|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 1, 2008 1:46:43 GMT 3
Hello Sharshuvuu, welcome aboard Yes, there are just too many inaccurasies, including Tangguts speaking Mandarin Chinese and Merkits wearing those weird masks while living in North American Indian tepees While I and my company of friends were watching, we were like "oh great hell!" when we saw the Merkit scene ;D
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jul 1, 2008 2:27:43 GMT 3
i'm surprized no one mentioned those silly masks of that tribe (Merkits?) yet... Well the truth of what the Merkits did (Ahem... my ancestral roots), has been a thorn on my buttcheek everytime I study my own history. We were known for being nutcases lol ;D - but yeah the masks and crap are screwed up.
|
|
|
Post by sharshuvuu on Jul 1, 2008 3:34:52 GMT 3
It's becoming clear that in this forum I am in the company of a number of authentic sons of the steppe, and that sounds like good company to me.
Sarmat has answered my point about the fate of Jamukha satisfactorily. I was so prepped for his final exit that it didn’t occur to me that that might be reserved for the second installment of the movie. Now at this point I have to ask: is there anything in the sources that puts Targutai in the relation to Jamukha portrayed in the movie? I don’t recall reading anything about this, but there is a lot I don’t know.
The Tanguts running around speaking Mandarin, yes, that’s another howler. The Merkit masks looked goofy, all right; when they first appeared, I expected them to yell “Trick or treat!” How much do we know about Merkit ethnography? I don’t know whether they wore Siberian masks or not. From what I have been able to learn, it is even uncertain whether the Merkits were linguistically related to the Mongols or to the Tungusic tribes, including the ancestors of today’s Evens and Evenks.
About the teepees: about fifty miles from where I live there is a community of Russian Old Believers, one segment of which lived for a number of years in East Turkestan AKA Sinkiang (or in Pinyin spelling Xinjiang). They tell me that among the nomadic people they encountered, those too poor to have yurts/gers lived in teepees (they knew the local name, but I don’t recall it) that differed from the American Indian model chiefly in that where the poles crossed at the top, the Xinjiang type had a circular board with holes drilled in it, and the poles passed through the holes. The Saami have similar lodges; you can see a photo in the Wikipedia article ‘Sami People’. Seems to me that it’s a prehistoric circumpolar architectural tradition, not impossibly used by the Merkits.
The death of Saul I think differs enough from the death of Targutai according to the movie to absolve Bodrov of importing biblical narrative into Mongolian history. In 1 Samuel 31, Saul loses a battle with the Philistines; his three sons are killed and he is wounded by an arrow. When it becomes clear that he cannot escape, he avoids capture by falling on his sword. The Philistines found his body the next day, cut off his head, and hung the bodies of Saul and his sons on the walls of the city of Beth-Shan, from which they were recovered by Judaeans in a stealth operation by night, burned, and the bones given proper burial. 2 Samuel 1 provides a further episode: an Amelekite survivor of Saul’s army makes his way to David’s camp and reports the death of Saul and his sons. David asks how he knew, and he replies that he came upon Saul after he had fallen on his spear (here it says “spear” and not “sword”) and found that he was mortallu wounded but still alive. At Saul’s own request, the Amelekite gives him the death stroke, and takes his crown and bracelet, which at this point he presents to David as proof of his story. This is the man David orders to be killed, not for betraying Saul but for daring to lift his hand against the Lord’s Anointed.
I don’t have a copy of the Aarne-Thompson motif index, but I suspect that the general account of some underling bringing the head of a king or the like to his enemy and for his reward being put to death is pretty widespread, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the thing happened in actual history more than once. The death of Saul has only a very general similarity to the movie episode.
As for installments two and three: if there is any way to call Bodrov’s attention to the discussion in this forum, it might have some influence on him in the direction of more historical and ethnographic accuracy.
Sharshuvuu
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jul 1, 2008 5:56:27 GMT 3
Well, the episode similar to Saul's story actually did happened. But Bodrov just messed up everything. When Jamuqa got into the hands of Temujin the second time he was actually bertrayed by his own people who tied him up and brought to Temujin. Temujin immidiately ordered their execution despite their bitter complaints. Bodrov just replaced Jamuqa with the dead Targutai's body. However, Bodrov didn' actually invent that episode. It was already in the Chinese series "Genghis khan." There Targutai's servant had killed him and brought the head to Temujin and was executed again. So, Bodrov, might have just copied that episode from some "smart" Chinese directors. Targutai was indeed the ally of Jamuqa at the battle of Koiten. However, his real fate after the battle was much more fortunate than as described in the movies. His noions cought him and wanted to hand over to Temujin. But then they came to the conclusion that Temujin would definitely execute them if they betray Targutai, their khan. So, they just let him go and came to Temujin. Temujin praised them for the wise decision and accepted their service. The further fate of Tartgutai is unclear. It's interesting, however, that according the "Secret history" he was convinced that Temujin wouldn't harm him. About the teepes. They are common in Siberia, Evenks, Yakuts. Dolgans, Chuckhas etc. lived in this kind of structures. In Siberia they are known under the word "chum" (from Chuckchi language). Apparently, some Mongols, I specifically mean forest tribes e.g. Uriankhais lived in similar kind of structures. But the point it that Merkits were not really a "forest" tribe, they were nomadic and didn't live in Taiga.
|
|
|
Post by sharshuvuu on Jul 3, 2008 7:24:34 GMT 3
Sarmat, this is just the kind of discussion I was looking for when I stumbled on the Steppe History Forum several days ago. I appreciate having questions answered by knowledgeable people. I'm glad I found you guys!
Sharshuvuu
|
|
|
Post by Bor Chono on Jul 3, 2008 12:52:16 GMT 3
Oops! Sarmat said : Do U know this movie about WWII www.youtube.com/watch?v=CESKR4vmO6c&feature=relatedDuring recent Russian Movie Awards the person who must give award as good movie -refused. He said "This movie is shame & lie, I can`t & will not give it ". Bodrov`s "Mongol" movie is worse!
|
|
|
Post by sharshuvuu on Jul 3, 2008 16:19:00 GMT 3
Svolochi? Haven't seen it. As far as I know, the plot is entirely fictional (anyone on this list know whether there was ever really a sabotage unit formed from juvenile delinquents? I am assuming that there was not).
I have pretty well sworn off discussing Russia in WW II after suffering a major falling-out with a valued Russian friend. She started ranting about some historical topics and it quickly became evident that she knew only what she heard on the Russian media, which by now are almost entirely propaganda organs for the Kremlin. I had to point out to her that in addition to the great heroism of the Russian nation in the war against the Nazis--which I certainly recognize--there are some less savory aspects, including an unmistakably pro-Nazi police during the almost two years of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. In response she simply became hysterical, denied all the facts I cited, and would not speak to me for months. Apparently even real history is regarded as "a shame and a lie" if it is in any way discreditable.
At this point, what I am most interested in is this: can we do anything to push Bodrov in the direction of making installments two and three historical and ethnographically more responsible than the first part?
You folks have seen Chinese and Japanese productions that I have not; has there ever been a film or TV dramatization that portrayed a steppe battle realistically? I have not seen a single one, and as has been ventilated in this thread Bodrov did not give us one in the climax of "Mongol," although he seems to have had the resources that would have made it possible.
Where he stuck to real history, he did a pretty good job, if lacking in balance (as mentioned here: where were Temujin's early companions who later played such an important role? Boorchu gets a thirty-second cameo, no one else is mentioned; &c ). The acting was good; and, most important, Temujin is a depicted as a real human being and not the ogre of Western popular misconception. There is no reason for the inaccurate swords, archery technique, and other such irritations--hell, information about these thing is readily available just by googling.
These films have the potential of providing viewers in the West and elsewhere with a more realistic and less prejudiced view of this segment of history--and the real history is as good a story as anyone could ever ask for.
So, all you steppe warriors (and khatuns--where are the ladies in this thread?), what can we do to persuade Bodrov to clean up his act in the coming installments? Just denouncing him here is not going to change the world.
Sharshuvuu
|
|
|
Post by Nomad (Daz) on Jul 3, 2008 16:21:02 GMT 3
Oops! Do U know this movie about WWII During recent Russian Movie Awards the person who must give award as good movie -refused. He said "This movie is shame & lie, I can`t & will not give it ". ( 'Bastard' Well the film takes place during the WW2 somewhere around 1944-1945. Most cities a filled with children commiting crimes and Stalin orders boys cought in crimes above 14 years old to be placed in special facilities where they will be trained to kill and sabotage. Its a story of two boys who got into this camp and went through training. Then they were send on a suicide mission with a group of other boys to bomb a German base some where in the mountains. Very heavy movie for some people. Non-fiction
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jul 3, 2008 17:10:05 GMT 3
Heh, heh "Svolochi" I would translate it "Cattle" is entirely fictional movie. The scenes described there never happened. Though I agree that the movie itself is good and there are some nice characters there.
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jul 3, 2008 17:26:06 GMT 3
I have pretty well sworn off discussing Russia in WW II after suffering a major falling-out with a valued Russian friend. She started ranting about some historical topics and it quickly became evident that she knew only what she heard on the Russian media, which by now are almost entirely propaganda organs for the Kremlin. You better discuss it with me. But Mass Media are always misleading. Did a lot of people in the West hear about the "Munich bertrayal" in 1938 or about "phoney war" in 1939 ? Not really, but of course there is a lot of stuff about the glory of liberation of the Western Europe from Nazists etc. Likewise there were also a separate negotiations with Himmler and Americans in 1945. Did a lot of Americans hear about that? No. Russian mass media likes to put only "glorious stuff" on the screen and keep the dirty stuff somewhere else. But, if you really want to know the truth there is no problem at all to find the real factual history accounts in Russia. Most of the people however don't want to look to deep insight. But this is true for all not only for Russia. At this point, what I am most interested in is this: can we do anything to push Bodrov in the direction of making installments two and three historical and ethnographically more responsible than the first part? I think he actually already got the critical message. All the flaws of the movie has been actively discussed in Russia. You folks have seen Chinese and Japanese productions that I have not; has there ever been a film or TV dramatization that portrayed a steppe battle realistically? I have not seen a single one, and as has been ventilated in this thread Bodrov did not give us one in the climax of "Mongol," although he seems to have had the resources that would have made it possible. Chinese TV series about Genghiz khan are very good IMO, but I wouldn't say battles there were represented really authentic. Japanese movie about Temujin is complete crap, much worse than "Mongol." I was so dusgusted after watching this BS...
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jul 3, 2008 17:32:49 GMT 3
Bodrov`s "Mongol" movie is worse! We all agree here that the movie is very inaccurate. I was very disappointed after watching it But it did a great job of popularizing Mongol history and Genghiz khan in the world. I don't know the exact reason, but all my American friends liked that movie. But of course, my Mongolian friends were very angry and disapponted. Though, I can't imagine a director who can make a movie about Genghiz khan and make Mongolians happy. We still should wait for some indigenous Mongolian Spilberg to do it.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Jul 3, 2008 19:09:34 GMT 3
I think you could make Mongolians happy by taking their culture and history seriously and respecting it enough to do a little research. I don't think the makers of this movie did much research at all.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Jul 3, 2008 21:27:46 GMT 3
The movie "Mongol" is very beautiful for people who haven't read about Mongol history in detail ;D
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Jul 3, 2008 21:56:14 GMT 3
It was alright, it wasn't too bad. It should have put "Based on a novel" then just leaving it blank at the start of the movie. As long as people won't say "I know Mongols! I watched the movie!" Thats fine by me.
|
|
|
Post by sarmat on Jul 3, 2008 22:30:25 GMT 3
The movie "Mongol" is very beautiful for people who haven't read about Mongol history in detail ;D That's what I also think ;D
|
|