Why is every protagonist in medieval movies a progressive atheist? I very rarely see protagonists that actually think and act like people did at the time.
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
It would be refreshing, I think they could even satisfy their lust for modern thinking by having a woman give sympathy eyes towards someone being oppressed.
Fricking something at least, these people lived in way more uncertain times, they really did.
Everyone acts differently when you could die easier, food insecurity, plague. War
Death in child birth
Toil ect
Some things are bizarrely modern like how apparently in gladiator Maximus would have been on billboards advertising olive oil according to historians
Details that wouldn't be believed are usually left out
I found Balian to be a boring homosexual. I lost interest in this movie when the blacksmith can suddenly read, know how drip irrigation works, and knows how to be a nobleman and warrior with little to no hand holding or training. He is Rey tier.
Director's cut switches the focus and fills in a lot of these gaps.
He was a military engineer, not sure if that's in the theatrical cut, I've only seen the DC
>when the blacksmith can suddenly read
Why is there a myth blacksmith couldn't read? You realize that 20% of wealthiest commoners could read, and blacksmiths were in that caste.
"Muh source: le Google!"
LOL. Fricking stupid jogger. Why can't you accept that our race is an illiterate moronic and backwards one?
why are you so willing to belive a lie? no many people were well educated especially a military engineer which is what the MC of this film was,guys that build bridges and catapults and are experts in siege warfare thats what military engineers were aka the MC of the film were well educated
He’s an engineer who built siege engines for warring nobility back in France. He even teaches King Baldwin a thing or two about siegecraft
He probably just blacksmiths because of le depression and being burnt out about his wife suiciding herself and being in hell.
Hes not an atheist. He’s actively seeking out God the entire movie – his entire impetus into the Holy Land is the myth that Crusaders dying for God in the holy war can save their souls from Hell (maybe his wife’s too) – Orlando Bloom feels as if he’s damned for murder after killing the priest back home. He desires redemption. If he was an atheist he wouldn’t have given a shit and asked Liam Nesson about all those fantasies in the holy land
Only when he arrives in Jersusalem does he see that most of the people there aren’t fighting for God but for control and personal greed. God does not talk to him.
Only towards the latter end of the movie its hinted God may have been talking to him this entire time, he just wasn’t listening.
Watch the scene with King Baldwin again. Atheists don’t talk like that.
Id anything Bailan is questioning his faith, which is a trop as old a Faith itself. But Id say by the end of the movie he finds his faith, not necessarily in the dogma of the Bible but as a knight who fights for those who cant.
>it was actually very religious how the Christians were the bad guys, all the priests were evil, the Muslims were pious and honorable, and the church was corrupt
This movie was antichristian
no it was very prochristian you just never watched it and get all your opinions from yt homosexuals
I literally watched it in Feb and almost had to turn it off because it was early 2000s militant atheist religious bashing, especially when you consider it in the context of the Bush era wars in the ME.
I myself am theologically antichristian and found the Hollywood propaganda so nauseating I almost turned it off
How anyone could interpret every church character being a corrupt piece of shit and the good guys being areligious christian killers as “pro Christian” is beyond me.
you are a fricking idiot, the priest knight is the most moral character in the film and a literal angel, the protagonist is christian so are his followers, so is the king you seem to want to pretend the main characters simply don't exist
The MC kills priests and a clearly favors Muslims over Christians. He’s areligious but finds his duty bound to Christian Europeans. He’s meant to represent the western man making amends with the fact that Christianity failed to save man and that religious zealotry only leads to bad news. Good people are areligious liberals like him.
It’s the most simple braindead shit Hollywood slaps onto every single movie in this time period and you’re acting like this is some 5D chess play about how it actually glorified Christians? It’s like saying Dances with Wolves is a pro-Yankee
It’s fricking commentary about red state Americans being dumb warmongering brutes using the Bible to persecute good people. You’re supposed to watch this then look at a Nick Fuentes character and go “Woah he’s just like the Templars, I hang out with Muslims and atheists because I’m a good guy, frick the church”
he kills his brother for being a total butthole, once again you are making shit up and ignoring other characters like for instance the older priest in the town who says he's praying for balian and gives him money, did you watch the thatrical cut or something? he fights against the muslims many times their is no indication at all he prefers them to christians, did you just make up a completely different movie in your head?
>the corrupt guy who raped his sister just happens to be a priest, okay. Just like the couple in movies just happens to be a black guy and a blonde white girl
>the kind generous guy who gives money and condolences just happens to be a priest okay
>the wise and noble king jut happens to be christian okay
>the wise and kind knight just happens to be a fricking Angel okay
cherry picking homosexual
>wise knight fights for Christians as his duty but is areligious and prefers the company of his Muslim friends to the zealous Christians
>king Baldwin is Christian but meek and dying, ripe for zealous holy rollers and the church to take advantage of
>movie ends with MC knight rejecting the church and its instutions and finds his “church” in the company of people of many religions
>prefers the company of his Muslim friends
what the frick are you talking about? that never happens
>baldwin is meek
no really stop making shit up
>movie ends with MC rejecting blah blah
no it doesn't at all, again you've invented something that never happened
Who are the towns folk that MC helps?
Is Baldwin a strong armed destroyer of enemies?
You can’t ignore the ending
you mean the ending where brave christians fight a hopeless battle to save the innocent civilians? and Baldwin is strong arming everyone, the most iconic scene in the movie is him strong arming everyone with his huge swinging dick
The ending where the liberal secular warrior makes a brave stand then gives Muslims the holy land walks off with his multicultural and multi religious community and calls them his church?
Based
the entire point of the seige was to make the muslims have to give terms instead of unconditional surrender followed by mass slaughter and rape, this is explained in the movie and what happened irl, you would know this if you were capable of paying attention at all
>and what happened irl
no it's not
IRL what happened is that he paid the ransom of all nobles, but the commoners were brutally raped and enslaved
so it worked out better then? okay
>Baldwin meek
nta but you're completely moronic
>bro Baldwin the dying leper who can’t control the machinations of zealous brutes is actually a Brutish warrior king
He’s meek by the most Christian definition of the term. He’s weak and dying and uses good will between men to hold his country together.
Idk why I have to spell this out to you. You might actually be media illiterate. Like you see things on screens but can’t process them
>brutish
strong and brutish are not the same thing what a bizarre stance to take
>submissive and easily imposed upon
moron.
Blessed are the meek moron
Yes, which doesn't apply to him. moron.
And before you misconstrue it: that doesn't mean non-meek are not blessed.
He’s by definition a meek ruler whose court is in disarray.
Pretending he’s a big strong man conqueror who smites his political enemies is moronic
>court in disarray
Sure.
>meek
No.
>big strong man conqueror who smites his political enemies
Strawman.
Would you like to continue looping?
He’s meek by the Christian definition - the same way Christ was meek
you just made up a completely different movie that doesn't exist
Idk what to tell you dude
You might actually have brain damage if you’re Christian and like this movie
you made up shit that never happened then proceeded to make conjectures based on the things you made up, you should look into getting a CAT scan
Made shit up?
It’s a sin to tell a lie
watch the fricking movie
Pretend you’re a red state American in the year 2004
you made up a different movie then proceeded to get mad about it, you really like to pretend don't you, how about pretend you have a fully functional brain and stop selectively picking scenes and characters misinterpreting them and ignoring everything that doesn't fit with your stupid theory you know the actual movie, not the one you imagined happened the one actually shown on screen
Alright this is going nowhere.
You’re just emotionally offended and can’t make a reasonable argument. Go back to reading the Bible and shut up
you can only invent things that never happened then hold these non existent things up as "proof" you are right, its bizzare
>I myself am theologically antichristian
that explains why you were so confused every good character in the film was either christian or at least religious
The most vocal proponents of Christian were evil. The church instutions we’re all corrupt, people who fought for the holy land were considered evil brutes
The good guys were all Muslim lovers who wanted to live in peace with Islam and the MC basically says he doesn’t believe in the Church
You actually have to be brain dead to think this is a Christian W
ok satan sure thing
>make valid point
>you are le satan
Literally I’m the good guy in Kingdom of Heaven and you are a Templar
The whole point of the movie is that the holy roller religious types are the evil ones.
>antichristian
hello moshe
Try Siegfried ~~*Paul*~~
>This movie was antichristian
It was anything but that. I haven't watched the movie in years but I don't think Christianity itself is ever criticized, only those who misuse it.
The whole point is that religion is misused by man and that people who believe in God shouldn’t be involved in institutions because they inevitability corrupt. “I’m spiritual but not religious” Libtard shit.
This movie is a triumph of multicultural secularism
No. The Crusaders are suffering from the entropy of victory. They won their crusade, and are now no longer united. They are divided between two factions: the King of Jerusalem (who wants to rule his Kingdom and hold the gains the Christians have made) and the Knights Templar (who want to conquer more and bring war to the Muslims). The Templars are shown as morally wrong for killing innocents in order to provoke the war and forcing the King's hand.
There are good Christians (Knight Hospitaller) and bad Christians such as the Priest who steals from Balian's wife's corpse and the Bishop of Jerusalem is basically portrayed as a coward, which is lame because after Saladin captures Jerusalem, I'm pretty sure the Bishop of Jerusalem went out of his way to pay the ransom of as many Christians as he could before leaving. Saladin enslaved all Christians who could not afford a ransom.
The Muslims by contrast are unified in their desire to conquer Jerusalem, even if there is shown some conflict between some of Saladin's more extreme generals, who do defer to their King, but warn that they will not wait forever. The only morally bad Muslim is the one who tries to kill Balian after his shipwreck.
I agree this is a little unfair considering how poorly some of the main Templar Christians and Balian's priest in France are shown. Saladin was by all accounts very chivalrous even to his enemies, freeing many of the Christians who he enslaved upon capturing Jerusalem, but this is a far cry from his line in the movie to give safe passage to "every soul" in Jerusalem. By the standards of the time, his actions were chivalrous, but by our modern standards only enslaving the Christians rather than massacring them is not so morally praiseworthy.
this is correct but balains priest was the old man not his brother, the old man was shown to be a very good person
The guy Balian shoves a flaming sword into wasn't the village priest?
I'm pretty sure it was. The Bishop's men who come to arrest him say that he killed a priest.
I'm 99% sure.
ffs, did no-one watch the directors cut in this movie, no the priest was the old guy who gives the bad preist who is the brother of balian money and tells him to give balian the money and that balian is in his prayers ok now I have to go grab a screen shot ffs
>you are as mad as your brother without him we cannot finish the new church, give him this...
a couple more since this thread seems populated by the dim not saying you are but you clearly missed this
I'll never understand how homosexuals like this see criticisms of the church and organizations within it as anti-christian. The movie serious elevates people like Baldwin IV, Balian, and the Hospitaller Knight as they are what Christians ought to be. Noble, selfless, merciful, and generous not just to their own flock but to everyone they come across (including their enemy.) Meanwhile it shows the hypocrisy of the many who merely used the faith (took the lord's name in vain) as a means to achieve wealth, power, and to slaughter those they viewed as lesser. The movie is very pro-christian. You're just looking at the wrong people for a positive example of what Christ called Christians to be. The Church is not the faith, it is merely a part of it. If you believe otherwise you must be Catholic.
Funny how the other organization (islam) is potrayed as good while the church is criticized
Also the fanfiction saladin was good not keeping slaves LOL
>Church instutions are all shown as corrupt and zealotry is correlated with corruption
>Islam is a United monolith of pious and moral behavior
>MC is areligious and doesn’t believe in religious conflict, just a dude who wants secular peace
Yeah it’s critical of Christianity, especially for 2004
>First portayal of Islam is of barbaric soldiers attempting to murder a our protagonist in the desert
>They are also shown to execute prisoners to the man unless they can be used as a bargaining chip
>Outright murders captured nobility
>implied they will slaughter civilians (and that protagonist and company need to intercept them before they arrive)
>In the end they completely sack the city, loots it, and tear apart every important item in the city like total savages.
>Saladin is shown to mercifully spare all the Christians in Jerusalem because that is what he actually did historically when the actual historical Balian surrendered the city, even though when Jerusalem was taken more than a century before head, the Christians actually did massacre the muslim population.
You are specifically looking for examples to be outraged about while ignoring examples that show both sides are no different than one another with the exception of their rulers and a noble few.
This is a complete misreading and no one sane would take away any of this from the film.
Basically all reviews agree they put Islam in a sympathetic light
>Basically all reviews agree
how about watch the actual movie instead of relying on shitty yt homosexuals, what are these "reviews" of yours?
I’m just telling you that your hamfisted interpretation is contrived and disingenuous
by referencing "pretty much all reviews" I'm not that anon btw but I agree with him, you who have clearly not even watched the movie are trying to say that
>uh pretty much all reviews agree that...
no seriously what the frick have you watched the film? and if not why do you think anything you have to say on it matters? you are literally saying
>uh some things I read or heard about 2nd hand said the movie was like this, not that I ever saw it or even read those reviews, but I heard from this YTgay that thats what people say about it, are you crazy? my favorite ytgay already told me what to think of this
I mean do you have even the slightest hint of selfawareness?
no pretty much anyone sane would have this take since thats what happens in the movie, what are these "pretty much all reviews"? did you watch the movie? what was your take?
Find me a mainstream review right now that shows that argues the film is critical of Islam
I don't watch reviews I watch movies, you insane moron, is your argument really
>uh I heard reviews said its like this
no I'm talking about the film the one i've seen mayn times not what some gay reviewing it thought, what did you think of it? dumb question I know you've never seen it, so stop trying to discuss it, what a fricking weirdo you tell me not what some random dipshit on yt thought, what did you think? go dl the movie Directors cut only watch it then come back and say what you thought of it
>I have never seen this movie just find me some egay who is talking about it
wtf?
>Saladin letting everyone go and not enslaving who couldn't pay ransom
Not true
>Saladin letting everyone go and not enslaving who couldn't pay ransom
That is not what I said homosexual.
not anti-christian, anti-latin. byzantine gang, where we at?
>medieval people couldn’t read
End this fricking meme. Literacy rates appear so low for the era because they were measured by the amount of Latin speaking people. People could read their languages.
There were so many insanely different languages and dialects and non-standardized grammars between regions smaller than a US county that yeah, most people were functionally illiterate unless they knew Latin and no one was writing anything signicant in their local language.
Reading and writing in the native language came up in the 14th century, before it was all latin.
>very rarely see protagonists that actually think and act like people did at the time
Excuse me, mate were you there? No? Well, shut the frick up then.
>act like people did at the time.
Anon read actual medieval diaries or letters, even pagan warlords went phyolosphically new age and talked that there is either no god or that there is only one called by diffrent names
Of course pagans would say things of that sort.
Christcuks seething, typical. Go pray to your israelite on a stick
>uneducated heathen can't spell
you've truly rejected all facets of His wisdom
Frick off and stop your genocidal massacre in Gaza.
There is no group more anti-judaism than Christians. Christianity literally exists primarily to diametrically oppose judaism.
This
Judaism teaches monotheism and Christianity teaches idolatry and man worship
They're diametrically opposed religions
Your nose is showing.
Judaism is Christianity but wrong. Judaism is nitpicking and phrasing things a certain way to frick people over. Christianity is doing the right thing and doing it properly regardless of how things are worded or explained. Judaism is the deliberate, self-serving corruption of Christian ideas.
I mean just read the New Testament my friend!
It's full of 'phrasing things a certain way to frick people over' that is, encourage people to engage in idolatry through manipulating verses from the Hebrew Bible!
No it isn't. Paul's teachings are basically
>just do what we mean, not what we say
Actually the opposite. The Talmud was written specifically in response to Christianity. The most wildly practiced Judaism of today (Rabbinical Judaism) is actually younger than Christianity.
Christianity was formed to oppose pharisaic judaism. Pharisaic judaism was a bastardisation of "YWHWism", or whatever the proto-"abrahamic" religion was called, and was itself the propegator of rabbinic talmudism. Christianity is a reformation of that original religion after the failure of the foreskin cult.
This.
Reminder to any Christians on this board:
Jews believe and teach that Christ is boiling in excrement in hell.
If you believe in Christ, son of God, then you can never make common cause with people who believe this.
Your dogma still states that the israelites are God's chosen people, but Gentiles can share in the blessing that was promised to the descendents of Abraham and Isaac if you accept Christ and become an "honorary israelite". Learn your own faith.
There is no dogma in Christianity. Nowhere in the Christian faith does it say that israelites are still, or ever were, Gods chosen people, that's the whole point. It was formed to directly oppose that idea.
You haven't read the Old Testament, have you?
Yes I have.
>old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
you haven't read the new testament have you?
Abraham is our father,” they answered.
“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would[c] do what Abraham did. 40 As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41 You are doing the works of your own father.”
“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
This is a King Jamaes Version board, anon.
this
KJV or nothing thanks
>israelite on stik
kek
The genocide is being done with the dollars of christian nations. Maybe you should stop being full of shit for once.
There is no group that harbors israelites more than you cucks. Not only did you take the land, and give it to israelites, you have been giving them weapons, tanks, jets, helicopters. ships, missiles, and endless cash since you made their country. Israeli citizens are in your house and senate for fricks sake, they own all of your media, even the ones you might claim as “yours”. You reeeeeeally wanna compare that to China, Iran, Egypt, etc? You really think you cucks are more anti-israelite? Christhomosexuals are the number one reason we have a israeli problem, you massive fricking moron. To top it all off, they aren’t your friends, they aren’t even grateful to you, they fricking hate you. Idiot
>the people supporting israelites are Christians because, well because they publically said that they were out loud.
Read anything written by Peter.
How’s the fendora
Grow up.
Maybe you should try reading, dumbass.
Op will never read just look at him
Pagans believing gods are the same under different names is an ancient tradition that predates Christianity. The reasons why Romans persecuted Christians is because Christians broke this traditional view and said that their god was not the same under a different name.
Thats kind of an advanced form of paganism.
I doubt the Norse thought that about their gods.
Actually the Romans persecuted Christians because the Romans deified emperors under the Imperial Cult and the Christians didn't like to participate in public dicksucking of dead politicians.
They were charged as atheists for not worshipping the gods and made good meals for lions
>morons seriously defending the shit writing
Baldwin was well done. Angel dude aside, the Christian characters are either seething moron immoral hypocrites, basically atheistic, or going through a modern crisis of faith. The Muslims are pious and whitewashed (Saladin letting everyone go and not enslaving who couldn't pay ransom), the fricking patriarch suggests they convert to Islam at the siege. Very war on terror. Ridley Sneed DOES NOT KNOW a good script at this point. A shame too, cool production design and setting.
you forget balians knights especially his main dude they charge a muslim horde 10 times their numbers to protect the innocent
kino scene
Okay cool, but the point still stands, and again look at the templars. They're basically evil, hysterical, cartoonish, they invented some nonsense where they're being executed for some reason? These were a monastic order, it's moronic. Hospitalers GOOD or something.
Or when Balian is on his way to Jerusalem and has a "they're just like us" reaction basically immediately upon seeing Muslims.
There is an annoying modernism and cringe takes to the movie.
you are choosing to excule all the great things about htis film and only concentrate on what you see as bad, its a shame you see it this way because their are so so many great things about it, yes like any main stream well lets be honest a film that might have been main stream 30 years ago and wasn't even main stream when released, it dumbs things down their are villains their are heros their are the people in between their are those trying to do good but are over whelmed by the complications of the situation aka Jeremy Irons character, etc. its strange to me that this was reacted to the way it was but since I don't care in the least about world politics, and at the time the 2nd iraq war was happening it hit a lot of americans in a different way for me I watched it and wondered where the rest of the story was, then I saw the DC and thought it was excellect a throw back to films like el cid stuff I grew up with, i'm only 38 but those old knight films like quevadis elcid knights of the round table etc, it seemed to me like a slightly more modern version of those, those also had many historical inaccuracies el cid for instance died when his horse tripped over a tent pole and he broke his shoulder blade, in the film he dies much more heroically by an arrow to the chest, idk I never had a problem with this movie it was to me like one of the older epics, which is exactly what I think ridley was going for I mean come on gladiator, its not remotely historically accurate but I had seen fall of the roman empire many times before I saw gladiator in the cinema and so while I was debating the film with my friends I understood that it took bits a pieces from actually history to create an historical drama, it was much later that I encountered this dd hatred for this film and the autistic insistence of some that it wasn't historically correct, I never thought it was I just thought it was a well put together story that was very faithful in a historical fiction sense.
Does the director cut’s actually balance the message better than the theatrical?
If so I might give it a watch.
Found the theatrical preachy and unfairly critical
uh yes, you newbie, why would anyone ever watch the theatrical? you only watch the DC for this movie ever the theatrical sucks, damn wtf?
the movie should never be watched in its original form, it should only ever be watched as the directors cut, this is the standard for dc over theatrical, it is the one pointed to showing that when you don't butcher the story and show it as intended it actually works and is a great film rather then a jumbled confusing series of un connected scenes, it is the WATCH THE DIRECTORS CUT movie, never watch the theatrical it should've never been released in the first place only the DC its the actual movie.
>even pagan warlords went phyolosphically new age and talked that there is either no god or that there is only one called by diffrent names
such as?
People are too stupid to relate to a character that hasn’t got a 21st century western personality
What's this requirement for "relating" to a character?
Hollywood liberals only know how to write about themselves, this is why all the "good guys" are progressive liberals and all the "bad guys" are religious conservatives. It's a symptom of having no writing talent and only being able to create what you know.
It's not just "create what you know" but write who you know. I took a writing course back in university and the professor teaching the class, she told us to eavesdrop and spy on people. So writers these days tend to base their character on still living people which I guess makes writing a lot easier- I mean difficult.
I could talk about Dog. But he has no place where we are barking.
Funny since the real Bruce went on an hour long speech about God.
Because Hollywood is full of people(prlbably israeli) who are progressive atheists and insist on the rest of the United States and the world that they must become progressive atheists.
*probably
Freaking spellchecker didn't catch that.
Jews invented spell checker to make you illiterate
So you would you prefer the Grammer Nazis do the spellchecking?
But the character in your pic is Christian and his best friend is literally an angel, what did you mean by this?
Why is Cinemaphile so full of butthurt christcucks now?
This place is barely useable nowadays.
You have an obsessive confirmation bias that you use to validate your own inability to absorb new information and consider opposing ideas.
Idno I think it's best just to jot respond to them
They are like the plague. That rots the board with mind numbing opinions and circular speech. Hopefully they kio themselves off
They think there’s enough of them to take over the board, it’s sad to watch
the atheism reddit made christianity cool again
People have always been liberal, goyim!
We live in a Liberal world, the only acceptable mindset is to be liberal.
A fervently devout medieval man would be totally alien to a modern American Goyslave, it’s also why so many modern people completely misunderstand medieval and early modern thinkers/writers or other notable people being genuinely deeply motivated by their faith and NOT being moronic or insane.
>my turn to finally post it
Is this it, Priest, the Pope's new army, a few crusty b***hes and handful of ragtags?
>Frick I ruined it
AND MAY THE CHRISTIAN LORD GUIDE MY HAND AGAINST YOUR ROMAN POPERY
because it's antisemitic
>The history of the israelites and the Crusades is part of the history of antisemitism toward israelites in the Middle Ages. The call for the First Crusade intensified the persecutions of the israelites, and they continued to be targets of Crusaders' violence and hatred throughout the Crusades.
Oh no.
Why were there israelites in 100% christian europe?
Ask your boy Charlemagne.
Usury is a sin, gotta let the israelites handle it.
Corrupt rulers and nobility profited off it
Reminder that the israelites were notorious traitors and helped the Muslims capture many cities and strongholds in Christian Spain during the Islamic Conquest.
The protagonist literally sees an Angel of God, dummy
Baldwin is a christian and presented as a good and wise ruler
he had lost everything, went to the one place everyone told him he could achieve redemption and felt nothing. sounds pretty straightforward
Not medieval, but Solomon Kane was kino in this regard.
>progressive atheist
He's a bitter cynical man who is protected by god at every turn because he still upholds christian ideals despite believing god has abandoned him.
>muh people were different back then
og shogun miniseries does a good job of it, one of the reasons I prefer that version.
I don't think OP watched this movie. Like, at all.
>why do the people that hate Christians constantly criticize Christianity
what a mystery
>read medieval sources
>people were literally the same as today, not some square state amerimutt evangelist chuds
>Why is every protagonist in medieval movies a progressive atheist?
This is done so that modern progressive atheist audiences can relate and self-insert as the protagonist.
Watch Excalibur
Crusades kino coming through.
been forever since I thought of this one, shame it didn't have a bigger budget, I wonder if the novels ever got translated I always wanted to read them
The king with timothee chalamet
cringe.
Watch the Kenneth Branagh Henry V instead.
>protagonists that actually think and act like people did at the time.
ah yes, a story about a generic normie aping centuries of tradition would be so much more compelling than somebody that stands out and above his peers.
dubs get and God is real and will smite these diggieless heathens
Amen
>I very rarely see protagonists that actually think and act like people did at the time.
You weren't there you literally don't know how they were thinking or acting. It's all guesses made up by "historians"
They should make movies about knights running around killing all the heathens even though they all happen to be brown people from other cultures. Don't make it overly heavyhanded either, play it up as genuine heroism with heroic fanfare.
Iron Clad had a hard core christian templar as the main character
OP is a homosexual who hasn't actually watched anything, not even KoH we've established this
If kings believed god was real, they wouldn’t do anything.
>Kill them all for the Lord knoweth them that are His.
almost no religious person REALLY believes that bullshit
prove: when push comes to shove 95%* of "belivers" would rather live another day then join their god in supposed heaven afterlife
* and 95% of those are 'slims lol
Yeah? You don't decide when you meet God buddy
neither do you homosexual
Of course a homosexual woudn't meet God
Based on popular writings and forced compliance, one might find a depiction of a modern man that isn't woke to be unrealistic too. I can guarantee that the past had plenty of sensible people keeping their heads down to avoid being called heretics.
100%
Actually there were a lot of high profile people who were privately very open minded
One bishop confessed on his death bed that he was a practicing Pagan
It's because pre-industrial people were so far different from modern people they might as just be aliens, and so 1. writers don't understand that and 2. modern audiences won't be able to understand that mindset.
A French knight in the Middle Ages would have had far more things in common to his contemporary Saracen/Muslim counterpart than to a modern Frenchman, even one that is white and "trad".
>I very rarely see protagonists that actually think and act like people did at the time.
Holy shit, can I borrow your time machine and your mind reading machine?
because they’re written by dorks. did you really need to ask that question?
How come the more we abandon religion the more our GDP and general quality of life improves ?
You watched a terrible medieval movie
The most memorable part from this movie is Balwin IV, the good christian.
Shit the only part most people know
>mfw I made thread hating on Kingdom of Heaven, something that's totally unique and hasn't been done by hundreds of over tradcath 14 year olds
Looking German as frick
I see you've never seen Christopher Lee as Charlemagne in The Bloody Verdict of Verden.