...probably not the movie most audiences expected.
Tools:
Recommend review to a friend »
"Do not scorn a weak cub.
He may become the brutal tiger."
--Mongolian proverb
Note: In the following joint DVD review both John and Eddie provide their opinions of the film, with John also writing up the Video, Audio, Extras, and Parting Thoughts.
The Film According to John:
Many of us, or at least I, have always thought of Genghis Khan (1162-1227) only as the ruthless warrior king who conquered half the world from Asia to Eastern Europe. Russian director Sergei Bodrov and co-writer Arif Aliyev want to correct that impression by presenting the more human (and humane) side of the man. If they went a step too far in humanizing the fellow, well, that's the danger of overzealous filmmaking. It makes for a far more interesting story than merely following the Khan's military exploits.
I hate to admit it, but most of what I thought I knew about Genghis Khan probably came from the outrageously miscast 1956 movie "The Conqueror," starring John Wayne, of all people, as the Mongol leader, and Susan Hayward as his wife. Forget about it (if you knew anything about it at all). Bodrov's "Mongol" aims to set the record straight. Of course, in recounting events that happened over 700 years ago, I doubt that Bodrov and Aliyev's account is all that much more accurate than the '56 version, and by now there's no way to prove the case one way or the other. It's just that Bodrov's film looks and feels right. And the Academy must have agreed because they nominated the film for a Best Foreign Language Film Oscar.
So why would a Russian director want to make a movie about Genghis Khan? To get it right, as I've said; and because in the Khan's day he conquered a good part of today's Russia. For Bodrov, it's a part of his country's history. Plus, Bodrov undoubtedly saw a wonderful contradiction in the dichotomy of a world conqueror and a loving family man, as this movie portrays the Khan, and Bodrov undoubtedly wanted to exploit the possibilities. He does a pretty good job of it.
Now here's the thing: You'd think a movie about Genghis Khan would be all about battles, wars, and fighting, and while there is some of that in "Mongol," for the most part we get a sensitive, personal, though somewhat superficial story of the man. The film covers the Khan's life from 1172 to 1196, the year the Khan united Mongolia under one rule (his own). This would be the twenty-four years of his life from age ten to age thirty-four. It would be in the final thirty years of the Khan's life that he would conquer much of the rest of the world.
No, instead, what we have here is mainly the Khan in captivity, and when he's not in captivity, we've got the Khan not just trying to reunite his country but reunite with his wife. The several battles in between are bloody and brutal, earning the film an R rating, but they are not paramount in the story. I understand that Bodrov may be saving the later part of Genghis Khan's life for future installments of the story, perhaps a film trilogy. We'll see.
OK, first, let's get the name straight. The man the world knows as Genghis Khan was born Temudgin, the son of Esugei Khan, a powerful Mongol clan leader. Temudgin should have rightfully taken over as Khan, or hereditary tribal ruler, when his father died, but in Temudgin's case his father died when he was only ten years old, and another powerful leader wanted the title of Khan for himself, throwing young Temudgin in irons. This would be but the first of many such incarcerations for the poor guy.
Tadanobu Asano plays Temudgin as an adult, and it's fun to see him with his wife and children, especially. Genghis Khan rolling in the grass with his kids is not exactly the picture most of us conjure up when we think of the great warrior. As per tradition, Temudgin picked his bride when he was ten. He chose Borte (Khulan Chuluun), a girl from a neighboring clan. But he couldn't marry her until he was fifteen, by which time Temudgin's enemies had locked him up. Yet when he does finally escape the clutches of his archenemy, he finds Borte faithfully waiting for him. It couldn't be sweeter, something I didn't think I'd be saying about this film before I saw it.
Almost as important in the film as Temudgin and Borte, however, is Temudgin's blood brother, Jamukha (Sun Hong Ley), a childhood friend who grows up to be the leader of a rival Mongol clan. While Temudgin's relationship with his wife is never varying, his relationship with Jamukha changes from utmost friendship to grudging enmity. This is probably the most fascinating part of the movie, and Sun Hong Ley (or Honglei Sun) well deserved his Asian Film Award for Best Supporting Actor.
So, what we've got in "Mongol" is partly a story of dire tribulation, partly a story of undying love, partly a story of strained friendship, and partly a story of war and retribution. That's a lot for a movie to cover in two hours, but Bodrov manages by keeping things simple and direct.
Even though I found much of the proceedings slow going, perhaps overly meticulous in their attention to minute detail, there is no denying the grandeur of the filmmaking. Bodrov shot on location in China, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan, with the cinematography of Rogier Stoffers and Sergei Trofimov vividly capturing the vast panoramas of mountains, forests, plains, and steppe. This is a beautiful film to watch, despite its occasional bloody battles.
It's also worth seeing how harsh life could be in the twelfth century, even for the ruler of a country (or perhaps it was even worse for the rulers or would-be rulers). Likewise, it's worth seeing how a leader such as Temudgin grew and developed, even if the development is rather shallow for so important a character. We see the man's decisiveness even as a child, and we see it increase when his enemies take his wife from him, and he determines to get her back. Yes, getting his wife back preceded his conquering the world. First things first; he loved her more than he loved all the world. The man had his priorities straight.
Primarily, the film explores what it meant to be a Mongol in the twelfth century, with their fierce tribal loyalties, their rivalries, their customs and traditions, and their unyielding trust in fate. "Mongol" is an enlightening as well as entertaining film.
Yes, "Mongol" is overly melodramatic and spends too much time brooding over lost love and lost friendships, with a haunting score by Tuomas Kantelinen hanging heavily over the whole. I would imagine a lot of viewers just want to get on with the action and watch the blood fly. They'll find that in several scenes, most notably in the final battle, which indeed looks epic in scale. However, there is a rather shaky transition at the end of the picture from Termudgin in prison to Termudgin suddenly leading half of Mongolia in battle against his rival, a transition that looks as though Bodrov needed more time for his film to unfold but didn't get it.
Average user rating (1-5):
Not yet rated.
Not yet rated.
[release]24757[/release]