Arn: Tempelriddaren

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.

Once I heard about this movie I felt pride for my country for making such a big production, hoping for it to be able to challenge big productions such as Troy, King Arthur and maybe even 300. I hoped so, but I expected otherwise. I know my epic movies pretty well, and in the trailer some months before release I notices some bass tones of the music score were identical to a part of the Gladiator music. I feared a cheap American epic movie ripoff with flawed actors and fake-looking special effects. Luckily, I did not see what I expected.

Arn has one big difference from the epic movies we know - it is made in a country where an epic movie of this size has never been made before. Naturally, many will expect to see the same of what we've seen in epic movies so far. Many will expect to see a hero or a group of heroes slaughtering hordes of enemies for the pure obsession of it that they call glory, but they won't. What they will see is the tale of the medieval life told in the most simple way. A mother promising away her son to God to serve him. The obsession of power between kings. To get to know your worst enemy and respect him as a man, and to meet anguish of having to kill him on the battle field without really knowing why.

During the first half of the movie at some point the storytelling got a little over hand, which is understandable while the balancing between being informative and entertaining is a hard thing to perfect. Though, it would be a shame going to the theater to see this film waiting for the heads to start rolling to the right and to the left, missing out the whole experience of having an honest story about the medieval life being told right in front of your eyes by common people.

This is the first part of the story of Arn. Now I have my hopes up for the second movie to round up this tale as well as or better than this first part started it.

It seems that most reviewers here want sword fights and action.

Arn is more interesting than that: it is a surprisingly complex film about honour and medieval notions of chivalry and values.

We REALLY enjoyed this - the characters are fleshed out and the plot develops at a drama pace, rather than at a dramatic pace. It seems a lot of thought went into the characterization and settings - this did cost $30,000,000 making it the most expensive Swedish film ever - and it did very well at the box office.

Those wanting just action had best look elsewhere those wanting both action and character, and a real exploration of the values of knighthood then this will definitely be your cup of tea and something to savour.

It is kind of like Braveheart in its values, and less like Kingdom of Heaven than you'd expect. Yes, it is quite elegiac, and that fits its Nordic roots well.

Overall, one of the better films about the crusades and the choices made for people living in a time when individual freedom was lost and subjugated to church and kings.

Recommended

Sweden in the 1100s is the backdrop for the troubled love story between nobleman boy-turned monk-turned-knight templar Arn and neighboring girl Cecilia- before he is sent off to Jerusalem in the crusades and she into a convent- plus the rivaling royal clan struggles for power in the nation. I haven't read the bestselling books which this is based on, and knowing this is a part-saga and soon TV-series to be, I can somewhat overlook the gaps in storytelling.

What I do enjoy is a sound, intriguing (especially the scheming between the church and royal clans) and reliable medieval tale - with heavy doses of romance, monastery/convent dramatics and a little touch of "Kingdom of heaven"-battling in the end - that unfortunately never quite peaks. As a cinephile Swede, I know the country's market a bit, and notice that the filmmakers are SO focused on keeping a safe, steady course not to fail with such a big production ship like this, that they end up with no real climactic cinematic highlights to speak of. Rougher camera-work and sets might've heightened things a bit?

For that reason it's very evenly paced, never boring and quite nicely produced. But with a major flaw: Arn remains very stiff and sketchy as an adult character. We never personally get to know him (he has SO few lines!) as to really understand why Cecilia loves him.

All in all, 6 out of 10 from Ozjeppe

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.