|
Post by sharshuvuu on Jul 4, 2008 6:43:38 GMT 3
Sarmat is quite right that every country pretties up its own history--I don't single out Russians (IBM, the American corporation, made the business machines that enabled the Nazis to do such a thorough job of genocide, and how many Americans have ever heard of it--and plenty of other examples).
I think we have a consensus developing here on the good and bad aspects of the film. I'm pleased to learn from Sarmat that the fecal matter impinged on the rotating blades in Russia, and that Bodrov must have got an earful already about the nonsense in the film. Maybe he will do better in the coming two.
Americans see a well-acted movie with a lot of action, wonderful scenery, and a sympathetic portrait of the protagonist (about whom they may well have heard nothing but how destructive and barbaric he allegedly was). Mongols, and even a rank amateur who has found this history fascinating since childhood (that's me), are continually irritated by little details that are needlessly wrong (for pete's sake, why couldn't they get something as basic as the bow draw right!), and are surely going to be royally pissed off at the way Bodrov abandoned history for complete bovine excrement toward the end of the film. This forum has allowed me to vent my annoyance in the best of company, and to ask some questions and get straight answers from people who really know the history; thanks to all.
Sharshuvuu
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 22, 2008 2:57:41 GMT 3
So I was Googling for "historical accuracy of Mongol movie" and came across this site. I find one of the problems of a topic like this is that everyone of us is an expert when it comes to "historical accuracy", but we only end up making ourselves look foolish. We can't _truly_ know if something is historically accurate or not unless we had a time machine. That would be fun! - Merkits were believable. Teepees are a real thing in Siberia. Moreover, there is documented evidence that the line between "nomad" and "hunter-gatherer" is a lot thinner than most people realize. In regions where the taiga and the steppe meet, becoming hunter-gatherers in the forest was a life way of many nomadic peoples when they lost their herds. When they gained enough wealth from hunting, they could start a herd again and revert back to steppe-living. These different modes of living weren't tied to ethnicity. The fence around the Merkit encampment, not believable. The masks? I've no opinion on that. - The Tanggut bits in the movie were definitely a distraction and ahistorical. - Costumes were actually quite good; pre-Chinese influence.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Nov 22, 2008 3:31:52 GMT 3
But you should note that the Merkit people did not live in the forest zone, they were in Northern Mongolia
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 22, 2008 21:14:49 GMT 3
But you should note that the Merkit people did not live in the forest zone, they were in Northern Mongolia That's exactly what I'm talking about how we usually can end up making ourselves look foolish on these sorts of topics. But Northern Mongolia isn't all steppe. It butts up with taiga. The Dukha/Tsaastan people live in Northern Mongolia/taiga. The Merkits lived somewhere south of Lake Baikal, right? Or were they more east of Baikal around today's Buryatia?
|
|
|
Post by hjernespiser on Nov 22, 2008 21:16:18 GMT 3
Another annoying thing about the movie. During the big battle at the end when the arrow with the red ribbon was shot I was waiting for all the other archers to shoot in the same location as the red ribbon arrow! No whistling arrows? Ugh.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Nov 23, 2008 1:58:23 GMT 3
The Merkits lived somewhere south of Lake Baikal, right? Or were they more east of Baikal around today's Buryatia? Yes, to the south of Lake Baikal.
|
|
|
Post by keaganjoelbrewer on Nov 23, 2008 4:19:38 GMT 3
Haha!! Whistling arrows like in Hero?
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Nov 23, 2008 13:42:19 GMT 3
Forest people = Oirats Not Merkits =/
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Nov 23, 2008 15:40:26 GMT 3
There were no whistling arrows in Hero ;D Not just the Oirats, but also Buriats, Tümet, Uriangqai, Qïrġïz, etc
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Nov 23, 2008 17:49:21 GMT 3
My history is very 'simplified' while drunk... ... so thank you for the correction
|
|
|
Post by Temüjin on Nov 23, 2008 22:33:40 GMT 3
Another annoying thing about the movie. During the big battle at the end when the arrow with the red ribbon was shot I was waiting for all the other archers to shoot in the same location as the red ribbon arrow! No whistling arrows? Ugh. they also shot arrows using the mediterranean release and not the typical thumb-draw. and they had infnatry, and i mean lots of it. plus those weird cavalry with strange swords in both hands.
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Nov 23, 2008 23:43:53 GMT 3
Yup, only one freaking scene where horse archery took place. Hell even BBC did a better documentary-movie on Chingghis Khaan. Link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfIzYkuld5MFew errors here and there but this is definitely better then the movie.
|
|
|
Post by H. İhsan Erkoç on Nov 24, 2008 0:39:30 GMT 3
*Fully agreed*
|
|
|
Post by sharshuvuu on Dec 21, 2008 5:19:47 GMT 3
I hope the projected two more installments of the movie are produced, and I certainly hope that the director pays attention to what authentic steppe people who know their history have to say about it. The errors and unhistorical episodes were all quite unnecessary. I would see it again, and on the whole enjoy it, but I can't think of any convincing excuse for the annoyances.
Sharshuvuu
|
|
|
Post by Subu'atai on Dec 21, 2008 13:40:57 GMT 3
I doubt he will listen to us, he never did. When Bodrov asked for information of Mongolian history he wasn't interested in our history but instead more "ideas" to publish his own storyline. Slavic majority in Russia tends to be rather deluded people these days.
|
|