tellurikwaves Blog : CINEMA :Les blessures narcissiques d'une vie par procuration

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p23

15/06/2013 05:08 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p23

15/06/2013 05:08 par tellurikwaves

Khulan Chuluun : Börte

*

The Making of Genghis Khan

Author: janos451 from San Francisco

23 May 2008 (part 1)

Astonishingly, the name and the person of Genghis Khan in Sergei Bodrov's"Mongol",a great, Shakespearean drama about this seminal figure in history, don't appear until the very end of the two-hour epic. Instead, we see Temudjin, the man yet to become (posthumously) Khagan (emperor) of what was to be for several centuries the largest contiguous empire in history.

Whether Bodrov completes the contemplated two additional chapters of the story or not, "Mongol" stands on its own as a masterpiece. Contradicting the Western (and Russian) image of Genghis as the monstrous conqueror, Bodrov's work is influenced by Lev Gumilev's "The Legend of the Black Arrow" and is based on "The Secret History of the Mongols," the 13th century Mongolian account, unknown until its re-emergence in China 700 years later. For a director, who learned in school only about the horrors of Russia's 200-year subjugation by the Mongols, taking a "larger view" is a remarkable act.

Unlike Omar Sharif in the 1965 Henry Levin "Genghis Khan" or Takashi Sorimachi in Shinichiro Sawai's disappointing 2007 "To the Ends of the Earth and Sea," Tadanobu Asano in Bodrov's film is strictly Temudjin, not the great Khan. He lived from 1162 to 1227, and "Mongol" covers the years between 1171 and the beginning of the unification of Mongolian tribes around the turn of the century...

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p22

15/06/2013 04:58 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p22

15/06/2013 04:58 par tellurikwaves

Look up your history before you knock this

Author: Thesquiddemuerte from United States

9 April 2008

You know how they say history was written by the victors? That's true for everyone but the Mongols. Most of their history was written by the Chinese, Russians, Arabs, and other conquered peoples who had an interest in perpetuating Genghis Khan = bloodthirsty savage.

The movie is based on one of the few sources about Genghis khan written in Mongolian. It's called the secret history of the Mongols and was written shortly after he died as a record for the Mongolian royal family. He was just a chieftain's's son of a very minor tribe. That's what makes this story so impressive, he didn't start out as a king or a prince with a huge army, like Alexander. Everything he had, he had to earn. He didn't get to be Genghis Khan until he was in his 30's. He was always aware of how victory wasn't assured but had to be paid for with planning and strategy.

He wasn't a saint by any means but he wasn't an unthinking savage. This movie is actually meant to be the first in a trilogy with the second one probably detailing his conquest of north china and the third the conquest of the Khwarezim empire in Iran and Afghanistan.This is an approach that I like because the Alexander movie died on account of it trying to condense all of his conquests into one movie.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p21

15/06/2013 04:53 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p21

15/06/2013 04:53 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p20

14/06/2013 17:23 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p20

14/06/2013 17:23 par tellurikwaves

Bon ça commence à me gonfler méchamment tous ces commentaires oiseux.Je met la liste

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p19

14/06/2013 17:16 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p19

14/06/2013 17:16 par tellurikwaves

La critique de Chris Knipp (fin)

How Genghis Khan got to be Genghis Khan, in short, is one thing this movie doesn't begin to try to explain. Could anyone? That I don't know; but 'Mongol' presents its biographical narrative without the connectives that make sense of a life. Despite lots of dramatic scenes with snappy dialog, striking images, and above all computer-assisted battles with crunching bones and crackling arrows and ringing swords, the film has an epic style without epic themes because its great issues are not so much resolved as abruptly, magically removed.

This may in fact be more an epic love story than anything else. It is that in the backhanded way the 'Odyssey' is a love story, because, though Temudjin is away from Borte a lot of the time as Odysseus is mostly away from Ithaka and Penelope, 'Mongol's' opening sequence gives Borte a primary importance, because she (as played by Bayertsetseg Erdenebat), belonging to another tribe, a liberated young woman of the twelfth century, isn't chosen by but chooses Temudjin when he's nine years old and she's ten. It's not supposed to be that way--and maybe it wasn't; it seems a bit implausible. THIS IS NOT AN AMERICAN MOVIE fucking hell!!!

Temudjin is traveling with his Khan (tribal chieftain) father (Ba Sen) on their way to placate another tribe by choosing the boy's wife from their girls. When they don't, the father is promptly poisoned by the other tribe. And its leader, Targutai (Amadu Mamadakov), vows to kill Temudjin--but not for a year or so, because "Mongols don't kill children." Well, what Mongols do or don't do seems up for grabs, and probably at the time, historically, "Mongol" itself must have been a rather vague concept. In fact that is another running theme: what's a Mongol? What are their primary values? There is no satisfactory answer, though killing and stealing are advanced as major concepts.

Surprisingly, since not too many are "to the right of Genghis Khan," and since he succeeds in wiping out all his enemies, Temudjin as played (as an adult) by the imposing Tadanobu Asano is a gentle-faced, zen-like fellow who's a strong advocate of fair play. Tadanobu, along with the somewhat over-histrionic Chinese actor Honglai Sun as Jamukha, his childhood blood brother and eventual arch rival, are both impressive. But the real star, with some substantial help from computer-generated effects, is the vast landscape of steppe, snow, mountain, and sky that dominates many scenes.

With effective use of lenses and light, the filmmakers have created an epic look, and it's this, plus the authoritative acting, that make this film worth viewing--but only if you like this kind of thing and if you don't mind that you're not going to emerge from it with any historical knowledge. Said to be the first of a trilogy. One will approach the sequels with a certain reserve.Shown as part of the San Francisco International Film Festival April-May 2008 and in US theatrical release June 2008.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p18

14/06/2013 17:04 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p18

14/06/2013 17:04 par tellurikwaves

La critique de Chris Knipp(suite)

He sinks through thin ice deep into the frozen water below; then, inexplicably, he's lying on land and getting rescued. He is languishing in a Chinese prison--his face seeming to acquire a patina of dust and sand (I liked that part: Bodrov excels at faces and tableaux); then he's miraculously found by his faithful wife Borte. She throws him a key and sets him free. Then, inexplicably, he is leading a vast army to defeat his arch rival. Over and over, how we get from point A to point B is left on the cutting-room floor. This is enjoyable as spectacle but unsatisfying from other standpoints.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p17

14/06/2013 16:52 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p17

14/06/2013 16:52 par tellurikwaves

To the right of who?, 29 June 2008

Author: Chris Knipp from Berkeley, California

*

'Mongol,' the Russian-directed semi-historical epic (big emphasis on the semi- here) shot for $20 million in China (and Mongolia and Kazhakistan) with a multi-national cast and crew and Japanese and Chinese stars, purports to depict the first thirty-five years of the life of the emperor Genghis Khan. I say "purports," because not much is known of this period and even in depicting legend, Bodrov chooses to leave out many of the essential connectives that make a good story (or fairy tale or legend). Temudjin, as the young super-Khan is called, is a yoked prisoner, for example, awaiting execution; then, inexplicably, the yoke is off and he's free.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p16

14/06/2013 16:46 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p16

14/06/2013 16:46 par tellurikwaves

(suite)

Temudjin goes through countless struggles on his quest to unite the warring factions of Mongolia under his banner. He loses and reunites with his bride countless times, scores victories and defeats in equal number and eventually finds himself in bondage at the feet of a wealthy king. Through it all, Temudjin never shows even a glimpse of fear or despair.

He simply watches and waits with the confidence of a man who knows he has God on his side (which is heavily reinforced by the film’s climax). I would expect many viewers to be turned off by the narrative structure of this film, but I think most will be satiated by how incredibly beautiful the way the cinematography paints the Mongolian landscape and the incredible dignity of the performance.

There are no scenery chewing speeches delivered on horseback, simply quiet, but confident portrayals of men fighting for survival in an unforgiving and dangerous country. These two strengths, coupled with the fact that film was produced on a budget of only $20 million, a shockingly modest amount compared to similar films produced in the US, commands respect. While it has its flaws, Mongol shows enough promise to merit excitement for the next two entries.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p15

14/06/2013 16:43 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p15

14/06/2013 16:43 par tellurikwaves

La critique U.S

The first of these foreign produced epics I will be taking a look at is Mongol, a Russian, German, Kazakhstani, and Mongolian co-production about the early life of Genghis Khan and the first part of a planned trilogy.Mongol tells the story of Khan’s childhood and early adulthood quite strangely. It’s almost episodic in its nature as it drops the audience rather abruptly into different stages of Temudjin’s (Gengis Khan’s birth name) life.

Many viewers will appreciate this approach as the filmmakers have enough faith in the audience to show us what kind of man he is rather than tell us. We don’t learn about his character through extended voice overs or monologues given by friends or relatives. There are simply small moments that subtly reveal his courage, compassion, confidence and, most of all, his patience.

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p14

14/06/2013 14:18 par tellurikwaves

Š DR - MONGOL de Sergeď Bodrov -2008 p14

14/06/2013 14:18 par tellurikwaves

Le réalisateur : Serguei Bodrov

*

La critique (on reste en France,mais c'est la dernière!)

Unification d'une nation

« Mongol » est un film épique au rythme déconcertant. Nominé cette année à l'Oscar du meilleur film étranger, ce film originaire de Mongolie, retrace l'enfance et l'adolescence de celui qui unifiera les clans, devenant le plus célèbre de « khan »: Genghis Khan. N'espérez du coup pas y découvrir les nombreuses batailles menées par ce fameux guerrier, le scénario réduisant cet aspect aux dix dernières minutes du film, durant lesquelles la philosophie patriote de cet homme est exposée de manière succincte.

*

Car l'intérêt de "Mongol" réside finalement dans ce parti pris qui en fait l'originalité certaine pour un film historique: compter(conter tu veux dire) les us et coutumes des clans, sociaux, maritaux, voire guerriers, que celui qui les unira n'aura de cesse de dénoncer comme des signes de faiblesse.Le récit se concentre donc logiquement sur les barbares traitements des femmes et les us d'unions fort précoces, les logiques de clans, les sauvages vengeances qu'elles engendrent*,et l'esclavage courant qui réside dans certaines régions.

*

Doté de prises de vues aussi amples qu'esthétiquement magnifiquesMongol donne à voir d'infinies steppes désertiques que les rétines imprimeront avec plaisir. Mais il pèche un rien par son rythme, peu passionné et les quelques clichés sur l'amour éternel d'un homme puissant et volontaire envers celle qu'il a choisie, et que le devoir et le sens de l'honneur l'empêche de voir au quotidien. Un film culturellement passionnant, mais un rien trop plan plan.(Ffffff!)

Olivier Bachelard

*

* Putain mais apprend donc à t'exprimer...Quelles tournures de phrases alambiquées !