El Naser Salah el Dine

The movie accurately demonstrates the true story behind the crusades and their attacks on the middle east. Salah El-Din leads the Egyptian armies to face the 3rd Crusade and recapture Palestine for the Arabs.

The good thing about this movie is its decent fighting sequences and special effects bearing in mind that it was produced in 1963. It also gives a good insight about Salah El Din who is known to the west as one of history's most noble kings. In the movie, the plot shows that Salah El Din too had a great deal of respect for Richard Lionheart of England.

One more interesting point is that the movie shows that Arab Christians were in fact suffering from the crusades and some of them fought side-by-side with the Muslims to defeat the crusaders; this is actually historically documented.

I love films about the crusades.

When I saw this film some decades ago it was on German TV. Some days ago I saw the arab version with English subtitles. Thw whole thing gets interesting when its compared with the crusader film Kingdom of Heaven. - Both films declare that they are extremely outnumbered by the other side (Saladin: 120.000 christians against 40.000 arabs / Kingdom of Heaven: 250.000 arabs against 50.000 christians). Both is wrong. There were 35.000 christians fighting 50.000 arabs. - In the Kingdom of Heavon it was shown correctly that Rainard was executed by Saladin (and not killed in an horoable duel). So one fault to the Saladin film. - In the Kingdom of Heavon film on the other side it was shown that Saladin was forced by the excellent Christian defense to ask the city of jerusalem to surrender. In history Jerusalem didn't make such a heroic defense and was taken easily by Saladin. He was so generous to offer the christians to leave the city and avoid slavery - that was shown correctly in the Saladin Film and very bad in the Kingdom of Heaven film.

Considering the fact that the Saladin-film was made in the 60ties, I can only come to conclusion that its an excellent film and I have great respect for the directors and actors of this film.

It was a pleasure to see this film again.

It is interesting to see an Muslim movie about the Crusades, and this is generally well done. Some of the special effects are, however, a bit hokey.

It is not clear in the movie that Saladin was a Kurd rather than an an Arab. Instead he is presented as a hero for calling for Arab unity in the face of western colonialist intrusion.

In this respect director Chahine makes Saladin a prototype of Gamel Abdul Nasser in calling for Arab unity in order to expel the western intruders.

Overall it is a nice and interesting film, the costumes looks quiet cheap sometimes but it's forgivable. Too bad the film has some non-historic anti-french propaganda (probably because of the influence of the British Walter Scott's works on the subject done in the 19th century), having caricatural vilains like that gives the film a bad taste.

Not only an extraordinary piece of epic filming, but also, in typical Youssef Chahine vein, a very humane view of territorial struggles and religious warfare. A remarkably pacifist outlook for 1963, preaching tolerance and honest diplomacy, decrying the crude pursuit of Glory at the expense of the lives of humble soldiers.