Marco Polo

2007
5.9| 0h30m| en
Synopsis

Assigned to accompany two priests on a mission to convert the court of Kublai Khan to Christianity, 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 country where he is accepted as an envoy into Khan's court. Marooned on the far side of the world, Polo, accompanied by his servant, Pedro, advances as a Mongol grandee for twenty extraordinary years. What he eventually brings back with him to the West is a chronicle that changed history forever.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

BlazeLime Strong and Moving!
Blucher One of the worst movies I've ever seen
Freeman This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.
Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
Jean-Mathieu Nichols 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.
darrell9 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...
artwk 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?
diddy-11 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.