Not the greatest film, but not as "tiresome" as Leonard Maltin claims in his review. (Leonard has seen so many films, he apparently gets tired easily -- See IMDB's sidebar link.) The wonderful thing about this film is its decision to cover a subject area that is largely unknown to Western audiences. Indeed, we Westerners didn't have any idea about this area of the world until the fall of the Soviet Union, where a lot of these mysterious countries emerged with an "an" at the end: Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and the like... largely Turkic regions and nations. Of course, Turks are almost always treated as villains in Western films (Another group that's usually villainous in cinema are the Arabs; however in a rare film where the Arabs were the heroes, "Lawrence of Arabia," the Turks were still the villains).
Now the Turks are not the heroes in this film, per se (not the Turks of today's Turkey, or the then-Ottoman Empire) but various Turkic tribes in the Caucasus (in the film, they're referred to as "tribesmen," "Caucasian," once as "Muslims," or -- derogatorily by the Russians --as "Savages." Probably using the word "Turk" would have been risky, as the Western audience might then lose its sympathy for the film's heroes). In the declining years of the Ottoman Empire, mighty Czarist Russia instigated many wars against the Ottomans, taking good advantage of their weakened state.
The thing I found interesting is that Czarist Russia is often depicted in American and other Western films as noble and heroic... I guess it's the Christian connection. In this film, based on a novel by Tolstoy, the Russians are hinted at as the bloodthirsty oppressors they were. I'm influenced by a rare book, "The Ethnic Cleansing of Ottoman Muslims" by Prof. Justin McCarthy, which showed the unbelievable magnitude of the evil and inhumanity displayed by the Russians, and others, including Bulgars and Armenians. Turkish or Muslim lives are not as important, and this part of history is very unknown to us Westerners. I doubt this subject matter would be chosen in an American film, and if it wasn't for Tolstoy's book, probably the Italians would have been unaware of the subject matter themselves, when they tried to choose an adventurous vehicle for Steve Reeves.
At the beginning of the film when Hadji Murad attacks Russian troops down a lonely road, Robin Hood-style, he meets with the "Maid Marian," Russian princess Maria. When she makes a statement regarding the superiority of Russian soldiers, Murad replies that his tribe kills only soldiers, whereas the Russians slaughter women and children. I'm reminded of the fighters in Chechnya following the same procedure (generally)... they wouldn't target innocent Russian civilians (other than terrorist attacks) during the first phase of their recent struggle, a few years ago. During the second phase, when the Russians invaded again, the Russians murder, rob and rape as indiscriminately as they have done in centuries past. Now that the Chechnyans (is it Chechens?) are no longer winning, there has been a general news black-out in the American media... but their struggle is still a continuation of freeing themselves from Russian domination in the Caucasus that "The White Warrior" is about.
I thought Steve Reeves had a surprising charisma... obviously, he was hired for these kinds of films for his spectacular build and not for his great acting ability, but he came across as a likable and believable hero in this one.
