The Student Room Group

Why has no one ever made movies about the journeys of ibn batutta

I am not able to find any feature movies about Ibn Batutta, who visited so many places in Africa and Asia, and who by contrast to Marco Polo wrote about himself and what sort of person he was.

It is very odd?
(edited 8 months ago)
Reply 1
Why would you expect to find 'feature movies' made about a man from a country most people dont really know anything about? Its hardly going to sell well compared to one on somebody people can relatively more relate to.

Hardly strange at all. Just like it isn't strange that various aspects of Chinese or Kenyan history aren't turned into blockbuster movies.. simply put, its irrelevant to the audience.
Reply 2
Original post by Napp
Why would you expect to find 'feature movies' made about a man from a country most people dont really know anything about? Its hardly going to sell well compared to one on somebody people can relatively more relate to.

Hardly strange at all. Just like it isn't strange that various aspects of Chinese or Kenyan history aren't turned into blockbuster movies.. simply put, its irrelevant to the audience.


But he saw so many things, so many now lost kingdoms, visited so many places? And he is by no means less interesting than either Marco Polo (who never says anything about himself or his feelings) or Columbus.

Why should they make movies about anyone, that is what you are really asking?
(edited 8 months ago)
Reply 3
Original post by michaelhw
But he saw so many things, so many now lost kingdoms, visited so many places? And he is by no means less interesting than either Marco Polo (who never says anything about himself or his feelings) or Columbus.

Why should they make movies about anyone, that is what you are really asking?


No merely pointing out that this person is unlikely to holkd much interest for the intended audience. People like to hear about those they can empathize with i.e. those from a similar background, culture, ethnic grouping etc. Not universally of course but it is a fact of life.
Simply put, we care more about our own than distant foreigners, in general. Whilst you or i might be interested to hear about this mans life exploits the majority of movie goers outside of niche cinema likely wont care.
Reply 4
Original post by Napp
No merely pointing out that this person is unlikely to holkd much interest for the intended audience. People like to hear about those they can empathize with i.e. those from a similar background, culture, ethnic grouping etc. Not universally of course but it is a fact of life.
Simply put, we care more about our own than distant foreigners, in general. Whilst you or i might be interested to hear about this mans life exploits the majority of movie goers outside of niche cinema likely wont care.


But Marco Polo was italian? Homer was greek? An Jackie Chan Chinese? So it is fact that may be true only for yourself. But when a movie is made, it enters an international market, and where the audience is is less relevant than actually covering the expense of production.
Reply 5
Original post by michaelhw
But Marco Polo was italian? Homer was greek? An Jackie Chan Chinese? So it is fact that may be true only for yourself. But when a movie is made, it enters an international market, and where the audience is is less relevant than actually covering the expense of production.


Er i'm not sure what point youre making there given the first two are European. I have no idea what the point of Jackie chan is though sorry?

Er 1) i did not say that was my position, i expressly said it wasn't so you'd do well to read it better in future before stating lies. 2) Simply incorrect. Major film studios do not make movies for their worldly goodness they do it to sell to their target audience. To that end, Paramount is unlikely to make a blockbuster about an aged Arab explorer when their principle market is Europe/America and possibly China.
As i said previously, just because you haven't seen the movies about this chap does not mean they dont exist, the odds of an Arab studio having made one being high, you simply having not seen it.
In fact, i can note there are a few movies about him that have been made by Arabic producers. Are you going to retract your statement now?
Reply 6
Original post by Napp
Er i'm not sure what point youre making there given the first two are European. I have no idea what the point of Jackie chan is though sorry?

Er 1) i did not say that was my position, i expressly said it wasn't so you'd do well to read it better in future before stating lies. 2) Simply incorrect. Major film studios do not make movies for their worldly goodness they do it to sell to their target audience. To that end, Paramount is unlikely to make a blockbuster about an aged Arab explorer when their principle market is Europe/America and possibly China.
As i said previously, just because you haven't seen the movies about this chap does not mean they dont exist, the odds of an Arab studio having made one being high, you simply having not seen it.
In fact, i can note there are a few movies about him that have been made by Arabic producers. Are you going to retract your statement now?

When you say they do not make movies for arabs, you mean to say that arab money is not good enough? I know that what you say is true. But it is due to the close bond between the Us and Israel, and a number of very central jewish people in Hollywood (speilberg is jewish, but by no means the only one. Barbra Streisand etc) The evangelical Christians have a bisarre belief system which involves several jeiwsh scenarios, which the jews use politically. I agree that the arabs could have produced something, the Iranians and the Egyptians would have decent actors and directors. But there is no reason why Hollywood cannot make a movie about Ibn batutta when they can make prince of persia or ali baba etc. But you are right in the sense that politics probably has triumphed both over the good story and the potential market appeal. That is a fact.

Quick Reply

Latest