Marco Polo (2007 TV Movie) User Reviews

Decidedly Average

[okky-1 · 5/10 · 27 March 2008]

I rented this movie as I love history. I had not heard of this made for TV movie and so based on past experience (ie when movies have no reviews or decent advertising campaigns or they go straight to DVD)I did not hold out much hope for it.

Unfortunately I was proved right. Whilst I give full marks to the wonderful settings and locations which were extremely good the acting was poor with no apparent eye to detail. It seemed the movie was rushed and what started out as a potentially good premise soon had me cringing. I battled through because I wanted to know more about the adventures of Polo. I have since looked him up on Wikipedia so something positive came out of it :) The person responsible for casting Dennehy as Khan needs to be fired.I thought Khan was from Mongolia and was oriental? It was laughable. Also ethnic Chinese who speak fluent English with an American accent just doesn't cut it. This doesn't make sense when other Chinese characters in the movie spoke speak Mandarine/Cantonese with no sub titles.

I am assuming their were liberal interpretations of the truth as to historical accuracy but then most supposedly true stories do this as well so I don't have any issues there.

Had so much potential but sadly let down. I guess the production ran out of money.

Dennehy is a Mongol - yeah right!

[pwhite60-1 · 6/10 · 15 December 2007]

What hope is there when even the films buyer/screener doesn't know the plot as the Plot Summary indicates - "Marco Polo is abandoned in the mountains when the priests, doubting the very existence of China, turn back. Polo eventually pushes bravely forth alone toward the fabled count - Written by Hallmark Channel". It seems they didn't even bother to watch the first 10-15 minutes to know that his father and uncle still accompanied him after the two priests (possibly the worst actors in the whole show) turned back.

Like others I agree the script, acting and casting was pretty atrocious for the European and 'name stars' and were mismatched to the possibly great movie that could have been if the production locations and costuming were better matched. I thought the era of trying to pass off Europeans (Dennehy) as Orientals had ceased and it was obvious the Asian actors were far better than the so called stars. At least back in the 50's and 60's all the actors and extras looked fake when playing foreigners of a different race. It is even more glaring when they are used alongside far better actors of genuine racial type.

However it did improve a lot after the first 30 minutes which had nearly made me switch it off.

Marco Polo the man who fillet out the empty spaces of China's map!!!

[elo-equipamentos · 6/10 · 22 March 2023]

The famous travels of the venetian Marco Polo were told countless time on movies, each one exposing in different way the notorious traveller and explorer, this overlong feature did not enough to tell the whole story properly, however give a sample as it really happened as wrote in is a book pick up of its logbook meanwhile travelled all around the Asian continent.

The Story is portraits for himself to a cellmate Pietro D'Albano when he stayed arrested in Genoa's prison for a ramson from Venice, his adventures is reported by endless flashbacks, since when his father took him to China passing through Jerusalem with two Priest, followed the silk road crossing Syria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan passing by India until reach China ruled by the powerful Kublai Khan (Brian Denehi) the grandson of the famous Genghis Khan, there Marco Polo received protecting of the wise Queen Chabi (Luo Yan) also gaining the teaching of Lord Chenchu (Kai Tong Lim) the beloved professor and mentor.

Soon Marco was assigned to work as Ambassador in a rebel province and aftermaths ruling as Governor, slowing rises on Kublai Khan's concept, bring back to Shangdu Palace to next assignment to travel around the whole China to drawing a most accurate maps with his faithful servant Pedro (BD Wong), they travel together for all territory drafting maps and also bringing some artefacts belonging those several places frequented.

Aside as Venetian be in Europe where the civilization were in developing process after the the pest,, Marco Polo was often entitled as "The Barbarian" due the Chinese and Mongol ethnicities assumed the Europe as delayed people, due they didn't any idea about powder and the compass among other goods and expertise.

I agreed with some reviewers that Brian Dennehy was miscasting for the role of a Mongol like Kublai Khan, somewhat disqualifying the whole thing, also all them spoken in English naturally, there no one translate each other, it was a crying shame, downgrading deeply the veracity of the long feature!!

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 2023 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.5.

What a waste of Production Values

[intelearts · 12 September 2007]

This looks wonderful - great costuming and locations - really impressive.

But all horribly let down by terrible acting, script, and above all, direction.

The filming looks so "made for TV" both in angles, lighting, but above all in tones: just some filters, and better use of film would have made a huge difference.

Historically accurate, this could have been really great: it really looks expensive and expansive; but it is living proof that nothing can cover poor acting.

Left me neither wanting more, or expecting less, I cannot recommend this for schools, or homes -- it just is so uninspiring -- and that is unforgivable given the material and the locations.

Cheesy and miscast

[barone01 · 3/10 · 16 June 2007]

What is that blue eyed surfer doing playing Marco Polo ? Simple, another Hollywood cheap production directed by budget director Kevin Connor. The actor playing Polo is badly miscast (he looks like Alice Silverstone brother), he's devoid of any appeal and subtlety, Brian Denneny is just laughable has a Chinese ruler. Connor's poor direction doesn't help, set pieces are uninteresting, acting is generally poor and the whole thing is uneventful and lacks passion. Music is by numbers and boring too. If you want to watch the best Marco Polo film available then I recommend you watch Giuliano Montaldo's version starring Ken Marshall, a RAI/BBC production with a great score by legend Ennio Morricone.

Yes, cheesy and predictable

[f_rocha · 4/10 · 7 October 2007]

It obviously isn't a historical movie, nor a movie that should be taken as "educational" material either. It's just a plain fiction on Marco Polo, a very free adaptation of his travels, the four points are for locations and sightings. Yes, the acting is really bad, some characters era annoyingly out of character, (sorry for the repetition). Though, I think the costume and production is very good, alas, the script is not. Even though, if you want to see a cheesy history of a guy that can make his way into a society by accepting the system in a supposedly "rebel" way, definitely, you'd like to see this one, it's message is simple "obedience pays".

Great movie, story line spoiler

[dani_rise · 10/10 · 22 June 2015]

I find Ian Somerhalder's performance in Marco Polo very refreshing. It's by far his best performance in a movie.

The story line is very interesting written, we are following Marco Polo in his quest and the story it's actually accounted to his cell mate in prison.

Each scene is filled with all very relevant historical details and Kevin Connor has the full credit for it. The dialogues are sometimes funny, sometimes filled with meaning but most of the time they are filled with history.

All in all Marco Polo It's a good movie that can teach you a lesson or two from the world history.

Ian can be the guy next door ready to play whatever - from the sexy vampire to the old full of wisdom scientist or adventurer like Indiana Jones or even Jesus of Nazareth.

Waste of time

[diddy-11 · 3/10 · 15 October 2007]

Don't you just love the fact that everybody, and I mean everybody speaks English in this movie. Regardless if they're Italian merchants, afghan doctors, poor Mongol peasants, Mongol nobles or even Persian warriors. At first the actors at least speak with an accent. But further into the movie the actors forget to add the accent. I thought that the first problem an Italian guy would have when he arrives in 13th century China is to communicate, but not in this movie. The makers of the movie doesn't even pretend that there are difficulties in communicating, which is common in other movies, even if they both speak English.

To add to the credibility of this movie the roll of Kublai Khan is played by Brian Dennehy. Don't get me wrong, I like Brian Dennehy as an actor. But he hardly looks like a Khan of the Mongol Empire. The makers of the movie, again, doesn't seem to care. At least his character gets old. Which is not something you could say about Marco Polo, played by Ian Somerhalder. The only difference in his appearance is when he's in the prison in Genoa. And the difference? You guessed it! They add more beard to his face.

Overall a very bad movie. It's not worth wasting your time on.

Wonderful movie about people: people are same today as they were at Polo's time!

[youAreCrazyDude · 10/10 · 18 September 2007]

Wonderful movie about people: people are same today as they were at Polo's time! Some people left comments about "bad acting". I did not see any of "bad acting". On the contrary, I think the acting was very good. Plots, betrayals, love, hatred, and other human situations that also happen in today's everyday life. What a great teaching sample to learn from! The movie teaches about how people behave today - just like they behaved at Polo's time. Most wonderful movie I have ever seen. I presume, the special effect fans and fans of computerized 3D effects left bad comments because, ... well ... the movie is true to its purpose: description of real human behavior and life. I lived in former USSR, Austria and Italy. Now I live in Portland, Oregon, USA. I feel the same way that Marco Polo feels. I saw the same things that Marco Polo saw (not in China though). Movie is very true to its purpose. I bow to the creators of the movie.

Out of 1.5+ Billion Chinese in the World Kublai Khan is portrayed

[darrell9 · 3/10 · 10 August 2010]

by Brian Dennehy? You've got to be kidding me... Worst casting than the actor that played Charlie Chan... Don't get me wrong, I think Brian is a great actor, just the wrong guy for this movie.

As others have said, beautiful locations, costuming, good camera work... The casting was about the worst ever. Is then no Chinese or even an Asian actor that could not have been cast for Khan?

BD Wong was okay for his part.

I wished they'd show more of the culture, the food, the dance, music the art. It would be a lot cheaper to produce than big war scenes. Marco's lady is beguiling and more of a romance developed would certainly have been an improvement to the movie as well.

As a Chinese American I was hoping to see more historically interesting facts, weaponry, food, scenery, art and culture. Oh well...

Such as shameful waste...

A missed opportunity

[artwk · 15 December 2007]

Given the fact that the makers had access to plenty of money, good costuming, and even to the locations (or convincing computer-generated substitutes), this could have been a very good historical movie.

Alas,the derogatory comments on this site regarding script, acting, and casting are perfectly valid. Who on earth cast Brian Dennehy as an oriental? There are established oriental actors who look the part — John Lone would be an obvious choice.

The real Marco Polo could speak Italian and French, and on his way to meet Kublai Khan may well have learned Turki, the language Kublai sometimes used in his written communications. But the ridiculous scene where they meet bears not the slightest resemblance to Marco Polo's real-life account, in which the great ruler was the soul of courtesy. Dennehy's grumpiness was pure fiction, like so much else in this tedious production.

The question that begs to be asked is: if one wants to make a historical epic, why present bad fiction instead of interesting fact?

Brian Dennehy as Kublai Khan, and movie made by committee

[sanduku · 3/10 · 16 December 2007]

I'm amazed-- did Dennehy never see or hear of "The Conqueror", starring John Wayne as Genghis Khan? Dennehy never get the belly laughs that John Wayne elicited, but-- why Brian, after such a stellar career???? The rest of the movie seems more than anything else a movie made by committee. My guess: somebody had a really brilliant idea, came up with a great story line, secured some of the greatest filming locations on Earth, and the future was very bright. Then one by one, people in the production process kept altering the plot, putting in formulaic details that were successful in other movies but inappropriate or laughable in this production (the martial arts fighting scenes come to mind), hiring on actors who were not at all fit for the parts, and the end result was this production that nobody actually owns or would really wish to own. It has so many great ingredients, but the movie should be a cautionary tale of just how bad of production can come from such great raw material. My condolences to all involved.

(having had a couple of days to think over the post): I don't want to be too hard on the actors in this production. Hollywood is filled with world-class talented actors who will find themselves acting in just about anything to keep working. All the lead actors in this production have shown phenomenal performances in other roles, and likely would have done wonderful things here if allowed. This movie is such a turkey because it's so badly produced and directed (and, yes, acted), and everyone in the production process can probably point out reasons why they personally were not responsible for the parts that suck. I really do offer my condolences to the cast, this could and should have been a world-class production.

My social-science take: high-budget turkeys like this are symptomatic of an organization where access to power and resources is become disconnected with any proved talent at using those resources wisely.

Disjointed Soap Opera

[ilovebees3 · 2/10 · 12 December 2011]

I gave a 2 (instead of 1 - awful)because of the attentive grand costuming, scenic beauty, and the breathtaking Asian girl that is the love interest of Marco.

But in this day and age it is outrageous that a Caucasian plays the Mongol king. Plus that incongruity continues to break the story flow thru out the movie. I was hoping to see a story that included more about the travels of Marco, the technological and cultural discoveries of the lands he visited. Instead, we get about 5 minutes of that, gunpowder its main obsession. The rest of the movie seems to be fabricated love triangles, invented King and Marco interactions, ridiculous "uprisings" with a smattering of poorly choreographed kung fu fights, internal convoluted political machinations with a sprinkling of "wise" Chinese sayings, and discussions of "freedom" that are extremely unlikely to have occurred. Save your money, save your time do not watch this movie unless you want to see a long boring soap opera.

Resolutely silly

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 5 September 2015]

MARCO POLO is a two part Hallmark TV miniseries chronicling the life and times of the famous Italian explorer who found himself at the court of Kublai Khan and famously wrote about his endless travels. Sadly the material is given an insipid, family-friendly feel in this resolutely silly and rather dull evocation of the material.

The silliness is to be expected given the pedigree of British director Kevin Connor, who made the likes of AT THE EARTH'S CORE and THE LAND THAT TIME FORGOT back in the 1970s - films that look like masterpieces in comparison to this dull-witted nonsense. The plot sort of slides from scene to scene, with lukewarm melodrama throughout and a distinct lack of realism despite location filming in China.

Ian Somerhalder is completely wooden as the uninteresting lead, although BD Wong (the scientist chap from JURASSIC PARK) is a little better as his wise slave. The oddest casting choice comes in the form of the larger-than-life Brian Dennehy, playing Khan; surely the most inappropriate choice for playing a Mongol since John Wayne played Genghis back in the day? For what it's worth, I much preferred the Shaw Brothers martial arts extravaganza MARCO POLO made back in the 1970s, starring Richard Harrison as the erstwhile explorer.

Hard to watch this drivel

[sekander · 4/10 · 15 January 2013]

Really, who's idea was this? A retreat back to the bad old days of Hollywood when Caucasians played Chinese, Indians and every race under the sun because how can we entrust these roles to "inferior" races. Brian Dennehy as Kublai Khan is as laughable in the 21st century as Bruce Cabot was as Maqua in the Last Of The Mohicans in 1936. And then, in a stunning reversal of typecasting, Achmed, a Muslim Saracen, is played by a Chinese. You can't write this stuff. Or, maybe you can. Somebody did here. God, what a mess. Let's not forget the casual glossing over of the trip to the East, which took almost 4 years and zips by here in a few minutes. Do yourself a favor and seek out the 1982 mini-series which was a labor of love with an all star cast, location filming and fabulous music from the master, Ennio Morriconne. Will someone finally release that on DVD so we won't have to be subjected to these awful remakes!!

Did the scriptwriter even read the book?

[nabilahjean · 29 February 2012]

The Travels of Marco Polo is a vast and informative account of a fascinating journey. The book was, anyway. The movie was a pretty film, but I think the only thing it had in common with the original account is some of the character's names and China itself. It was like a PC morality play rather than a portrayal of the events in the book. All the fascinating things Polo did and saw and all we got is that silly movie?

I am not going to complain about the acting. There was no soul in the script. I thought the young man who played Marco Polo was as good a fit as I would have expected, physically. I don't know what they were thinking of with Dennehy. He is a fine actor, but I don't think they did justice to the Chinese people by having an Irishman play one of China's major historical figures.

Why even use Marco Polo in the title

[jeanmathieu-nichols · 3/10 · 13 August 2014]

This movie is so bad. It's seem that nobody in the film crew try or care to read the Marco Polo's book. Everything is wrong. Cheesy romantic and non-sense plot, to many fiction intrigues so badly glued in the script, tons of inaccuracy in facts, use of English for every character, bad casting (Brian Dennehy has Kublai Khan).

For example, Marco Polo learn has is wrote in is book Le livre des Merveilles, the dead of Kublai Khan only in 1298, 4 years after is real dead. In the movie, Marco learn the dead of Kublai Khan while escorting the love of his life (awkward). It is easy to get they organized the plot for helping the romantic twist. But seriously, the life of Marco Polo has enough drama, discovery and hole to disorgonize facts in such big way.

The movie has that texture of poor b series of the '80. Talking of the 80', the series (1982) made in those year is by miles superior. First, good historians had been hired has consultants with a clear desire to follow what we know about the travels of Polo.

Next time, just thing of not using a prestigious name like Marco Polo or any historical name mater of fact just to get viewer interest.

conventional

[Kirpianuscus · 19 February 2017]

a surprising film. for the waste of each advantage. because, against the obvious great effort, it is a conventional, decent story. it not gives nothing significant. only the same well known story, Brian Dennehy in a role who is only a force shirt, In Somerhalder as a Marco Polo who seems be only shadow of the author of The Million, costumes and locations for suggest but not convince, dialogues who are just words in wind. after its end, the only question is about purpose. because it is not a real historical movie, it is not an adventure one, just a blank adaptation , not bad but under each reasonable expectation. a conventional story about Marco Polo. not emotions, not acting. only memories about superior films about the same theme.