2/10
A painful take on a masterpiece
27 January 2012
It seems to me that very few who reviewed this movie has actually read any of the books. That's alright, it only means that you were less disappointed than me. I personally hold Jan Guiliou as my favorite writer, an because the Arn series was the first of his books i ever reed, it has been a standard i compare his work with. The book series is the most amazing books i've ever reed. The characters and plot really sticks out as interesting for someone who are more interested in history than the common man. This is why i had great expectations for the movie, and was overly filled with joy when i heard they were making it.

I'm sure my review has hinted that i wasn't satisfied with what i saw, and this is correct. I'm not going to complain about the actors and locations, which in some choices wasn't remotely comparable to the books, what i however want to complain about is the extreme liberty the director has taken in changing so much of the original plot, that i couldn't recognize the original book i loved so much.

First off, Who makes 2 movies out of 3 books ?, they couldn't possibly have thought that was a good idea. The first movie is "The road to Jerusalem" and 15 minutes of "The knights templar" i felt empty and disappointed when i left the movie theater that evening.

Another thing is that the films are just a love story. Guiliou's original books was a story of life in Sweden during the middle ages, where the love story between Arn and Cecilia was the red thread that combined the books. In the movie this is the main plot, the secondary plot, and the rest of the story is left for scraps.

My recommendation is that instead of watching the movie, you read the books. They are more entertaining, and you won't feel that you just wasted part of you're life.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed