MONGOL does almost everything I want a movie to do: it takes us to a different time, a different place, and a different culture. It educates and entertains, and it does so by giving us interesting people living in interesting time. I invested in the film's hero, Temudjin, and his family. I wanted them to overcome the odds against them and emerge victorious, and I was happy when they did so. (Hey, it's a biopic. They don't make biopics about people who get killed in their teens. Surely, that can't count as a spoiler.)
However, MONGOL does one thing I never want a movie to do: it makes me scratch my head and wonder, "What were they thinking?" Why does the film show us a young Tamudjin falling through the ice on a frozen lake, yet never shows us his escape? Why does the film go to such lengths to underline the brutality and unrelenting nature of his (one-time) captors, only to give us an (apparently) magical deliverance and expect us to believe the captors simply lost interest in him? Why does a movie that expects us to accept that Tamudjin can survive upwards of four years in a tiny cage also expect us to believe that he can emerge from that cage ready to fight, climb, run, and love? Why do the filmmakers go out of their way to explain that Tamudjin wins his climactic battle through strategy, then show us only the first phase of the strategy before turning to what can only be considered divine intervention?
Now, I'm not normally one for head scratchers. I'm willing to go along with what a movie has to give me. But these omissions and errors blew my suspension of disbelief. While MONGOL is a fine costume drama / National Geographic special, I think it could have benefited from one more pass at the writing table and the editing room. Perhaps the filmmakers will do better with the second film of this proposed trilogy of the life of Genghis Khan. I hope so, because I'll be there to see it.
