New film on crusades distorts history
Washington Times:
"Oscar-nominated director Ridley Scott was savaged by senior British academics yesterday over his forthcoming film, which they say 'distorts' the history of the Crusades to portray Arabs in a favorable light.
...
"The script depicts Baldwin's brother-in-law, Guy de Lusignan, who succeeds him as King of Jerusalem, as 'the archvillain.' A further group, 'the Brotherhood of Muslims, Jews and Christians,' is introduced, promoting an image of cross-faith kinship. 'They were working together,' the film's spokesman said. 'It was a strong bond until the Knights Templar cause friction between them.'
"The Knights Templar, the warrior monks, are portrayed as 'the baddies' while Saladin, the Muslim leader, is 'a hero of the piece,' Mr. Scott's spokesman said. 'At the end of our picture, our heroes defend the Muslims, which was historically correct.'
"Mr. Riley-Smith, who is the Dixie professor of ecclesiastical history at Cambridge University, said the plot was 'complete and utter nonsense.' He said it relied on the romanticized view of the Crusades propagated by Sir Walter Scott in his book 'The Talisman,' published in 1825 and now discredited by academics.
" 'It's rubbish. It's not historically accurate at all. They refer to 'The Talisman,' which depicts the Muslims as sophisticated and civilized, and the Crusaders are all brutes and barbarians. It has nothing to do with reality.'
"Mr. Riley-Smith added: 'Guy of Lusignan lost the Battle of Hattin against Saladin, yes, but he wasn't any badder or better than anyone else. There was never a confraternity of Muslims, Jews and Christians. That is utter nonsense.'
...
"Mr. Riley-Smith said Mr. Scott's efforts were misguided and pandered to Islamic fundamentalism. 'It's Osama bin Laden's version of history. It will fuel the Islamic fundamentalists,' he said."
Washington Times:
"Oscar-nominated director Ridley Scott was savaged by senior British academics yesterday over his forthcoming film, which they say 'distorts' the history of the Crusades to portray Arabs in a favorable light.
...
"The script depicts Baldwin's brother-in-law, Guy de Lusignan, who succeeds him as King of Jerusalem, as 'the archvillain.' A further group, 'the Brotherhood of Muslims, Jews and Christians,' is introduced, promoting an image of cross-faith kinship. 'They were working together,' the film's spokesman said. 'It was a strong bond until the Knights Templar cause friction between them.'
"The Knights Templar, the warrior monks, are portrayed as 'the baddies' while Saladin, the Muslim leader, is 'a hero of the piece,' Mr. Scott's spokesman said. 'At the end of our picture, our heroes defend the Muslims, which was historically correct.'
"Mr. Riley-Smith, who is the Dixie professor of ecclesiastical history at Cambridge University, said the plot was 'complete and utter nonsense.' He said it relied on the romanticized view of the Crusades propagated by Sir Walter Scott in his book 'The Talisman,' published in 1825 and now discredited by academics.
" 'It's rubbish. It's not historically accurate at all. They refer to 'The Talisman,' which depicts the Muslims as sophisticated and civilized, and the Crusaders are all brutes and barbarians. It has nothing to do with reality.'
"Mr. Riley-Smith added: 'Guy of Lusignan lost the Battle of Hattin against Saladin, yes, but he wasn't any badder or better than anyone else. There was never a confraternity of Muslims, Jews and Christians. That is utter nonsense.'
...
"Mr. Riley-Smith said Mr. Scott's efforts were misguided and pandered to Islamic fundamentalism. 'It's Osama bin Laden's version of history. It will fuel the Islamic fundamentalists,' he said."
Comments
Post a Comment