Los Angeles Journal


	Home My Account Register

2008-06-05

by John Esther

Interview: Sergei Bodrov

Summary

Russian writer-director discusses Mongol

Article

Oscar nominated for Best Foreign Language Film, Sergi Bodrov’s Mongol is a sweeping epic covering the early days of Genghis Kahn (1142-1227) that challenges the myth behind the man known to many around the world as a monster, especially in Russia where myth had turned into historical truth for many.

According to Bodrov and co-writer Arif Aliyey, the child Temudjin (Odnyam Odsuren) was a tough kid who withstood a lot of abuse from people after his father was assassinated.

Beaten, boarded up, and ostracized for much of his youth, the child who would be king grew up to be the fierce and revered outsider Temudjin (Japan's Tadanobu Asano) a military genius instilling fear in his enemies.

Guided by a sense of nationalistic purpose and love for Börte (the fascinating looking yet not very convincing actor Khulan Chuluun), his first wife and personal confidant, Temudjin seeks bloody revenge on those who crossed him while bestowing rewards on the loyal.

Filmed with grand shots of reclusive parts of Mongolia, filled with frank violence and framed with loving eyes toward its subject, the 126-film stops off where Temudjin, now Genghis Kahn (amongst other names and different spellings thereof), went on to unite a great part of Asia through many mean means as necessary.

Although its historical “corrections” seem plausible, if not admirable, Mongol remains a questionable piece of filmmaking where nationalism and military might are hailed as virtues.

An internationally acclaimed director, Bodrov’s films include Bear’s Kiss, The Quickie, Kavkazskiy Plennik and Nomad.

In this exclusive interview we spoke to Bodrov about Mongol.

Los Angeles Journal: Why did you want to make this film?
Sergei Bodrov: It’s an interesting story about a guy who’s almost always known as an evil monster. In Russia he’s one of the most unpopular names. We blame Mongolians for all our problems. It was nice to go against stereotype.

LAJ: How have Russians responded to the film?
SB: They were surprised when I said I would make this movie. “Why are you doing this? What good did the Mongols do for us?” Good or bad, it’s part of our history.

LAJ: Have you found that it changes the perspectives of many Russians?
SB: Yes, yes, yes, it’s changed better than we expected. Movies are emotional and there’s a great story; they work especially for the younger generations. They have more hope.

LAJ: What do you have in common with Temudjin?
SB: That’s an interesting question [Laughs]. Production was extremely difficult. It was a war, a battle, fights. I couldn’t give up because he was a warrior with such a very strong spirit.

LAJ: He also has a very nationalistic and traditional spirit. What concerns did you have that here would be a character who promoted nationalism at the expense of those whom wanted to break off on their own?
SB: He was very loyal to his people and people were very loyal to him. His war was not about religion – he believed in his Mongolian god, but he was also surrounded by Buddhists, Muslims and Christians; plus Mongolians were never occupants like Russia. He established his rules. You like it or you don’t like it. Some rules we’re still using now. For example, it was the Mongolians who first said, “Don’t kill my messengers. Don’t kill my ambassadors. I’m sending people to talk with proposals.” He said, “I will punish for this.” And the punishment was tough. People learned their lessons. Now people don’t kill ambassadors, diplomats. He invented this.

LAJ: Do you plan on making a sequel?
SB: I’m thinking about it.

LAJ: What kind of hostilities have you encountered from historians who have an investment in maintaining this myth about Genghis Kahn?
SB: Absolutely. Some historians don’t like my take; like the ones from the old school. They say, “It couldn’t happen that he was captured.” I said, “Prove me wrong.” What did he do from this year to that year? We don’t know. They say, “Maybe he was hiding.” Maybe, but I have one source that [claimed] he was captured. I said, “Look you don’t understand the logic, you don’t understand the character.” Some pieces of his life are missing. Some historians were arguing with me then [after they saw the film] they said, “You are right.”

LAJ: Do you see any leaders on the world stage like Genghis Kahn?
SB: No, he is on his own. He is one of the great leaders. He was a military genius. They still study his battles.

LAJ: Do we need a military genius on the world stage?
SB: Maybe not. Look, the worst century in human history was the 20th century. World War I, World War II, Nazis camps, Stalin’s camps, Holocaust, nuclear weapons…this is like insane. The hypocrisy is that we’re judging a guy from 800 years ago. He fought looking into the eyes of his enemies. We’re such insane people. We love to judge people, but not thinking about what we’re doing now.

LAJ: Lastly, what do you think about interviews where you discuss your work? Do they serve the work? Should the work speak for itself?
SB: The work has to speak for itself. The movie has to talk, but if you ask me to talk about the film I have to talk. The movie has to talk. That’s enough for me.