Arn: The Knight Templar (2007)

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Highly Overrated But Still Good

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

The one main reason why I wanted to see this is mainly because of the caliber of the cast. I enjoyed watching Gustaf Skarsgard, Vincent Perez, Bibi Anderson and Stellan Skarsgard in previous movies. With one or two recommendations I decided to take a look at this.The movie's plot (remember this is the 3 hour version) is that Arn is a boy who fell off a tower trying to catch the prince's crow. His parents pray a deal with God that if he survives to put him in a monastery. He survives and years later he is a monk who is taught to fight by the former Templar Guilbert (Vincent Perez). He soon falls in love with a woman named Cecilla. Soon after that it is revealed she bears his child. Arn and Knut (The rightful ruler of the throne but now isn't because his father was killed by the current king) go and ambush the King and kill him. Because Cecilla bears Arn's child and that he killed the king when Arn and Cecilla weren't married. Cecilla is sentenced to 20 years at a nunnery and Arn is to be sentenced at a monastery, then after that Arn is asked to fight at The Crusades.Cecilla goes through horrible torment and Arn goes through battle after battle. I'm not really going to go into detail though. After that He returns to his wife and son. Knut is soon on his deathbed and the only way to make peace is to hand over the throne to the son of the former king that Knut decapitated all those years earlier. The only condition that this king has is that Knut's son Erik is to take the throne after him. Arn asks for a person who he trains to observe The King and his actions towards Erik. The King asks this person to go out to a river and drown all three of Knut's children. He seems to comply until the last minute and kills the 2 guards observing him, in collateral damage Knut's youngest son dies. Arn then leads one final battle against the king.The character development of this is really well done. The pacing of this movie is just right (which is why I will never watch the 2 hour version). The Acting (as I suspected) is great. I would recommend this version to people who have seen the 2 hour version or those who want to see a good movie about the Crusades.

I liked this movie because it didn't come from Hollywood. That already earned it several stars in my book. This movie simply tells a tale of the trials of a knight in the Holy Land, and at home. The writer did excellent by not giving the hero modern, biased, progresive views such as were on display by Orlando Bloom in "The Kingdom of Heaven." Hollywood loves to portray Crusaders as bloodthirsty maniacs, and the Muslims as peaceful pious victims. History proves that both sides had both kinds of men. Movies are good when they simply tell it like it was, not like revisionists want us to ee it. I now look for foreign made films on history, especially the crusades. I avoid Hollywood like a dark age plague.

the first good point - atmosphere, recreated with subtle art. the second - performance of actors far from cage of mannerism. more important - the management of each scene. love story, historical fragments, moral lessons and the game with basic values of life is not easy job. but, in this case, the solutions was smart and interesting. because it is more than story of an hero in dark times. it is more than tale about fight and history in "ad usum delphini"clothes a map of existence , sacrifice and questions in a period who may be the present. only skin is different. the great virtue is science to present a credible face of Crusaides in middle of historical adaptation fever. and result is not bad.

Sometimes I wonder whether the writer (and the screenwriters) did not want to tell us that in the Middle Ages at least,Muslims were more tolerant, chivalrous ,human and clever -the Europeans could eat their heart out as far as maths,medicine ,architecture and astronomy were concerned-than the believers of the"true" cross.Mother superior (played by Bergmanian Bibi Andersson I did not even recognize)is actually more sadistic and more dreadful than Saladdin and his warriors.It's never boring but it's never really exciting as well;as an user points out,it never peaks although there's a good chemistry between the two principals -who anyway do not share many scenes-The ending may seem original till you realize it is actually borrowed from Anthony Mann 's "El Cid" (1963).We were told the authors had a mini-series in mind and I'm sure it would have worked better that way.But you could do worse than rent this epic story which keeps you interested till the end ,in spite of a certain monotony.