remake?
-
SuperWittySmitty — 10 years ago(March 24, 2016 06:01 AM)
Wow, aren't you a piece of work. Obviously, you've missed the point of this story. Only when the Christian and Muslim forces allied together to fight the evil on BOTH sides was peace finally obtained. Your outlook on this film was apparently obscured by your hatred, bigotry, and seething resentment over your own irrelevancy.
-
allan-crook — 17 years ago(August 16, 2008 12:59 PM)
no.no.no.noooo
this is a fine film. most current remakes are disasters.
i hear the ladykillers and dambusters are being mooted.
it won't be in 70mmm either.
two fine uk mvies, best left alone. CGI not required. -
wmileo-1 — 18 years ago(January 30, 2008 01:57 PM)
In this PC world, EL CID would have to be cast in a negative light. The invading followers of the "Religion of Peace" would have to be the good guys and El CID would be a racist "Christian" A$$. I can not see a remake going anywhere. If they told the truth, The Islamofacists would have the writers and actors killed like they did to Van Gogh in Holland a few years back.
-
themill — 18 years ago(January 31, 2008 12:41 AM)
Uhsort of the way those crazy Iranians had Snyder, Miller, et. al. killed for making "300?" Actually, the great thing about El Cid is how it shows Christians and Muslims working together for a common good. I think you could probably get a good remake out of this, but I don't expect to see one. Good epic film-making went out with Braveheart, sad to say.
-
themill — 18 years ago(February 19, 2008 08:38 PM)
"Non-sequitur; the Persian Empire wasn't Muslim."
For sure, but 300 certainly pissed off many Iranians, unless the news items I was reading at the time were mistaken. Maybe it was a bad analogy. My point was that a film about a historical conflict doesn't seem likely to set off that kind of violence, especially a film that treats the group in question as sympathetically as El Cid does. -
s007davis — 18 years ago(February 20, 2008 06:53 PM)
I would never want anyone to remake this film. It's perfect as it is. As wmileo-1 so aptly pointed out, today's PC Hollywood would destroy what made it a classic film in the first place. No contemporary actress could do justice to lovely Sophia Loren's Jimena. And no contemporary actor could come near to duplicating Charlton Heston's masculine strength, integrity and larger-than-lifeness as El Cid.
-
russedav — 12 years ago(July 26, 2013 07:45 AM)
There seems to be a contest for who can be most ignorant about what both Christians & Muslims actually believe. I thought of that near the beginning at ~10:40 when I heard El Cid exact an oath/pledge from his prisoner never to attack King Ferdinand's kingdom again, whereas according to Islam's taqiya absolutely anything goes (lying, stealing, deceit, killing, raping, etc.), so long as Islam prospers/is promoted thereby, preferably by military advancement/conquest. Most Christians and secularists (most of whom have had some Christian influence regarding telling the truth) haven't a clue about this, expecting Muslims to tell the truth, which shows as gross a misunderstanding of Islam as there is of Christianity when so many foolishly equate it with catholicism or conservativism, in spite of the fact that some of the worst persecutions of true Christians have been at the hands of catholics & conservatives, I being one, banned from "catholic" & "conservative" websites alike for pointing out from the Bible how God condemns and prohibits what they claimed. See thereligionofpeace.com for what Islam really is, and desiringGod.org for a rich Christ-centered presentation of the Christian faith, unlike so many which rather wrongly make man so much the center that can make salvation impossible.
-
Karl Aksel — 9 years ago(May 14, 2016 05:42 PM)
There seems to be a contest for who can be most ignorant about what both Christians & Muslims actually believe.
I'll bear in mind that you yourself said that.
I thought of that near the beginning at ~10:40 when I heard El Cid exact an oath/pledge from his prisoner never to attack King Ferdinand's kingdom again, whereas according to Islam's taqiya absolutely anything goes (lying, stealing, deceit, killing, raping, etc.)
No, that is not what taqiyya is. Not remotely. Taqiyya is simply that a Muslim is excused if he renounces his own faith to save his own skin, in facing persecution or death. It is specifically that, and nothing else.
Most Christians and secularists (most of whom have had some Christian influence regarding telling the truth) haven't a clue about this, expecting Muslims to tell the truth, which shows as gross a misunderstanding of Islam as there is of Christianity when so many foolishly equate it with catholicism or conservativism, in spite of the fact that some of the worst persecutions of true Christians have been at the hands of catholics & conservatives,
Like you said, there seems to be a contest for who can be the most ignorant about what both Christians and Muslims actually believe. You are a shining example. Not only do you seem to get your information about Islam from propaganda sites, but you also seem to be woefully ignorant on the history of Christianity. In the course of history, Protestants have been every bit as eager to persecute heretics as Catholics, if not more so. Catholics, at least, allowed the defendants the right to an attorney. Protestants did not.
I would like to add that the ridiculous claim that either Protestantism or Catholicism is somehow
not
Christianity, is not worth taking seriously. And
will
not be taken seriously by anyone who does not already share that opinion.
I being one, banned from "catholic" & "conservative" websites alike for pointing out from the Bible how God condemns and prohibits what they claimed.
Being banned from websites is not the same as being persecuted. I am willing to bet that you were banned for your haughty and condescending attitude, perhaps even obnoxious behaviour, not because of your faith.
See thereligionofpeace.com for what Islam really is, and desiringGod.org for a rich Christ-centered presentation of the Christian faith, unlike so many which rather wrongly make man so much the center that can make salvation impossible.
Those are propaganda sites. But given what you have already posted, I am not the least surprised that you unashamedly link to them, apparently thinking them good, objective sources. -
thomengel-1 — 17 years ago(August 24, 2008 12:03 AM)
Remaking this film certainly couldn't hurt anything. It's not like it's really a classic. Actually, it's probably one of the worst epics made during that era. Charlton Heston is just downright awful. How that guy ever got a movie contract bewilders me. He's about the most non-actor of any of the Hollywood non-actors. It isn't fair to judge an actor by the movies he's been in, and Heston has been in some fairly famous movies, but he's a drag to watch. John Wayne is a much better actor than Charlton Heston, and Wayne is pretty mediocre.
-
russedav — 12 years ago(July 26, 2013 07:29 AM)
Though everyone has a right to his opinion, thankfully many aren't as ignorant about movies and actors as this drivel groundlessly impugning Heston's considerable abilities. As the saying goes, those who are able do or teach (Heston did both), those who aren't able criticize, like thomengel-1.