Tillat meg å gjenposte en post av meg selv fra et annet forum:
"
Let's put it this way:
Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith (who was brought on early as a consultant and then resigned in protest) and Amin Malouf (author of The Crusades through Arab eyes, the most misunderstood book on the crusades in the world) have both critized Ridley Scott heavily for relying on romantizised nonsense like The Talisman (the book the movie is based on) with Bad Christians and Good muslims all over the place. Amin Malouf has been quoted as saying:
"It does not do any good to distort history, even if you believe you are distorting it in a good way. Cruelty was not on one side but on all."
Professor Riley-Smith has many rather negative comments on the movie on the bad guy issue:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...18/ixworld.html
Considering that he withdrew as a consultant I suspect he has a good base to judge from, unlike UCLA professor Khaled Abu el-Fadl (who says just about the opposite in a recent NY times article).
The gear doesn't look half bad, though. A lot of it is about a 100 years outdated in 1187, but hey, Hollywood brought us englishmen wearing chinese armour (Braveheart), so it's a step in the right direction."
Utstyret ser ok ut, og trebuchetene i beleiringscenene ser riktige ut selv om brennende artilleriprosjektiler er noe jeg personlig er møkka lei av.
Vi får se i mai!
Endre