Great cinematography but really doesn't hold up. *SPOILERS*
When I was 10 years old and saw this for the first time, I considered it some sort of intelligent prestige picture, especially as I was getting into Geography pretty heavily as a kid and considered this a bit of a "geography-oriented movie", much like the more recent THE WAY BACK. Oddly enough, both films were made in Morocco. Unfortunately, more than 30 years later, this movie turned out to be nothing like I remembered. Quick aside - For some reason I also remembered the society Connery becomes head of to be high up in the Himalayas and that his big death-plunge was into some deep snowy abyss and we had a close-up of his face with the wind blowing on him as he fell to his death. Perhaps I was thinking of LOST HORIZON or something?
I didn't remember this film having such a goofy sense of humor to it and never containing an ounce of realism. The central plan of two British sergeants sneaking into Central Asia and profiteering would never have worked without some massive amount of support staff and locals on their side. Two men on their own would have been murdered immediately. I'm also not clear on the mid-movie battle scene where someone (who?) intentionally (?) hits Connery with a (fake?) arrow and for the rest of the movie their translator is in on it? He's such a devoted follower that he even commits suicide for them, but at the same time seems to be the only one that is aware of, and supportive of, the big fraud from the start. It doesn't really make much sense and all the characters feel more like cartoon characters by the end of the film, so it becomes harder and harder to sympathize or care about either of them. I don't know if that's what Huston was going for, but it feels like a major missed opportunity.