Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Looking Closer

Home
Religious Music & Entertainment
REVISED: First (and Second) Thoughts on "Kingdom of Heaven"

REVISED: First (and Second) Thoughts on "Kingdom of Heaven"

Last updated on: September 5, 2012 at 2:49 pm by Jeffrey Overstreet

REVISED: First (and Second) Thoughts on "Kingdom of Heaven" 2012-09-05T14:49:06-06:00 Jeffrey Overstreet

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I saw Ridley Scott’s Kingdom of Heaven today. I’ll write a review soon. But first, a few comments on how it fits into the trend of new “spiritual” films…

Better to call it Kingdom of Tolerance.

My initial reaction to the movie was negative. But the more I think abou it (this post has been revised), I’m glad Ridley Scott made the film. It gives us a context rich with provocation that will spur viewers to investigate all kinds of questions… and we should, focus on those questions. Whenever the film tries to lean toward an answer, it fumbles around and comes up empty, despite its good intentions. But forgive that initial, ticked-off rant. While I’m still dissatisfied, I’m seeing some of the film’s virtues more clearly now.

Kingdom of Heaven is a movie of and for our times, truly. It tries very hard to talk about a historical clash of Christians and Muslims without offending Christians and Muslims. It does this by portraying a wide variety of religious individuals, and by focusing on sins of arrogance and brutality instead of errors in dogma.

But it definitely has a message to people on both sides. And that message is this: Our highest priority should be getting along, even if that means revising our religious convictions, because if God expects something of us that gets in the way of cultural harmony, then he must not be God at all.

Sounds a bit contrary to Christ’s suggestion that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Further, it suggests that, no matter what religion will tell you, the one true path of righteousness is the path of good deeds… that holiness is found only in our own kindness, not in any commitment to obedience to God’s will.

In one memorable moment, the hero declares that he is going to do something his way, and if God has a problem with it, well, then he’s not God. Granted, the hero is following his conscience, but the film seems to make the conscience something that belongs to us, rather than a nudge from God to give up what we see as our way for something higher.

I shouldn’t be too upset about that — Ridley Scott is an agnostic and I’m sure the film wasn’t written or guided by Christians, so I’m glad the film turned out to be so thought-provoking. It’s not innocent, however, of taking cheap shots at Christianity. Yes, it does represent many of the ways Christianity has been abused, distorted, and misinterpreted, but its recommendation for a better way falls far short of the mark. In trying to come up with the One True Way, they hit all around the truth, and the empty space in the middle is the outline of Christ. Because, after all, no human being is capable of so much good that he can redeem the world and change human nature… no one except Christ.

If the film really grappled with the different claims of either religion, the audience might have to face the fact that the two belief systems aren’t reconcilable, that one makes claims that recommend certain behavior and consequences, and the other leads to entirely different behavior and consequences.

The film breaks it down like this:

There are Christians who make war in Jesus’ name and get it all wrong. And there are Muslims who distort their own religion and make war as well.
There are those who try to follow Christ, but when they don’t get their prayers answered, they despair and decide God has abandoned them. And there are Muslims who just want to get their way too.
Christian leaders either become corrupt and wicked and devilish, or they become absolute buffoons who abandon their convictions at the first sign of challenge. (Muslims, on the other hand… well, we don’t get to know them enough to find any Muslim fools. They’re actually fairly admirable in their religious pursuits.)
But the BEST Christians and Muslims are those who realize that true righteousness is all about deeds… being a good man. Being a good man means knowing that your enemy is really just like you, and when all is said and done, there are really no differences between the two belief systems worth arguing over.

Hey, I’m happy to see that the film is asking us to put up our swords and relate to each other differently. But the tendency to suggest that the BEST man is one who puts aside religion altogether for some generalized morality, that is insufficient to address most of the deep questions that lead us toward religion in the first place.

Thus, Orlando Bloom’s hero is the messiah of the story by recognizing that making war is bad, protecting people is good, and doing good deeds is a sacred path (minus all of that “God” stuff). The religion he arrives at in the end does not involve prayer or submission to a Higher Authority. It is entirely secular. It has little or nothing to do with Christ.

And of course it couldn’t. If it had anything to do with Christ, that would imply that there IS an authority. But no, we can’t have that, because that leads other religions to want to destroy us. We must first and foremost adhere to the religion of tolerance, and keep our other religious convictions to ourselves. It’s more important that we please each other than that we please God.

And what about the Muslims? The film paints them as people of honor and respect, for the most part. Oh, they have a few renegades who get what they have coming, but the movie carefully avoids showing us anything about Muslim culture that might make us question its foundational ideas. We are kept far far away from Muslim women, for example, so we don’t have to wonder about how they’re treated. (One Muslim woman appears, but she’s abused by one of the Knights Templar, not by her own people.)

Overall, Kingdom of Heaven is a well-made film, another fine example of Ridley Scott’s stellar craft. It has strong performances from its cast of great actors (Bloom isn’t bad either). I’d especially point out David Thewlis, for an admirably restrained turn… finally, directors are rediscovering this great actor. It’s great to see Jeremy Irons back in a role of authority and dignity (until the end, when his character abruptly disposes of that intelligence and strength). Eva Green is striking and surprisingly effective as the princess. (But of course, Bloom’s character quickly disposes of any ethical hesitation in sleeping with this married woman.) And Brendan Gleeson is once again a ferocious, commanding screen presence.

Best of all is Ghassan Massoud as a magesterial Muslim warlord named Saladin; he steals the show whenever he’s on screen.

Further, the film boasts Scott’s typically dazzling cinematography. But one of the surprising disappointments is that this established master of adventures and epics would exhibit such a lack of creativity in the battle scenes — Scott basically clones dozens and dozens of shots from The Two Towers and The Return of the King.

The greatest disappointment is that the storytellers seem to think the Muslim way and the Christian way are equally misguided, and that there is a secular path that trumps both of them. This makes it, ultimately, a hollow piece of cultural commentary.

Journal

Kingdom of Heaven

Ridley Scott

Tolerance! (except for Christians)

Previous Post

May 4, 2005

Boxing day.

Next Post

May 5, 2005 THUMBS' UP? What Christian critics say about "Hitchhikers"

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Blog Bloggers on "Through a Screen Darkly" Browser Coming Soon Endorsements Fiction Books Film Forum Film Reviews Inspirations Interviews Journal Kindlings Muse Movie buzz Music Reviews Non-Fiction Books radio Reviewers on "Through a Screen Darkly" The Auralia Thread Through a Screen Darkly Through a Screen Darkly - Bonus Materials Top 10 (or 20 or 100) lists Uncategorized

Select a Month June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 July 2003 May 2003 March 2003 September 1999

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many books are named after prophets in the Old Testament?

Select your answer to see how you score.

5 12 17 21