PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
6,6/10
24 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Arn, hijo de un importante noble sueco, es educado en un monasterio y enviado a Tierra Santa como caballero templario para hacer penitencia por un amor prohibido.Arn, hijo de un importante noble sueco, es educado en un monasterio y enviado a Tierra Santa como caballero templario para hacer penitencia por un amor prohibido.Arn, hijo de un importante noble sueco, es educado en un monasterio y enviado a Tierra Santa como caballero templario para hacer penitencia por un amor prohibido.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Premios
- 3 premios y 2 nominaciones en total
Sven-Bertil Taube
- Biskop Bengt
- (as Sven Bertil Taube)
Thomas W. Gabrielsson
- Emund Ulvbane
- (as Thomas Wearn Gabrielsson)
Reseñas destacadas
Impressive film. i expected purely a crusades film. but it is much more. essentially it is about Arn and his life from childhood to adult. eventually finding his true love but this love is forbidden since he has "sinned with the flesh" as those crazy Christians put it. so he is sent away to the crusades where he encounters Saladin, the oppositions leader. and they come to respect one another as men of honor and wisdom. since this film involved severing of limbs and cutting throats i am puzzled why this film got a pg rating when films like die hard get a 18 rating. the answer is purely because the financial backers of the film had pull with the censorship board. after all this is the most expensive film production in Scandinavian history. cant wait to see the sequel.
This is a movie which is very much like a Hollywood adventure, but in Sweden. This movie could have been really bad if it wasn't for the good acting(Stellan Skarsgård, Bibi Andersson, Michael Nyquist, Gustaf Skarsgård, Sofia Helin and more), the wonderful music and some very good fighting scenes. It's nice too see a Swedish high-budget movie that can be seen by anyone who loves epic tales with good drama. Joakim Nätterqvist is surprisingly good in the leading role as Arn and he will probably become one of Sweden's next big stars. This is a very good movie that i can recommend to anyone who likes adventure, epic, drama and Swedish movies.
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.
it could be defined in different ways. as historical movie, as example of romanticism in hard - idyllic period, as adventure of a kind of self made man, as return to the books of teenager age. in fact, it is more than a correct/good film about a character who becomes useful guide in the essence of Medieval life. because, without be a lesson, it is a precise - delicate pledge for values and gestures and responsibility. and this does it seductive. because it gives an universal story. because it is an admirable work. not only for the fans of genre. but for remind. what is real significant in each life.
I'm sorry I can't think of a better title for my comments. I thought of comparing it to "Kingdom of Heaven", the film trend in Hollywood, and a bunch of other things. But the one thing that really stands out for me is that it's just a good movie.
But the film's history reminds me of a personal anecdote regarding one of my former managers early in my film career, and his effort to get a medieval epic off the ground in the late 80s regarding Robert the Bruce. Without going into too much detail he lost control of the project, and the film that eventually came out of his efforts was "Braveheart", only "Braveheart" was the market competitor that was designed to compete with my manager's film, which never got made.
So it is with "Arn the Templar" in regards to "Kingdom of Heaven", only unlike my old boss's film "Arn the Templar" got off ground, and flourished into an impressive medieval Nordic epic. There's little to criticize about this film, other than the drama itself never really hits a high point. But perhaps that's as it should be, because it seems a bit more real. There's little in the way of over dramatizing the characters, which obviously holds back a more emotional film. This in turn allows the background itself to become a character.
We're taken to medieval Europe and Outremar. The landscape is barren, harsh, and most of all for the audience, real. The north is rich when love is in bloom, but cold when violence reigns. In the wastes of Jerusalem all is hot, parched, and full of death. The desert runs with blood.
The other plus in regards to this film are the costumes. The actors are made to look of the land. Those who trudge the desert are covered in dust, dirt, and caked mud via perspiration. And the costumes look to be of the period. Unlike another film I reviewed, "1066", the armor in this film looks like armor of the period as with the rest of the costumes. Such authenticity helps offset some of the notable lack of energy in the drama. In fact this film's art direction is perhaps superior to "Kingdom of Heaven".
Why is that? Because there is no CGI in this film. SFX for this film go back to golden era Classic Hollywood; i.e. no miniatures and no CGI. Everything you see is real. Which would help explain why this film was so expensive to make for Scandinavian film makers.
Negatives, and there're a couple. There's maybe two, possibly three oddly cut sequences where the alleged 180-degree camera rule is violated, and shots are put together in an unconventional way. But it's so minor that you hardly notice it. The only other criticism I'd make is that the film feels like a Scandinavian effort to make a Hollywood film. Not that that in itself is a bad thing, after all Europes Scandinavian types are finally mining their culture and history for some quality films.
All in all I liked what I saw. In fact I liked it better than "Kingdom of Heaven" for a number of reasons. First and foremost there are no real villains as such, and therefore unlike Ridley Scott's film this movie doesn't present us with one-dimensional sociopaths as the cause of main emotional propellant for the action. That is to say we don't need individual characters to help push the geo-politics. Outremar is there, and so is Saladin's army and the political forces driving both. We know this. Nations fight. They always have. They always will. The collective mind that nations create will always vie for power. It's the story of the individuals that are caught up in the maelstrom that we're interested in. This is what Arn the Templar is all about.
So, in the end does this film deliver? I think it does, but it does lack that extra bit of emotional muscle to really push it into the classic film category. That, and it does get somewhat reminiscent of classic films in the end. Still, this is a very solid piece of commercial cinema that should entertain.
Enjoy :-)
NEW SCREENING 12/13/2010
I ordered a DVD import of the entire mini-series, and all I can say is ... my god, no wonder this thing was so expensive. The producers essentially shot an 8+ hour feature film for was supposed to be a TV series. Mini-series or no, if you spend this much time and care setting up the shots and getting all the particulars right, then is it any wonder this project cost so much?
From Arn's child hood to his eventual death, we look at his life and that of his love interest. But in a movie of the week format, not even a regular dramatic TV format, but a series that took the care and production values of a feature film, and injected them into an epic that makes the old epics pale in length. Imagine taking Coppola's "Godfather" and making a TV series out of it where every shot and prop was tended to with extra care. Well, that's what the mini series is.
Good stuff... even if I can't understand Swedish :-)
Check it out.
But the film's history reminds me of a personal anecdote regarding one of my former managers early in my film career, and his effort to get a medieval epic off the ground in the late 80s regarding Robert the Bruce. Without going into too much detail he lost control of the project, and the film that eventually came out of his efforts was "Braveheart", only "Braveheart" was the market competitor that was designed to compete with my manager's film, which never got made.
So it is with "Arn the Templar" in regards to "Kingdom of Heaven", only unlike my old boss's film "Arn the Templar" got off ground, and flourished into an impressive medieval Nordic epic. There's little to criticize about this film, other than the drama itself never really hits a high point. But perhaps that's as it should be, because it seems a bit more real. There's little in the way of over dramatizing the characters, which obviously holds back a more emotional film. This in turn allows the background itself to become a character.
We're taken to medieval Europe and Outremar. The landscape is barren, harsh, and most of all for the audience, real. The north is rich when love is in bloom, but cold when violence reigns. In the wastes of Jerusalem all is hot, parched, and full of death. The desert runs with blood.
The other plus in regards to this film are the costumes. The actors are made to look of the land. Those who trudge the desert are covered in dust, dirt, and caked mud via perspiration. And the costumes look to be of the period. Unlike another film I reviewed, "1066", the armor in this film looks like armor of the period as with the rest of the costumes. Such authenticity helps offset some of the notable lack of energy in the drama. In fact this film's art direction is perhaps superior to "Kingdom of Heaven".
Why is that? Because there is no CGI in this film. SFX for this film go back to golden era Classic Hollywood; i.e. no miniatures and no CGI. Everything you see is real. Which would help explain why this film was so expensive to make for Scandinavian film makers.
Negatives, and there're a couple. There's maybe two, possibly three oddly cut sequences where the alleged 180-degree camera rule is violated, and shots are put together in an unconventional way. But it's so minor that you hardly notice it. The only other criticism I'd make is that the film feels like a Scandinavian effort to make a Hollywood film. Not that that in itself is a bad thing, after all Europes Scandinavian types are finally mining their culture and history for some quality films.
All in all I liked what I saw. In fact I liked it better than "Kingdom of Heaven" for a number of reasons. First and foremost there are no real villains as such, and therefore unlike Ridley Scott's film this movie doesn't present us with one-dimensional sociopaths as the cause of main emotional propellant for the action. That is to say we don't need individual characters to help push the geo-politics. Outremar is there, and so is Saladin's army and the political forces driving both. We know this. Nations fight. They always have. They always will. The collective mind that nations create will always vie for power. It's the story of the individuals that are caught up in the maelstrom that we're interested in. This is what Arn the Templar is all about.
So, in the end does this film deliver? I think it does, but it does lack that extra bit of emotional muscle to really push it into the classic film category. That, and it does get somewhat reminiscent of classic films in the end. Still, this is a very solid piece of commercial cinema that should entertain.
Enjoy :-)
NEW SCREENING 12/13/2010
I ordered a DVD import of the entire mini-series, and all I can say is ... my god, no wonder this thing was so expensive. The producers essentially shot an 8+ hour feature film for was supposed to be a TV series. Mini-series or no, if you spend this much time and care setting up the shots and getting all the particulars right, then is it any wonder this project cost so much?
From Arn's child hood to his eventual death, we look at his life and that of his love interest. But in a movie of the week format, not even a regular dramatic TV format, but a series that took the care and production values of a feature film, and injected them into an epic that makes the old epics pale in length. Imagine taking Coppola's "Godfather" and making a TV series out of it where every shot and prop was tended to with extra care. Well, that's what the mini series is.
Good stuff... even if I can't understand Swedish :-)
Check it out.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesScandinavia's most expensive film production ever.
- PifiasIn the period this film takes place, Swedes, Norweigans and Danes still spoke the same language, albeit with distinct accents.
- Citas
Arn Magnusson: I don't understand. For killing two men I am set free, but for loving I am punished?
- ConexionesEdited into Arn (2010)
- Banda sonoraEnd Song
Composed by Anders Glenmark and Niklas Strömstedt
Performed by Marie Fredriksson
Produced by Anders Glenmark
Arranged by Anders Glenmark
Published by Blue Cable Music och Nixongs
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Arn: The Knight Templar?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Arn: The Knight Templar
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- 25.000.000 € (estimación)
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 21.287.566 US$
- Duración2 horas 19 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
By what name was Arn: El caballero templario (2007) officially released in India in English?
Responde