Genghis Khan

I stumbled across this obscure movie earlier today and it was a pretty decent film. Based on the life of Genghis Khan, it's a little bit too scampy on the script but the scenery and music are gorgeous, and you can't go wrong when Bob Simmons (the early James Bond films) is your stunt coordinator. Omar Sharif gave a good performance, but I kept getting distracted by Stephen Boyd every time he appeared onscreen (mainly because in this movie he looks A LOT like a young Timothy Dalton, which is not a problem for me since I'm a big Dalton fan). The only performance I had a problem with was James Mason's campy Chinese ambassador. All in all, not a bad way to spend a couple hours.

I haven't seen this in years, but I remember it has some exciting battles, some good acting by Omar Sharif, Michael Hordern and Stephen Boyd, some great acting by James Mason and Robert Morley. I guessing that none of the actors were Mongolian or Chinese. Historically inaccurate, but kind of fun, sort of like some of Erroll Flynn's movies, like "The Charge of the Light Brigade". In recorded history, Genghis Khan was a murderous, merciless tyrant, not the idealist he's seen as in this picture, just wanting to unite all the tribes and live their lives out riding around on their horses not being bothered by the meddling Chinese. Even with all that said, it has some spectacular action and some interesting scenes that do have some historical veracity.

I have to admit I didn't think this film was half as bad as I have been led to believe through negative reviews here on IMdB and elsewhere. So, if it isn't all bad ... I agree it isn't historically accurate but neither was Elizabeth and 100s of other 'historical' films. It is a bit leaden in places, true. Francoise Dorleac gets a bit tiresome although even she has her moments. The script may be a bit dodgy in places but looking at what we get in recent years ... I don't have a problem with Sharif in the title role at all - I thought he was fine. The 'Chinese' being Mason and Morley was distracting but even at their worst these two were always entertaining. Eli Wallach and Michael Hordern make interesting appearances. Even done on the cheap the film doesn't look bad and I enjoyed it better than, say, Demetrius and the Gladiators. And then there was cute Stephen Boyd if all else failed, always a pleasure to watch. Genghis Khan a turkey? Let's just say 'I've seen worse'.

This has about as much to do with the real Genghis Khan as the Hughes film"The Conquerer".If you want to know about the real historical figure,read Lamb's 1920s book.That aside,we have to appreciate the production values of the film.Sets,props,etc.,are all ok.None of these people,however,can scarcely be imagined as Central Asians.Greek Savalas and Alabaman Strode come closest.Wallach,as the Shah,makes an acceptable sly villain,and not an unbelievable Levantine.Everybody else is not only much too European,but much too Nordic,as well.(Sharif is only a minor exception to this generalisation.)And Morley,Mason,and Hordern all act as though they wandered in from a road company of "The Mikado".Watch this film for amusement,and perhaps free-wheeling historical fiction(aka Robert E. Howard),but don't take it too seriously.

I remembered enjoying this film when I saw it as a pre-teen on television in the '60's. I have remained an avid fan of adventure films and epics. So, when it was aired yesterday on TCM, I tuned in with anticipation. It had not aged well. Perhaps all of the anomalies are more difficult for a mature movie fan to accept.

The best parts of this film are the locations, the sets, the costumes and the props. Even so, the sets are never quite convincingly grand enough. They retain the flavor of sets. The photography never captures the locations in a way that conveys the vastness of Central Asia. And the impact of the costumes and props is diminished by the fact that they are at the service of a predominantly Caucasian cast attempting to portray the tribes of Mongolia.

Blonde Francoise Dorleac, who portrays Genghis Khan's wife is the most glaring racial anomaly. But the entire cast is similarly anomalous. At least Stephen Boyd and Omar Shariff aren't blond. But Englishmen, James Mason and Robert Morley look hopelessly out of place. (I personally wondered how people of Oriental heritage reacted to Mason's stereotypical pronunciation of the letter "L" as an "R!") I don't really find a lot of fault with the portrayals offered by Mason and Morley, although I do agree with the suggestion of several reviewers that they seem like they wandered in from a production of the Mikado.

Lastly, I cringed at the soundtrack - typically Occidental-sounding pseudo-epic orchestrations with grandiose flourishes. The heroic-sounding 4/4 marches were typical of the Sword and Sandal epics of the day. Only a stray chord here and there suggested an Oriental setting.

In that era, it was inconceivable to cast Orientals in the principal roles of a film of this one's pretensions. Under the circumstances Hollywood would have done better to simply avoid attempts to depict tales of Asian peoples.

In the end, bizarre casting and completely Occidental-sounding music render this film difficult to swallow for a film-goer looking for anything beyond a shallow adventure story. With the number of Oriental actors in Hollywood films today, a GOOD portrayal of the life of Genghis Khan is ripe for filming!