Hercules Against the Mongols (1963)

Such a frustrating disappointment

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

As I've said in other reviews, the sword and sandal genre isn't exactly one that I enjoy. But I think even those who do enjoy its offerings will find this particular one tough to sit through. One big reason for that is that the hero (Maciste or Hercules, depending on what version you watch) is particularly weak. Not when it comes to physical strength (though his strength does fluctuate through the movie), but when it comes to his character. We learn nothing about him, like how he got to this part of the world or what he feels or thinks about anything. In fact, he's off screen for big chunks of the running time. This might have been looked over had the movie done well in other areas, but it doesn't. While the awful dubbing does provoke a few chuckles here and there, it doesn't make up for the fact the movie is extremely dull. There's far more talk than action, and when there is action, it's staged and directed in a very feeble fashion. It didn't take long into watching the movie for me to wish that it would end much quicker than it actually did, and I suspect that you'll feel the same way as well.

Maciste contro i Mongoli (1963) or Hercules Against the Mongols (USA) uses the same two sons of Genghis Khan that were in Hercules Against the Barbarians (1964).Mark Forest as Hercules/Maciste is again a stiff bore.Hercules/Maciste fights against the three sons of Genghis Khan. Not much happens. Scenes are recycled from this and put into Hercules Against the Barbarians (1964).Sub-standard peplum/Sword-and-sandal flick that has nothing to do with the Sword-and-sandal genre. I think it's just a re-titled Maciste (a Hercules-like figure) flick. Hercules aides the Russians against a Mongol invasion in the 13th century.Mark Forest plays Hercules and he's a complete bore. Most scenes are dull and boring. There's a bit of interest in the Mongol bad guys played by a few hefty European or American weight lifters, other than that, it's sub-standard stuff.

Though the original "Hercules" movies stayed within the classical world of Greco-Roman myths, later entries in this genre began to wander to other places, other eras. Some of these later movies put Hercules (or Maciste, Samson, Goliath, Ursus, etc.) into Central Asia and this is one of the better examples of that sub-genre. It stars Michael Forest, one of Steve Reeves' more successful wanna-be's, and it boasts decent production values including several outdoor battle scenes complete with charging horsemen. The plot, of course, is the usual hodgepodge of familiar elements, and while Forest possesses the required "beefcake," his bondage sequences lack style and originality. First, Mongols force the chained Hercules to carry and put into place a heavy stone beam. Later they chain him inside a cave in a wooden yoke and leave him to starve. Both sequences seem little more than routine.Ken Clark, who always deserved better, is largely wasted as the nastiest of Genghis Khan's three sons. He doesn't even get to take his shirt off.

The version of this movie I saw was called "Hercules Against the Mongols"Hercules, dubbed within an inch of his life and his loins covered within an inch of his modesty, is told he is to fight the Mongols by an oracle.A female voice then tells us it's 1227. She continues to tell us of the leaders of Mongolian tribes that Hercules will fight. They are the three sons of Ghengis Khan and they lust for conquest. To incite their people to go to war they kill one of their own and blame "THE WHITE MAN!" THE WHITE MAN must be punished!The Mongols burn houses (in this movie symbolically represented by a miniature hut) and kill many WHITE MEN or take them as slaves. Amid all the confusion you can always tell the Mongols from THE WHITE MAN. The Mongols are hairy, manly and wearing leather. THE WHITE MEN are shaved, feminine and wearing felt.The Mongols discover that an heir to THE WHITE MAN's throne has escaped. "We must find him!" exclaims one son of Ghengis Khan. "We must kill all the legitimate heirs to the throne!" The boy, Alexander, wanders through the woods and comes across Hercules who is playing pick-up-sticks with tree trunks. "Why are you moving those trees?" asks Alexander, his dubbed voice sounding like he is speaking in a wind tunnel. "What are you doing out here, little boy?" asks the grinning, mostly unclad Hercules in what is the movie's creepiest moment.It isn't long before Hercules is fighting the Mongols. Hercules picks up a tree trunk and stands there as the Mongols ride their horses into him. Defeated, the Mongols sneer "We will meet again!" and run off.Beefcake films are more of a curiosity nowadays but I must admit I enjoy watching them. They are, by no means, Great cinema but they are fun to watch: half-clad men fighting, posing, and delivering absurd lines.The only disappointment was the lack of the midget actor usually found in these films. How can it be an Italian production without a midget?Afterthought: There is one fight with a lion that is pretty harrowing and could be considered cruelty to animals. If you are squeamish about such things be forewarned: you may want to skip this one.Loincloth!