Wonderfully offbeat film!

Please don't spend money on this.

Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??

Crappy film

I almost always sit through a movie immediately before making any comments on it because I think the impressions ought to be fresh in one's memory.But it's really necessary -- if I'm ever to follow a categorical imperative -- to leave a few notes here to prevent others from enduring the agony I went through years ago. I don't even enjoy THINKING about the movie but I'm compelled by a sense of public duty.To be perfectly honest, I really believe there are two groups of people who would enjoy seeing this abortion. One group consists of people who have never seen a movie before. The second group consists of people who are stoned out of their gourds on weed.There are those who claim that the movie, like some others, is so bad that it's funny, but I wonder if they have actually sat through one of these monstrosities from beginning to end and were still able to laugh as the end credits rolled. More likely they'd be in a state of shock.There's no need to go through it. John Wayne is Temujin, later to become Genghis Kahn. Pedro Armendáriz is his sidekick, Jamuga. John Wayne looks like a rich American. Armendáriz looks like a Mexican cowboy star. Susan Hayward, as Bortai, looks like a glamorous Hollywood red-head. Oscar Millard is guilty of the script."Truly, she is much woman.""Yew're beauty-full in yew're wrath." (Ie., you're cute when you're mad.)It's impossible to go on. This is beginning to set off a long-forgotten merry-go-round inside my head, to the tune of "Ah, Mustafa" played on a calliope. I seem to be sitting astride a hippocampus. Wait. It's speeding up. Now, it's really fast and I'm afraid that something will --

"The Conqueror" is often considered as the worst film ever made. That means that we can put it together with "Plan 9 from Outer Space" or "Jack and Jill", for example, can't we? And if we do, we will find plenty defects in it.On the other hand, we can compare the worst film ever made with the best one (indeed, why not?). For instance, with "The Searchers". These movies have many common details: they were produced in the same year, in the same Utah desert. They have very similar plot (that's why I can define "The Conqueror" as the sub-genre of western - it is eastern) and the leading hero in both movies ... one and the same John Wayne. Just ask yourself, can't Temujin be called the Searcher and can't Ethan Edwards be called the Conqueror? I guess, they sure can. But it does not matter, "The Searchers" is considered as the best movie ever made, "The Conqueror" - as the worst one...If it is not appropriate to compare "The Conqueror" with western, let's compare it with epic film/peplum. And once again ask yourself, are "The Ten Commandments", "Ben-Hur (1959)", "Spartacus" better than "The Conqueror"? They also have common details: the historical plots with inevitable historical mistakes, the American actors portraying Egyptians, Jews, Romans, Mongolians, including beautiful leading actresses who do not have any Oriental features and famous actors with funny Western accents... But it doesn't matter again: "The Ten Commandments", "Ben-Hur", "Spartacus" are the best movies ever made and "The Conqueror" - ...One can argue about this movie, one can find positive and negative details in it. But let's be objective: if "The Conqueror" is not the best movie, it is definitely, definitely not the worst one ever made.

I caught this film entirely by accident as you do. i'm usually working so I tend to more listen than watch.At first I thought it was another John Wayne cowboy movie. It sounded John Wayne, it sounded sort of cowboy, but something was wrong.I started watching to see him in some kind of fake Mongol costume with other obviously fake mongol\Chinese actors (white Americans). This wasn't so bad except that John Wayne was totally unfit for the position.He does absolutely NOTHING at all to be or move or sound even a tiny bit like a vicious Mongol warrior. It's like watching a cowboy film without guns set in Mongolia. You just can't divorce Wayne from it and so the movie literally collapses the moment he opens his mouth. Seriously, it does. It's a facepalm moment.On top of that, the script is awful, something a small child would do for his first class story. Wayne delivers it like he's alseep, all the way through the movie.Like others have said, it's so bad you just have to laugh. People in the 1950s surely must have seen this as rubbish once out. Even they could not possibly have liked this.This probably helped future historical film makers know what NOT to do as well as make them laugh out loud. It's worth watching for that.2 stars for the unintentional humour.

I give this movie ten zs. I couldn't get through it before falling asleep.The other comments mentioned the groaner lines (i.e. "Farewell, Tarter Woman") but what they didn't mention is that the whole script is a groaner. Seems that Susan Hayward's wardrobe was recycled from a biblical flick. All the roles are over the top, from Wayne looking like a cross between a carpetbagger and the cat Gideon from Pinocchio, to Hayward doing a true biblical vamp. Wayne, not a versatile actor, sounds whiny in this role. Even the action shots of the battles and horses were boring. If a movie is based on a place in a certain time, it should have some relation to that place and period, or at least depart in a witty or funny way. This depiction of Mongolia around 1200 did neither. This movie deserves the "slow death".If you want to see a good Genghis Khan movie that was actually shot in Mongolia and has some realism, see the recent Genghis Khan, by Aoki Okami. If you want to see other movies shot in Mongolia, see Genghis Blues or the movies of Byambasurem Davaa: The Weeping Camel and The Cave of the Yellow Dog.If you want to see some good battle scenes with horses, see Seven Samurai.This movie maybe good for a laugh, but I couldn't stay awake long enough.