Customer Reviews

Soldier of God

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

Disclaimer: I worked on this film as a stunt man, but that doesn't mean I'm giving it a good review because of that.
The first reviewer is very right... they do make the Christians out to be bad guys, and also the Jews. It's a little off-putting but the story line is very solid and entertaining. I was at the world premiere in Los Angeles and I would say 8 or 9 out of 10 people reacted favorably. I think it's worth seeing at least once.

It's not Kingdom of Heaven and thankfully so, but this movie is not perfect(really is a 3.5 star movie). As usual in this day and age when the West continues to be attacked by Muslim fanatics, the Christians and Jews are the bad guys. As for the DVD, good picture, but I found the dialogue difficult to hear at times - audio recording not the best considering the environment being filmed in? I found the scene with the Jew attacking the camp confusing - why? what was the explanation? It just seemed like a forced scene to cause the Knight to lose it. Anyway, the actor who played the Knight should have played Orlando Bloom's character in KoH - better looking, more rugged and saltier than Orlando.

An excellent dramatization revealing the feelings and passions of those on both sides of the Crusades for the Holy Land.

1) That scene in the beginning where the "good guy" is on the ground about to get killed, but at the last minute he stabs up at the "bad guy" who mistakenly thinks he's already won. Wow. Like I haven't seen that sort of scene before.
2) As is typical with many modern films (such as King Arthur too), this film goes out of its way to demonize Christianity. If filmakers and screenwriters want to make films relevant to modern issues, they should focus on the violence within Islamic history. It is in modern Muslim countries that non-Muslims & Muslim women are second-class citizens, and Muslims aren't allowed freedom of religion to convert away from Islam. Those aren't problems in the vast majority of modern Christian countries.
3) It was totally unnecessary to make the Templar knight go into such a gratuitously irrelevant bloodlust at the end.
4) The sound recording was awful. I could be mistaken, but I think I heard Soheila say that she came from Al-Andalus where "Mamluks" massacred her family and enslaved her. Newsflash: The Mamluks were never in Spain (Al-Andalus). If I heard wrong, I blame the sound recording.
5) It was very confusing why the Jewish trader was involved in attacking the Templar and the Assassin at the end. Sure Saladin's men would do that, but why the Jewish trader too? First of all, while medieval Jews preferred Muslim rule to Christian rule, I don't think it was that personal for them that one would have gone through the trouble to be part of a band of 4 men attacking a Christian & an Assassin. Also, he was a trader, not a soldier.
6) Muslims are supposed to pray 5 times a day. Why were there constant shots of the Templar praying, but no shots until the very end of the Assassin who travelled with him praying?

The movie is good however there is little action. Lots of conversations regarding many existing issues between Muslims and Christians and the idea of the Holy War.

This is a superb movie that may disturb some people with narrow minds. If you are looking for a movie that elevates one faith above another, look elsewhere. This movie is about the respect and camaraderie that develops between two soldiers of differing religions, who come to the realization of how similar their beliefs truly are.

The writers of this movie have obviously done their homework when it comes to the historical background of the story. In fact, it may help if the viewer also has some knowledge of the historical and political situation amongst which this story is set. Specifically, knowledge of the history of the Knights Templar, as well as the Ismaili sect of Islam would be beneficial. I have not spoken with anyone who has seen this movie but lacks the historical knowledge, so I don't know if this movie would be enjoyable to those who are historically uneducated.

This is a thinking movie, not an action-packed thrill ride. Scenes of battle and carnage are few, and not very graphic. It seems that the intent of the movie was to make viewers evaluate their notions of right and wrong, in particular as it relates to possession of the holy land in the middle ages (and by extension, even today). It also touches on human nature, and how difficult it is to accept who you truly are. I highly recommend this movie to all students of medieval history, and those interested in comparative religious studies.

First of all regardless of what other may say as far a historical dramas go "Soldier of God" is fairly accurate. As far as Bias well some of the script is a bit cliche in terms west/east Stereotypes. Both sides exhibit arrogance and ignorance of each others society. Example the Ismaili is an assassin and the Templar is
is suffering from "Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)". Both share a common enemy yet neither are aware of it.

Key to understanding the movie is understanding this is set to the background of the Greatest(disastrous) defeat of the European Crusaders at "The Battle of Hattim". Opening scenes we are introduced Sir Guy of Lusignan, The Templer Grand Master Gerard of Ridefort and Raynald of Chatillon as the military geniuses (from the low end of the Crusaders gene pool) responsible for the defense of the of Jerusalem. Its not bias to say this was a needless waste of European military resources. The plot narrows first becoming first a desert survival tale than becomes a "Bottle Story" confined to a "widows" desert tent (as implausible as that sounds). Their are inferences and nuances that are easily missed. We have seen this before in Twilight Zone episodes and a more recent Russian movie "Prisoner of the Mountain".

As to the movie itself it has a slow if not plodding pace. Dialogue is often difficult to follow. The leading man Tim Abell, the Templar "Rene" is lost in his Rambo like brooding.

We hoped this would be a redeeming film, but there was nothing redeeming about it. The knight becomes a homicidal maniac when he sees blood. From beginning to end, he goes downhill and ultimately destroys everything good in his life. His Muslim companion is portrayed in a much more positive way.

Unfortunately it is not rated, as the violence and nudity would call for an R rating, and then we would never have purchased it. We destroyed the disk after watching it and wished we had never seen it.

An Excellent Movie, best I've seen this year (2009). I wish I could find more like this one.
Bill in Las Vegas

This movie may not be for everyone. A serious subject that has been beautifully directed. Hard to believe after reading about the movie to discover that this is the director's first movie, but that's what it says. A particularly important story given the current situation in the Middle East. First saw this movie at the Berkeley Film Festival (where it won best picture) and have since watched it on video. Highly recommend this film.