For me if I had to pick a good contender it would be the UK version of The Office.
I know many tend to debate how Ricky Gervais really fell off and how he repugnantly acts like a whiny centrist edgelord but me personally IMO I actually don’t think he was ever funny not even a little.
His big break through television was just so painful to sit through it’s so charismatically boring the characters are completely generic at best (notably Tim) or straight up insufferably unlikable at worst (especially the protagonist David FUCKING Brent) and most importantly the humour is just embarrassing.
Always seemed like The Thick Of It but without the nuisance tongue in cheek and charming satire.
I’ve seen it noted by better critics than me that when people criticize movies by fixating on hyper-specific inaccuracies or contradictions (the Cinema Sins method) they’re usually expressing the fact that there were deeper underlying flaws in the movie itself that meant it failed to give them a reason to overlook those hyper-specific complaints.
After all, if the things you’ve listed here were reason enough to hate a film, on their own, you’re basically just saying that you shouldn’t watch movies. If you know enough about where and when a movie is set, you’re guaranteed to be able to find those kinds of inaccuracies in any movie you watch, with very few exceptions.
The real problem here, I suspect, is that Kingdom of Heaven, as released is a bad movie. The director’s cut, on the other hand, is incredible. Ridley envisioned this as a sprawling Lawrence of Arabia style historical epic, and that’s the film he made. That film was then butchered to fit what the studio thought would make a good theatrical release.
The director’s cut will not, to the best of my recollection, solve any of your specific complaints, but it is a far, far better movie.
Of course, it is possible that the version you saw was the director’s cut, in which case I’m very sorry, movies set in any version of the real world just might not be for you. Or you’re just not really a fan of historical epics or something. I dunno, you do you.
I watched the Director’s cut. It is a ridiculous movie lol
Sorry but the Hollywoodisms and bad history aside, it is also just orientalist as all hell and I will hold the movie’s pretense of being a historical movie against it when it is so deeply revisionist
A movie I did really enjoy was Waterloo for example. There are plenty of movies where I can forgive some artistic license. Hell, I like Chernobyl even though yes, that is also revisionist, but I understand the choices that were made. For Kingdom of Heaven though, it’s clear Ridley Scott did what he is known for: putting a hatchet to real stories and chopping them down until there’s nothing left.
See, those are all really interesting and meaningful criticisms, and for the life of me I cannot understand why you didn’t lead with that instead of trying to nitpick how they got access to wood in a region known as the fertile crescent :-P
I’m a pedant! I’ll admit it!
Fair. If we’re being pedantic though, come on dude, they had wood in Jerusalem. Like, a lot of it. There are contemporaneous depictions of siege towers being used in the first siege of Jerusalem.
That’s fair!