"I read his script and you know, the man is known for his tough writing. He wrote CONAN and DIRTY HARRY and APOCALYPSE NOW, and it’ll be interesting to see how he works behind the camera. I’m playing Genghis. John wrote as a piece told from the son and grandson’s point of view, how they saw this mythic figure from their family. You see him in flashbacks, back when he was in his mid-40s. And back then, being in your mid-40s was being REALLY old."
It seems that Rourke is a fan of Milius. A while back, Rourke was in talks to play "Conan's" dad in the "Conan" movie, before the deal fell through. Rourke is known to be quite picky in his roles, and tends to make - let's just say - bizarre demands. Could it be that Rourke was initially excited about a new Conan the Barbarian film, realised that Milius wouldn't be involved and that the film would be different, and eventually backed out? It would be depressing if, in some interview down the line, Rourke said "When I read the script, I was all "brah, this is totally different from the original. Why'd you change it?" And when it was clear John wasn't even going to be involved, I didn't want to be party to a project that wouldn't treat the original movie with respect." Or some such.
And, of course, I can't help but make Conan the Barbarian comparisons. The very famous "Crush ya enemeez, see dem driffen befowr yu, ant heyah de lamentations of de wimmen" line from Conan the Barbarian is a slightly altered translation of a quote attributed to Genghis Khan. The original was better.
The greatest joy for a man is to defeat his enemies, to drive them before him, to take from them all they possess, to see those they love in tears, to ride their horses, and to hold their wives and daughters in his arms.
As an aside, the JoeBlo article has the best denoument possible in discussion with Genghis Khan.
He conquered vast portions of northern China and southwestern Asia before visiting modern day San Dimas for a high school history report.
Tarim's blessings on you, JoeBlo.