 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.34.255.156
Genghis Khan.
Magnificent.
A large-scale epic with a cohesive and complex plot, on-location shooting, a brilliant cast, and steady direction. This international effort has a Russian director and, in a stroke of casting genius, Tadanobu Asano, the Japanese superstar, in the title role. His nemesis is a fine Chinese actor and the Khan's wife is played by a Mongolian newcomer with such skill and beauty that she since has become a star, herself.
But, really, it is Asano's film. If you are unfamiliar with his work, see "Bright Future," "Zatoichi," "Last Life in the Universe," or "Ichi the Killer." He is one of the best leading men on earth!
I don't know why Hollywood, with its immense budgets, cannot seem to make a great epic anymore but who cares? This film proves that a very good director (Bodrov's "Shiza" is an excellent "little" film), a highly skilled cast, and good writing still exist.
This, my friends, is an epic for adults. Why invent silliness ("Star Wars") when we have plenty of drama right here in our own little world, with our own creatures?
I can't wait to see the next two!
Follow Ups:
Amazing on Blu Ray and a welcome relief to the Chinese directors (Yimou and Lee) style. My partner (Chinese) thought it was boring, no flying through the air etc.
Like you , can't wait for the next two.
Smart
My big complaint is that Khan goes off on his own and the next time we see him, he has an army. How did that happen? It was a little too magical, but this is typical of Asian filmmaking. I liked it ok.
In spite of all its beautiful visual aspects and historical cues it had too much of this disjointedness. I found myself in almost constant notice and irritation of the "magic", which just didn't work for me.
As you mentioned, he goes away and..............well, it's even more confounding than that. As I recall we see him as a child, impossibly bound up in stocks and completely isolated under impossible conditions of hunger, danger and desperation. Even Chuck Norris would have died. Next we see him with the huge army, etc. There was lots more of the same ilk.
Too much work and suspension for me. I want some continuity.
I always love Asano's work but neither it nor any of the other charms of the film could overcome my ultimate disappointment in it.
I'll probably see it again because I like its kind. I hope I was grumpy and wrong first time around but I don't have high expectations like before.
He hardly was bound and then next at the head of an army. I think you've forgotten his escape, his wandering, his salvation by his blood-brother/nemesis-to-be?
In a biography, even a projected six-hour one, much must be condensed, edited out. I think Bodrov made very good choices, deciding to center on character development and major battles. How tiresome to see him enlist each and every local chieftain. Having seen a couple, the viewer's imagination can supply all the others.
....you're unconvincing. And it's not worth seeing again just to point out the specifics why.It's been a long time since I've seen it and a detail may be fuzzy in my example but there's no question about my memory of the jarring gaps I felt in some essential continuity. I remember actually being angry, feeling frustrated, cheated by the director.
What's "missing" are some final, refining ingredients from an ambitious story teller. Close(ish), but no cigar from me.
It's a schizophrenic movie in that it couldn't make up it's mind between being pop or being art. Ultimately it was neither.
Relatively speaking, it bombed at the box office. Not only in the U.S. but at large. I know that's not the sole indicator of "quality" but it is a key one. And I remember it got considerable pre-release publicity. It just didn't have substantial legs.
I complimented Asano and the pretty colors and nicely costumed natives, what more do you want? ;-)
I didn't say it's a failure, just a disappointment.
Edits: 08/06/09
d
Mongol did that at times for me
thumbs up!
thanks
Phil
the theaters . . . even paid to see it twice (of course, not back-to-back!).
Originally it was supposed to be a trilogy, but even if it ends up a great two parter, I'd be happy.
The standard for cohesive trilogies has been set impossibly high by Peter Jackson's LoTR, and accomplished by shooting all three movies at one time.
There is another "Mongol" movie, entitled "Genghis Khan . . .", released in 2007, that is available through Netflix. It is a Japanese production. It's fairly disappointing and doesn't hold a candle to Mongol.
This one covered his amazing military exploits with minimal manpower. Some historian claimed to have figured it out. The types of bows and arrows used along with quiver location allowed them to fire an arrow off every second or two. This, combined with training on how to shoot accurately from a galloping horse, made the warriors virtually immune to enemy fire and deadly. The guy practiced and was able to do it. He could gallop a horse and fire every second or two and accurately hit his targets.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
Saw it last year. I've been waiting for news on the next installment, but haven't heard anything.
Jack
d
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
