Genghis Khan (1965)
5/10
Uninvolving
11 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
It's easy to be critical of these hokey old sword 'n' sandal epics, but some of 'em still give a good turn even today. 'El Cid' is one I particularly enjoy watching.

'Genghis Khan', however, simply doesn't cut it.

And it's not because the man doesn't feature much in western history books. After all; neither does the 'Cid'. Somehow the elements of the movie just never seem to mesh. We see any number of set-piece battles out in the middle of nowhere, non of them particularly exciting. Young Khan's imprisonment and escape is performed like a conjuring trick rather than a long wished-for aspiration. His romance is peremptory and lacking any passion. The whole thing has a 'story-by-numbers' feel to it.

And as to the casting? Well... Exotic-looking Omar Sharif was obviously chosen as a sop to female fans. Micheal Hordern offers some wobbly gravitas. Telly Savalas makes a plausible rough-neck of just about any culture or vintage. Ever-reliable Woody Strode gets another chance to show off his fine physique. But as to the rest? Robert Morley as a Chinese Emperor? You've got to be kidding! And James Mason must have blushed crimson afterwards to see what an abortive oriental he presented. What a complete waste of his inspirational voice. But who's this? Kenneth Cope of 'Randall & Hopkirk Deceased'? As I live and breath! And the list goes on: Eli Wallach, another trans-culture villain trying but ultimately failing. And finally, butchy Mr Boyd reprising his Ben Hur villainy for all he's worth.

I'm not interested in historical fidelity. Who cares, unless you're a student. Just give me a good story well told and I'll buy it. But not this. It's a tired, tepid, unremarkable curtain-call to the age of ancient 'epics'.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed