Gengis Khan il conquistatore

Irving Allen went all the way to Yugoslavia to make this foolish attempt in Technicolor and Panavision to capitalise on Omar Sharif's new-found celebrity which actually carried a disclaimer from Talking Pictures for the myriad racial caricatures on display.

The international cast represents every conceivable ethnicity except for a bona fide Mongolian. Familiar Asian types include Stephen Boyd, James Mason, Robert Morley, Michael Hordern, Telly Savalas, Eli Wallach, Woody Strode, Yvonne Mitchell, Kenneth Cope and Jacqueline Pearce (the latter pair playing Francois Dorleac's brother and Wallach's daughter; the craziest line being Miss Dorleac's description of herself as "ugly-looking").

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!

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 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.

As an user has pointed out ,this is the last of the spectaculars of the late fifties/early sixties which began with De Mille's "Ten Commandments" and included such works as "Ben Hur" ,"Spartacus " (which was more Kirk Douglas' work than Kubrik's ),the highly underrated "Cleopatra"(when will we see the uncut version?),Mann 's "El Cid" and "Fall of the Roman Empire" .

This is the last hurrah,but it's a bad film.James Mason and Robert Morley do not seem to take their roles seriously (as Chinese characters!!)and their playing is deliciously tongue-in-cheek.But all the others seem to believe in this far-fetched tale ,very dubious historically ,with Egyptian Omar Sharif as the lead who abducts pretty princess (French Françoise Dorléac) who is raped by Irish Villain (even

nastier than Ben Hur's Messala) Boyd.There's also American Wallach who offers him his two daughters.Both Sharif and Boyd seem to enjoy bondage (collar ,cage,etc).When he speaks to common women ,Genghis is feminist (it's up to them to choose) ,but when he is with his wife ,he's a more credible macho.

Incidentally,Sharif,Mason and Dorléac's sister (Catherine Deneuve) would team up three years later in Terence Young's "Mayerling".This time,Mason was Sharif's father .

If you want to see a good Sharif movie,do choose "Dr Zhivago" instead.