User reviews

Everybody (with an interest in the topic) knows the Mongol conquest of Khoresm (that is of everything to the West of China) started with a Mongol caravan which got pillaged by uncle of Khoresm Shah in Otrar. Well, here we are told what exactly had happened and how the Mongols really had it coming and how it really wasn't the fault of Central Asian Turks. Now Central Asia got it's own Andrey Rublyov movie. Yeah!

The Fall of Otrar is a vivid and surprisingly historically accurate account of events in the 13th century which foreshadowed events of worldwide significance. It is unfortunate that most people in the West are unfamiliar with these events and thus miss the significance of the setting and the drama. No one in the West who has any sense of history has to be reminded of the significance of Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon with his legions. Perhaps a bit of historical background will help viewers appreciate this film more.

In the early part of the 13th century, having consolidated the Mongol tribes, Chinggis Khan (popularly but less accurately spelled as Genghis Khan) began his first overtures to the western domains by sending a caravan of several hundred camels carrying great quantities of silk, silver, gold, and other goods to the realm of Khwarizm, whose Shah Mohammed was the greatest power between the Indian subcontinent and Baghdad. The Shah's mother was not Persian but from the Central Asian Turkic Kanglis tribe, which supplied the Shah with his cavalry and provided the primary basis for his power. The Shah and the Caliph of Baghdad were involved in various intrigues against each other and jockeying for supreme influence over the Islamic peoples and lands. When the caravan stopped in the border town of Otrar located along the Silk Road, the local governor could not help himself and killed the merchants and seized all the valuables. When Chinggis Khan sent an ambassador to the Shah with a polite request to right this wrong, the Shah, not yet knowing that he was dealing with the future world conqueror, killed the ambassador and burned the beards of his military escorts. The Mongols considered ambassadors inviolable, and an attack on Chinggis Khan's ambassador was tantamount to an attack on the Great Khan himself. This triggered the Great Khan to summon all of his troops and to lead the first Mongol campaign to the western regions outside of their traditional lands, an onslaught which did not stop until the Caliph of Baghdad was trampled under Mongol hoofs, the Russians utterly defeated, innumerable other foes vanquished, and Mongols consolidated under their rule virtually all of the lands of Asia and Europe from the China Sea to gates of Vienna, creating the greatest land-based empire in history. This Pax Mongolica made possible Marco Polo's subsequent journey to China. Thus, Otrar was the first stop and the calm before this ferocious storm - a storm which perhaps could have been averted - or at least postponed - had the governor not been so greedy, or if Shah Mohammed had righted the wrong.

Having been an avid student of Central Asian history, I was delighted to see a dramatization of this event of world historical significance done not by Hollywood but by a filmmaker whose land has been a central part of this history. The film is amazingly accurate in its portrayal of many minutiae, including the manner of capture of the Otrar governor and his punishment (Chiggis Khan had given strict orders that the governor of Otrar be captured and brought back alive to Mongolia), Chinggis Khan's ecumenical toleration of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism, his own reliance on the advice of a Taoist master whom he had sent out from China to his war camp to advise him on matters of the spirit, and his pronouncements including the Mongol chiding of Muslims about the need to face Mecca to pray as "didn't they know that God is everywhere?"

Saw this one last night. For any fans of Kurosawa/Mifune samurai epics, of late John Ford-style western epics, or of Peckinpah, it is a must-see. Amirkulov has absorbed all their lessons and more. Fall of Otrar is remarkable - I don't think I've ever seen a "historical eipc" where the cast seemed so perfectly of the time and place (although there's something inescapably modern about the way the leading roles of Ozhu (the Mifune character), Kairkhan and Genghis Khan are conceived). The photography (both the color and B&W sequences) is gorgeous, and Amirkulov displays a sure eye for how to render the Central Asian landscape visually. At 2hrs 45mins the film is not overlong - every scene scores its point and everything is so beautiful that at times you just want it to go on and on.

People have drawn parallels with the takeover of Kazakhstan and Central Asia by the Russsians and Stalin, and with the current menace to these societies from corporate globalization. Could be. It's worth noting, however, that the Kipchaks (at least as I remember my history) actually did fairly well under the Mongol federation and maintained their distinct identity longer than the movie implies.

Fall of Otrar is full of quirky humor, throwaway sequences that fit perfectly in a loopy way, and lots and lots of violence. Too many great sequences to sample here, but Kairkhan's fate at the end is not to be missed. Dialogue is florid and utterly in keeping with the visuals.

This is one of those occasions where the moviemakers went to great trouble and expense to produce something that looks and feels like primal folklore. They succeeded. Made me feel that movies have been with us, mentally, since the beginning of time, that they satisfy a craving for a certain way to tell a story about ourselves that we've always known we could do. It's wonderful to see this achieved so well.

An amalgam of influences ranging from "Ivan the Terrible" (gloom-filled court intrigues) to "Andrei Rublev" (horses and grisly executions) to "Conan the Barbarian" (exotic sex scene), with quite a lot of Kurosawa (an array of Toshiro Mifune character types from the various stages of his career) thrown in as well - making a unique whole. Inexplicably shot on both color and black and white stock with little transitional logic. At times threatening to lapse into incoherence, but never quite abandoning the audience. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Amirkulov must have been enjoying almost total artistic freedom: as evidenced by the near-constant violence, a good deal of nudity, and plenty of religious discussion, no censorship of any kind has been imposed by the state.

Amazingly enough, this is an altogether compelling, thought-provoking and even historically accurate (more so than "Gladiatior", at any rate) picture. Some background in Ghengis Khan's 13th century conquests does help understand the proceedings, but is not necessary. If anything, do the research after the film (like I did) and see it again (like I hopefully will if it's ever released in a digital format). Given the very limited budget of the filmmakers, some of what they achieved here is truly impressive (and surely more authentic and heartfelt than any latest computer-generated imagery).

It is a war movie set in a pre-modern world during the Middle Ages when the world's most powerful empire, the Mongolian Empire, conquered the world.

Naturally, this war and historical movie was made in Kazakhstan, the brother country of Mongolia.

As a war movie, it does an amazing job of showing cavalry warfare.

The armor, helmets, and swords are very cool.

It also features a lot of large-scale cavalry battles, making it one of the best war movies for men who like cavalry.

The Scimitar, the military and cavalry sword of the Mongol Empire, is also featured heavily.

It"s a great war movie.

I actually had high hopes for this movie when watching it in the cinema at a film festival in Copenhagen, the director Amirkulov was also present at the viewing, so it felt like a special occasion. And it surely isnt every day one is given the opportunity to shake a director from Kasakhstan in the hand. The movie itself revolved around some historical battles and politics which are really unknown for me, and even though mr Amirkulov pointed out before the film began that we in the audience could expect some obscure historical talk in the film, i was surprised about the lack of many things in the movie. A lot of ideas are tested in the movie, but everything feels like the movie tried so hard to be great, that it fell apart. Bad editing, and often dull cinematography made the interest fall apart. I would suggest finding some reading material about the historical facts about the fall of Otrar, than wasting 3 hours watching this overlong film.

It's been about 10 years since I saw this movie (I saw it shortly before it came out) -- it's about the conquest of the town of Otrar, in central Asia, by the Mongols in the Middle Ages. It's something like four hours long, but it's good. Dialogue is in Kazakh.

Also, Ardak Amirkulov is one of the directors of the "New Kazakh Wave." This is a group of Kazakh directors who studied under the Russian filmmaker Sergei Solovyov (director of The House Under the Starry Sky (Dom pod zvyodznym nebom) (1991)), and includes Yermek Shinarbayev, who directed the interesting movie Revenge (Mest) (1989).