Arn: The Knight Templar (2007)

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

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.

Arn is a two-hour movie that could be summed up as "terrible things happen to Arn and Cecillia for no apparent reason, then he dies and she mourns."The hero and heroine do everything right almost to the point of being saccharine; he is the devoted Knight, she the pining lost love. Both are dedicated, strong, heroic characters - and both suffer terribly despite their heroic qualities.Perhaps this is how life often is; but by choosing to glorify it, the author spits in the face of his audience. Two hours of thinking "well, you know, eventually their strength of character will be rewarded" only to find out I was wrong.According to Rand, art "is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value-judgments". I wonder what sort of artist enjoys torturing his characters for no apparent reason? Apparently the sort of artist who enjoys torturing his customers as well.

While this type of film will always be compared to big budget films such as Troy etc, Arn had character and a realism that is not often present in blockbusters these days. Troy may have cost more but Arns fight scenes were believable and the costumes were excellent. The scenery and sets were also of a high quality. The acting was very good throughout and I had sympathy for the characters. This film is a great example of what can be produced by European film makers using traditional and authentic material and actors/extras. Arn left me with the thought that I had been well entertained and that I would like to have seen more.

I must admit I am pleasantly surprised by this project. The scope of the story and the cinematic achievement were quite good. It's true, the story had some holes, big holes in it, but considering the time of the story it covered and the multitude of sub-plots I think they made quite a good job at it. Take into account that the story starts somewhere in rural Gothland, a kingdom before the formation of Sweden, then stretches for many years.. and distance, all the way to the Holy Land and the fall of Jerusalem. It is a story about the coming of age of a true knight, his unfortunate love story, sibling betrayal and it's consequences, military rivalry among those who should be united and an unexpected friendship with an honorable enemy. I was also pleased with some of the acting (good on the part of Joakim Nätterqvist, good enough for Sofia Helin) although I cannot understand the choice of an actress that looks much older than her characters' love interest. But the fight scenes where decent enough, the battles were made to look quite realistic, even though you can tell there probably weren't enough money for lots of extras to have. What I did not like at all was how much religion was added, but, I guess it all adds to the flavor of the times, supposedly. All in all, a movie I would recommend for anyone who likes historical films and.. Swedish cinema.