NOTE IMDb
7,5/10
3 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAfter Saladin's victory over the King of Jerusalem, a peace treaty is signed between them, but the commander of the Crusader army, Renaud de Chatillon, slaughters a group of pilgrims going t... Tout lireAfter Saladin's victory over the King of Jerusalem, a peace treaty is signed between them, but the commander of the Crusader army, Renaud de Chatillon, slaughters a group of pilgrims going to Mecca. Saladin then decides to take revenge.After Saladin's victory over the King of Jerusalem, a peace treaty is signed between them, but the commander of the Crusader army, Renaud de Chatillon, slaughters a group of pilgrims going to Mecca. Saladin then decides to take revenge.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
Ahmad Mazhar
- Saladin
- (as Ahmed Mazhar)
Omar El-Hariri
- King Philip of France
- (as Umar El-Hariri)
Ibrahim Emarah
- Alfadel Judge
- (as Ibrahim Emara)
Layla Fawzi
- Virginia, Princess of Kerak
- (as Leila Fawzi)
Hussein Riad
- Hikari
- (as Husain Reyadh)
Avis à la une
10nmlynn00
One of the greatest Egyptian and Arab movies of all time. It is a beautiful portrayal that is worthy of Salah al-Din. It shows Salah al-Din as the man he was, one of the greatest leaders of all time, a man at all times humble, who was able to unite a fragmented Arab world, and free it from its invaders. It is an enlightening film for most Westerners who only learn of the Crusades through traditional Orientalist views. It does a great job in eliminating typical stereotypes of the Arab world at the time, but is fair in its representation of both sides. The film shows the aggressiveness of the Catholic armies, but also the treachery and deceit that plagued the Arab world. It also treats Richard the Lion-Hearted with the respect he deserves, and the most spectacular scene is a split screen comparison of Salah al-Din and Richard, that shows how the men were so alike, but caught on opposite sides of a war. Fantastic film, a must see.
10nadir-10
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.
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.
10tookus
Unfortunately the times when these great historic movies where done in Egypt are long gone. Elnaser Salah el-Dine is one of those rare movies that were made with these production values in the Arab world and in the hands of Youssef Chahine has became sort of a legendary film at least in where it came from. Despite the fact that it relatively flopped in theaters partly because of how huge the production is and how little the theaters these days in the Arab world can cause profit it became one of the most loved and respected movies and watched by everyone when aired on television. Historically it didn't bring everything about the hero, that's not why it was made.... it depicted a certain section in the history of the crusades without looking at the roots of the characters because there's only so much you can show in a limited time motion picture. Anyways, the movie showed the nobility of the leader, the power of his faith, his distinguished skill in warship, and most of all his human side. There's a real reason for why he is seen as one of history's legendary warriors in the east and such a respected figure in the west as well..The movie did him justice there, and didn't drift away from being very entertaining. Frankly not many movies or series in the middle east can make you feel the period that it's supposed to be in, but this one doesn't distract you in thinking about that manner because it seemed so real, the way it should be. And on the other hand Chahine being a Christian himself diminishes the idea of the movie being biased against Christianity. An amazing movie I enthusiastically recommend to anyone...
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.
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.
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.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis movie has been Ranked among the top 100 movies in the history of Egyptian cinema.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Saladin?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Saladin and the Great Crusades
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant