Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

UPDATE: I originally wrote the following because of the notice that there would be an eventual extended edition of the movie. The update is that Amazon.com now has a listing for said extended edition that comes in at 191 minutes and is to be released on 23 May 2006. I wrote a review for the theatrical release of this film which I will post below if you are curious what I think. I really wanted to just point out that if you enjoyed this film, you might not want to purchase this version. Back when the movie was first released in theatres, Ridley Scott was interviewed and stated that there was almost an hour taken from the movie. He also said there would be a director's cut that would have that material restored. Its not being released now, presumably, so that the studios can get their double dip. Look at Sin City (the "longer extended cut" comes out in December 3 months from its original release date) or Saw which is coming unrated this month to support the sequel. It happens all the time. Overall, I think the film is decent and I am curious to see what was cut out. I just don't want people who are interested to waste their hard-earned dollars because the studio wants to double dip. Take what I'm saying as a grain of salt because things can change and I'm no "insider" so I can't say for absolute certainty that they will release the director's cut, but there is an interview out there with Scott about the director's cut. So, my recommendation (take it for what you will)? If you enjoyed the movie but wanted more, wait for the inevitable directors cut :) For those interested, my original review for the theatrical release is pasted below: When epic films come out, people usually fall into two categories without even seeing the movie: they are excited to see it or they roll their eyes and yawn. I happen to fall into the first category. Epic historical war films like Gladiator, Troy and now Kingdom of Heaven (just to name a few) are a lot of fun to me. There's nothing like seeing boulders of flames lighting the night sky as they explode into castle towers, etc. From what I've gathered through the media and through friends of mine who are history buffs, the film is pretty accurate as far as movie epics goes; I am not a history buff so I couldn't tell you. Ridley Scott does a good job of mixing fictional (Orlando Bloom's Balian) and historical (The leper king, played by Edward Norton in an excellently subdued role). Complimenting the battle sequences is a rousing score by Harry Gregson-Williams who has done everything from the video game Metal Gear Solid 2 to Shrek. They also sample a song from the Prayer Cycle by Johnathan Elias which is achingly beautiful. Overall the sound fits the theme and the time period admirably well. The story is pretty standard epic film stuff. You have the unwitting hero, the possible love interest, the possible love interest's evil husband, all engulfed in the massive Crusades that are tearing apart Jerusalem. One thing I am glad for is that I feel Ridley Scott and screenwriter William Monahan did a more accurate portrayal of the Crusades by showing not only the religious side of events but also the socio-political and economical themes that pushed the war forward. I think Orlando Bloom has been criticized perhaps too strongly in this movie. Most professional reviews comment that he is too "pretty boy" for the role. It's almost as if critics are trying to pigeon hole him and type cast him into that role. I'm not trying to defend Orlando Bloom, but it never really struck me as the "fish out of water" character casting that professional critics are demanding it is. Sure, he relied on the look of a puppy dog who's lost his best friend a little much, and yeah he has that "pretty boy" look I suppose but come on, if you don't allow someone to do something different, you're just reinforcing his type cast which leads to a vicious cycle. You might feel that even though the movie is a good 2 hours and 25 minutes that it felt like something was missing. And, that's probably because something was missing, about 80 more minutes. In an interview with Ridley Scott, he mentioned that the theatrical cut is not his cut and that he was planning on releasing a directors cut on DVD that encompasses an amazing 220 minutes. I suppose the production company decided they didn't want to have an almost 4 hour movie in the theatres right now and so decided to chop sometime off, but according to reports with Ridley Scott that's not what he wanted to happen exactly. Going with the cuts and the story, I think part of what was left out might have been more of Saladin's point of view. It seemed as if the movie wanted to show both sides as there were moments were we saw dissent on the Arab side as well as a hint of some motives. I'm hoping that this was something we'll see more of in the DVD cut because it creates a better picture of just what was going on. I would like to say that it would be better to catch this on DVD so one could see the movie in its entirety, but fans of this genre know that the best place to see these movies is in the theatre. Just know that when it comes out on DVD it will be more complete. It's a pretty good epic film. There were some nice fighting sequences and the final siege of Jerusalem leading up to the climax was stunning. Personally I enjoyed it much more than Troy and Alexander of last year. It might not live up to Ridley Scott's Gladiator right now, but come DVD it has a chance I think.