'Kingdom of Heaven' had an immensely talented cast going for it, despite being unsure about seeing Orlando Bloom in an especially substantial lead role. It also looked great from the trailer, and have liked a good deal of Harry Gregson-Williams' work which can be one of the better components of films. Ridley Scott is not the most consistent of directors, his best films like 'Alien' and 'Blade Runner' are brilliant but lesser films such as 'Robin Hood' are really not good (personal opinion of course).
There are also films of his that are much better in the director's cut version. 'Legend' is one such example, but the biggest one for me is 'Kingdom of Heaven'. Found it a very mixed bag as the theatrical/ non-director's cut version and found a lot of issues with it (and this is actually forgetting the historical inaccuracies), such as choppy storytelling, erratic pacing and underwritten characters on top of Orlando Bloom and the dialogue. While it is still not a perfect film still in the director's cut version, it is a big improvement and some of what were major problems in the theatrical version are corrected.
Not all though. Do still find Orlando Bloom charisma-void and out of his depth, have nothing against him but this role was a meaty one, even more so in the director's cut where he is more complex, and needed a lot of authority and a wide range of emotions and to me Bloom didn't have enough of either.
Some of the middle of the film stalls a bit in the pace, the storytelling not always going very far. Although the characters are much more interesting in the director's cut edition, a few of them could still have gotten into more depth such as those with not much screen time still and the same goes with the themes, also did that the messaging at times could have been more subtle.
Improvements are many though. The characters generally are far more interesting and better developed, Eva Green's went from one that one questioned the presence of and was hugely underwritten to a well fleshed out character. They interacted more convincingly and not in as stilted a fashion. Despite some aimlessness in the middle, the pace is less erratic and doesn't jump around as much. The story is uneven still, but there is generally more cohesion and less choppiness, more of a sense of resolution with the vast amount going on and for me the contemporary relevance was a good thing.
Dialogue flows better and is less awkward, quite intelligent here too.
Both editions cannot be faulted visually. It is gorgeously shot with lots of atmosphere and the costumes and sets are stunningly evocative, with the siege especially being quite breath-taking. In fact, the action was very tense and powerful in both versions as well but especially in the director's cut. Harry Gregson Williams' score rouses and also has emotional impact, the director's cut does it more justice and a better job is done complementing everything whereas in the theatrical version it was the case of a great score deserving a much better film. Scott directs everything skillfully which is remarkable considering there was a lot to balance. The messaging and everything regarding tolerance and the historical inaccuracies were much criticised and still are, they weren't as big an issue for me.
With the exception of Bloom, the cast are very good. The standouts being an against type Edward Norton who gives a lot of complexity and intensity to his character and Gasshan Massoud showing how to do cool and menacing wonderfully. Eva Green's performance is deeply felt and Jeremy Irons shows a lot of dignity and restraint here.
Overall, didn't care for the theatrical version, but this review is namely for the director's cut which is an infinitely better, if imperfect, version and is a fairer way to judge the film on. My thoughts though. 7/10
There are also films of his that are much better in the director's cut version. 'Legend' is one such example, but the biggest one for me is 'Kingdom of Heaven'. Found it a very mixed bag as the theatrical/ non-director's cut version and found a lot of issues with it (and this is actually forgetting the historical inaccuracies), such as choppy storytelling, erratic pacing and underwritten characters on top of Orlando Bloom and the dialogue. While it is still not a perfect film still in the director's cut version, it is a big improvement and some of what were major problems in the theatrical version are corrected.
Not all though. Do still find Orlando Bloom charisma-void and out of his depth, have nothing against him but this role was a meaty one, even more so in the director's cut where he is more complex, and needed a lot of authority and a wide range of emotions and to me Bloom didn't have enough of either.
Some of the middle of the film stalls a bit in the pace, the storytelling not always going very far. Although the characters are much more interesting in the director's cut edition, a few of them could still have gotten into more depth such as those with not much screen time still and the same goes with the themes, also did that the messaging at times could have been more subtle.
Improvements are many though. The characters generally are far more interesting and better developed, Eva Green's went from one that one questioned the presence of and was hugely underwritten to a well fleshed out character. They interacted more convincingly and not in as stilted a fashion. Despite some aimlessness in the middle, the pace is less erratic and doesn't jump around as much. The story is uneven still, but there is generally more cohesion and less choppiness, more of a sense of resolution with the vast amount going on and for me the contemporary relevance was a good thing.
Dialogue flows better and is less awkward, quite intelligent here too.
Both editions cannot be faulted visually. It is gorgeously shot with lots of atmosphere and the costumes and sets are stunningly evocative, with the siege especially being quite breath-taking. In fact, the action was very tense and powerful in both versions as well but especially in the director's cut. Harry Gregson Williams' score rouses and also has emotional impact, the director's cut does it more justice and a better job is done complementing everything whereas in the theatrical version it was the case of a great score deserving a much better film. Scott directs everything skillfully which is remarkable considering there was a lot to balance. The messaging and everything regarding tolerance and the historical inaccuracies were much criticised and still are, they weren't as big an issue for me.
With the exception of Bloom, the cast are very good. The standouts being an against type Edward Norton who gives a lot of complexity and intensity to his character and Gasshan Massoud showing how to do cool and menacing wonderfully. Eva Green's performance is deeply felt and Jeremy Irons shows a lot of dignity and restraint here.
Overall, didn't care for the theatrical version, but this review is namely for the director's cut which is an infinitely better, if imperfect, version and is a fairer way to judge the film on. My thoughts though. 7/10