The Crusades (film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The Crusades
21 KB
VHS cover for The Crusades
Directed by Cecil B. DeMille
Produced by Cecil B. DeMille
Henry Herzbrun (executive producer)
Written by Harold Lamb
Waldemar Young
Dudley Nichols
Starring Loretta Young
Henry Wilcoxon
Ian Keith
C. Aubrey Smith
Katherine DeMille
Joseph Schildkraut
Alan Hale
C. Henry Gordon
George Barbier
Montagu Love
Ramsay Hill
Lumsden Hare
Maurice Murphy
William Farnum
Hobart Bosworth
Pedro de Córdoba
Mischa Auer
Albert Conti
Sven Hugo Borg
Paul Sotoff
Fred Malatesta
Hans von Twardowski
Anna Demetrio
Perry Askam
Vallejo Gantner
Cinematography Victor Milner
Edited by Anne Bauchens
Distributed by Paramount Pictures (original)
Universal Studios (current)
Release dates
August 21, 1935[1]
Running time
125 minutes
Country United States
Language English
Budget $1,376,260[2]
Box office $1.7 million[3]

The Crusades is a 1935 American historical adventure film produced and directed by Cecil B. DeMille, and originally released by Paramount Pictures. It stars Loretta Young as Berengaria of Navarre and Henry Wilcoxon as Richard I of England. It was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Cinematography (Victor Milner)[4] as well as for Best Foreign Film at the Venice Film Festival in 1935.[5]


Mostly taking elements from the Third Crusade, King Richard the Lionheart is enlisted in a crusade to bring Jerusalem back into Christian hands in order to get out of a betrothal with Princess Alice of France. En route, Richard meets Berengaria, Princess of Navarre and marries her in exchange for food for his men. During the Crusaders' attempts to get past the walls of Acre, Berengaria is captured by the Muslim Sultan Saladin and he brings her back to Jerusalem and attempts to woo her. Eventually, the Crusaders make their way to Jerusalem and after many battles Saladin declares a truce and Richard agrees. Berengaria and Richard fall in love and all the gates of Jerusalem are opened.



Andre Sennwald of The New York Times called the film a "grand show" and "two hours of tempestuous extravaganza". Sennwald also praised the "superbly managed" staging of the attack on the city of Acre and cited "excellent performances" all around, stating in conclusion, "It is rich in the kind of excitement that pulls an audience irresistibly to the edge of its seat."[6] Variety also praised the film, writing, "Probably only DeMille could make a picture like Crusades – and get away with it. It's long, and the story is not up to some of his previous films, but the production has sweep and spectacle."[7] Film Daily declared it "one of the best DeMille pictures ... The battle scenes are among the most thrilling made since the inception of talking pictures."[8] John Mosher of The New Yorker was less enthused, finding it "rather mild De Mille" that "doesn't compare by a long shot with many other scenes in the Master's collection. There is nothing in the film as astonishing as his Passing through the Red Sea, nothing as amazingly ornamental as his arenas of Imperial Rome." Mosher did praise Wilcoxon's performance, however, especially in his scenes with Young.[9] Similarly reserved, Graham Greene writing for The Spectator described it as "a very long film" with a "stuffy horsehair atmosphere of beards and whiskers", and criticized its historical accuracy as "a little quiet fun at the expense of Clio" with as "complete [a] lack of period sense" as "decorated mid-Victorian Bibles". Greene did praise de Mille's "childlike eye for details", however, and characterized the set-piece scenes (e.g. the cavalry charge and the storming of Acre) as "scenes of real executive genius".[10]

Cultural context[edit]

Lorraine K. Stock writes in Hollywood in the Holy Land, in her chapter "Now Starring in the Third Crusade" that Crusading films have been used by European and American countries to spread a political or cultural agenda. One way with which this is done is through the main Crusading "heroes" such as Richard the Lionhearted and main antagonist Saladin. Many films have used the relationship between Richard I and Saladin. In this particular film the relationship between Richard I and Saladin is connected not only by the conflict of the Crusade but "an improbable, if entertaining, erotic triangle" with Berengaria of Navarre. Stock notes that this relationship and the events which occur can be seen as a reaction to events after the First World War and especially America's isolationism. For example, Richard the Lionhearted at first does not want to get married, so he goes on Crusade despite showing signs of not being religious. Berengaria can also be seen as a "medieval League of Nations" when negotiations between Saladin and Richard I occur at the end of the movie.

A main concern for such films is the way Muslims and Crusaders are portrayed. Throughout the film Stock notes that there are a negative portrayals of Saladin and the Muslims. For instance Stock notes that the Crusaders are all dressed in mail armor with the cross upon their chests while Saladin and the Saracens are dressed mainly in "flowing robes of luxury fabrics" and "silken sashes". The Saracens shown as oriental but also "exotically feminized" according to Stock. Another scene has the Saracens shoot a Crusader messenger, who demand surrender of the city, with one of them wearing a helmet with devil horns upon it. There are other moments with which the Europeans mention devilry or call Muslims infidels. Stock says DeMille "establish the stereotypes of Richard and Saladin that subsequent films would repeat…".[11]

However Saladin is also depicted as an honorable man. In "Islam Muslims and Arabs in the Popular Hollywood Cinema", Anton K. Kozlovic writes "The Crusades was not as enthusiastically received in the West as DeMille would have liked (Bichard 2004, 292) probably because it showed the good and noble side of the Muslims and contrasted it with the darker deeds of Christianity". Saladin in the film refuses to help assassinate Richard I and in fact sends out help to prevent Richard from being killed by the treacherous other Europeans. Kozlovic also notes that when Saladin offers peace to the "foes of Islam", Richard responds by drawing his sword "and saying 'We are going to slaughter you!'". Kozlovic sees DeMille's film as a challenge to the stereotypical norm and negative picture painted of Muslim in Crusader films specifically.[12]


  1. ^ Birchard, Robert (2004). Cecil B. DeMille's Hollywood. University Press of Kentucky. p. 292. ISBN 9780813126364. 
  2. ^ Birchard, p. 283.
  3. ^ "WHICH CINEMA FILMS HAVE EARNED THE MOST MONEY SINCE 1914?.". The Argus (Melbourne: National Library of Australia). 4 March 1944. p. 3 Supplement: The Argus Weekend magazine. Retrieved 6 August 2012. 
  4. ^ "8th Academy Award Winners". Retrieved 18 September 2013. 
  5. ^ "The Crusades (1935) Awards" IMDb 20 October 2014
  6. ^ Sennwald, Andre (August 22, 1935). "Cecil B. DeMille Presents His Latest Spectacle, "The Crusades", at the Astor Theater". The New York Times. Retrieved July 22, 2015. 
  7. ^ "The Crusades". Variety (New York): 12. August 28, 1935. 
  8. ^ "Reviews of the New Films". Film Daily (New York: Wid's Films and Film Folk, Inc.): 16. August 5, 1935. 
  9. ^ Mosher, John (August 31, 1935). "The Current Cinema". The New Yorker: 51. 
  10. ^ Greene, Graham (30 August 1935). "The Crusades". The Spectator.  (reprinted in: John Russel, Taylor, ed. (1980). The Pleasure Dome. pp. 16–18. ISBN 0192812866. )
  11. ^ Stock, Lorraine K. (2009). 3. Now Starring in the Third Crusade Depictions of Richard I and Saladin in Films and Television Series. MacFarland & Company Inc. (2009). Hollywood in the Holy Land: essays on film depictions of the Crusades and Christian-Muslim clashes. Edited by Nickolas Haydock and E.L. Risden. pp 97-122. ISBN 978-0-7864-4156-3
  12. ^ Kozlovic, Anton K. (2007). Islam, Muslims and Arabs in the Popular Hollywood Cinema. Equinox Publishing Ltd. (2009). CIS 3.2 (2007) p. 213-246 Comparative Islamic Studies (print). ISSN 1740-7125

External links[edit]