, but he certainly pushed things in the right direction.
In the end, the story of Jerusalem, as the history books say, passed from Baldwin IV to Saladin. When Saladin entered the city of Jerusalem, he carefully walked over the traces of the infidels step by step. Ridley Scott asked him to lift up the fallen Jesus statue and sprinkle flowers on the road under his feet. In the end, Saladin fell to his knees reverently, and paid tribute to what he called Jerusalem, which is "both penniless and symbolic." This part is obviously heavily symbolic, and its intent can be understood by those with a little imagination. Because it's so simple, so poetic, so enlightening - it's a movie, it's always a movie. The same goes for Berian's little sapling and his love. They, like the Lionheart Chasing that comes on horseback at the end of the credits, are more of a kind smile and reminder that this is just a world woven by Ridley Scott. This world has a hypothetical title
that couldn't be clearer: Kingdom of Heaven. If this world were on earth, then Islam would never bow to Christianity, and Christianity would only offer flowers to its god. This story will turn into black and white on the page, into an endless strife, into the little story I wrote at the beginning: the story of Dara Shuko and Aurangzeb.
Write and play, no technical analysis.
View more about Kingdom of Heaven reviews
