The first thing which Ebert points out is that the director, Ridley Scott, knows how to direct a historical epic. Ebert goes on to say that Kingdom of Heaven is better than, Scott’s own, Gladiator; he says, “[Kingdom of Heaven is] deeper, more thoughtful, more about human motivation and less about action” (Ebert). The second point Ebert explains is that Scott is a brave man to release a movie about the wars between Christians and Muslims for Jerusalem; however, a Muslim scholar, Hamid Dabashi debunks the fact saying that it is neither pro-Christian or pro-Muslim but more about a profound act of faith. Dabashi believes the film revolves around an act of faith because although Balian is a non-believer, “All religious affiliations fade in the light of his melancholic quest to find a noble purpose in life” (Ebert). Ebert was pleasantly satisfied through the deeper meaning, historically accurate storyline, and the cinematography of Ridley Scott, consequently he gave the movie a 3.5/4
The first thing which Ebert points out is that the director, Ridley Scott, knows how to direct a historical epic. Ebert goes on to say that Kingdom of Heaven is better than, Scott’s own, Gladiator; he says, “[Kingdom of Heaven is] deeper, more thoughtful, more about human motivation and less about action” (Ebert). The second point Ebert explains is that Scott is a brave man to release a movie about the wars between Christians and Muslims for Jerusalem; however, a Muslim scholar, Hamid Dabashi debunks the fact saying that it is neither pro-Christian or pro-Muslim but more about a profound act of faith. Dabashi believes the film revolves around an act of faith because although Balian is a non-believer, “All religious affiliations fade in the light of his melancholic quest to find a noble purpose in life” (Ebert). Ebert was pleasantly satisfied through the deeper meaning, historically accurate storyline, and the cinematography of Ridley Scott, consequently he gave the movie a 3.5/4