Mongolian Film on the World Conquerer

When I grow up, I want to be a lawyer.

Mongol

I’m in a movie mode, so lets talk last year, an interesting film came out called “Mongol”, telling the story of history’s favorite mass murdering horseman, Genghis Khan. Now the Khan is one of my favorite people in history, as the fact that he was a random dude who went on to dominate most of Asia, and who’s decedents went on to create the second largest empire in the history of the world. So he is one of those really epic badass people who pull off some really impressive things despite being a bit of a sociopath. Now the popular portrayal of the Khan is a mass murdering barbarian who eats babies for breakfast and kicks puppies. In reality, he was a mass murdering nomad, but he was certainly an intelligent man, and wasn’t just a mass killer. By his people’s standpoint, he had a valid reason for attempting to take over the world, and certainly cared for his own people. So I was glad to see that a movie was coming out that would show him in a positive light.

Now the film itself is very good. It is filmed in Mongolia, which is a beautiful country and there re some really incredible landscape shots. And kudos to the film for the prop department, because it really gives you the feeling of what it must be like living in a vast plan back in the middle ages. The clothing is wore and looks like it was hand made and unkempt, as if they really were being used to ride around on a sweaty horse all day. The warriors look like they just using what ever weapons they happened to get there hands on, the food looks like its really been made at home back in the middle ages and I’m going on a tangent, but you see what I mean. And while the fight scenes (except for the last one) aren’t that impressive, I like that they aren’t absurdly over the top and are pretty realistic. And the horse riding is breath taking, which makes sense because its well….the Mongols. And the film does offer a pretty good window into the Mongolian way of life. I was shocked on the similarities to them and the western Native American tribes, in fact the Mekeeti use are like teepees. It makes sense through, the Native Americans originated in the same area, and live under similar conditions, but its still a note worthy comparison. The movie is also unique because of the Mongolian actors and back ground music, which is really fascinating. The Mongolian music is this guttural back of the throat singing, which is really odd at first, but actually is quite harmonic. The movie also is a good introduction to the Ancient Mongolian way of life.

Now here is what I don’t like. The portrayal of Genghis. Now I’m glad they didn’t show him as an inhuman beast, and they did show his human elements, but they took it to far, and essentially made him into a messiah like figure (literally if you pay attention to the scenes involving the wolf god). Genghis is show as an ideal hero, who is doing what is best for not only Mongolia but for Asia as a whole, divinely chosen as a great leader and a figure of inspiration. Now I’ll admit it, the Khan was an amazing person, and he did do a lot of good things for Asia, but we can’t ignore the fact that he killed millions of people, raped thousands personally (8% of Asian males are directly related to him), destroyed hundreds of cities and ruined the lives of whole nations, all for his own ambition. Now, the Khan certainly believed he was doing what was best for Asia, or at least his own people, and to an extent he was right, the Mongolians prospered with there empire, at least for a time. But he was also a brutal man sociopath at the same time. Yes I know the film is made by Mongolians, but the fact remains that glorifying your national hero is expected, but kinda dishonest. I know the US does it, but it can get kinda upsetting for the same reasons.

I mean, Confederate heroes such as General Lee, Stonewall Jackson, Nathan Bedford Forest and other major generals at the time are often shown dramatically as stalwart defenders of there home states, gentlemen who stand for the old traditions and customs of the South, and are fighting a romantic lost cause to protect there way of life, at the same time being good family men and kind people. And yet, we cannot allow ourselves (southerns) to forget that at the heart, they were still fighting for a ruthless and oppressive system of human slavery, however much they might have wanted to avoid the issue (except for Forest, who was a slave trader himself before becoming a Calvary man) and many of them (well not Lee, but hey) were slavers themselves, which means that they lived there lives off the sufferings of African Americans. The North does this as well, as we tend not to talk about the negative points of Grant (IE his presidency), John Brown (this one is mixed actually, he is either a saint or a serial killer), Abe Lincoln’s own racism or Sherman’s brutality (actually Sherman himself was pretty honest about it). Or on a more national level, Washington’s victory by attacking on Christmas, Theodore Roosevelt/Andrew Jackson’s extreme racism, Davy Crocket being a possibly serial killer or Custer position as a child murderer. All heroes have there bad points, and a good historical portrayal should show that. If I made a movie on Napoleon for example, I’d certainly show him as a brave and extremely intelligent man, who was thinking out side the box and in the long run most likely was good for France (and the people he was fighting against were all dictators so he wasn’t that bad compared to them), as well as an extremely charismatic and charming characters. But I’d still show his ruthless ambition and single minded dedicated to his own self interest, his abandoning his men in both Egypt and Russia to save his own skin, (through he often risked his life to defend his men as well) and he was at heart a rather self centered, if epically awesome man. Genghis Khan was a genius, and one of the bravest men in history, as well as the single most badass person in the history of the human race. But he was still a ruthless and cruel man who was looking out for his own (and his people’s) best interest before others, and oversaw some of the most brutal massacres at the time. Now, this film gets nowhere near as simplistic as say, Braveheart or the Patriot (I hate Mel Gibson) but it is very grating there.

Finally, the fact that the People’s Republic of China was involved in making the movie. We find some…..interesting….elements thrown in the movie. For example, a Chinese monk frees the Khan after traveling across the world before dying, saying it is “fated’ that the Khan will conquer China, and making the Khan’s invasion seems as part of China’s fate. Not only does this make the Khan into a more godlike figure, but it also effectively makes the Mongolian invasion happen only because China let it happen, which is interesting because in real life China (or what was china back then, the Jin and the Song) was totally wiped out. We also get some of the “Hero” styled communist propaganda thrown in, with the Khan’s speech near the end of the movie about “Uniting Mongolia, even if I have to kill half of them” “The rights of the few matter little compared to the good of the many” “We must unite to be strong” “People must be given order and keep in there place, so you shouldn’t kill a Khan even if he opposes me”. But meh, what do you expect

In closing, it’s a very good movie, and I recommend watching it, but don’t take it to heart as the way to view the real World Conqueror. And um, yeah, I hate hero worship. Oh yeah, I wrote this in a day, ergo why it is late, and while I am updating the blog every day now, not on weekends.

from
EE