This movie tells the story of the Life of Mehmed II...the Fall of Constantinople...well, you don't have to be a historian to realize the unprecedented distortion of History. I watched this movie with the best intentions, i wanted to like it, since this was the first time that such a historical event as the Fall of Constantinople was depicted in the big screen. However, at the end of the film, the general feeling was lukewarm. I would like to judge this movie both as a piece of art, and as a piece of history telling.. Production was good. There was a good effort in depicting Constantinople with special effects, and credit should be given to the ones responsible for this. The "bird's view" shots of the city were impressive, Hagia Sophia, Hippodrome, Palaces, the Gates..all can be easily compared to shots of Rome in Gladiator or the shots of Babylon in Alexander. However, there were some problematic "green background" shots where the special effects were poor and fakeness was obvious, especially in shots were actors were implemented. The script was average, not too complicated, kept really simple..but faithful to the Ottomans' point of view..and the direction..well, it was average to bad, with awkward imbalances and gaps. This, in combination with some bad acting made things worse, especially for the first half of the movie. Another issue I would like to note is the absolute miscast for the film. The actors chosen to portray certain characters were purposely selected. Someone could easily see the good and noble Mehmed II, and the "ruthless, almost satanic" face of Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos. The second half of the film was more enjoyable for me. The battles were OK and, as i have already mentioned, it was nice to see at last in a movie the Siege of Constantinople, as Hollywood insists on depicting only the Crusades in Jerusalem, the Battles of Joan of Arc and the skirmishes of Robin Hood. However, I can't help it but judge the movie here as far as the history depiction is concerned...and this depiction could not be more inaccurate... Of course, from the Ottoman point of view, there were so many Turkish heroes that distinguished either with their actions of heroism, or their death. But why this story telling is kept one sided? Why is it kept secret that the city had only 7,000 soldiers defending it? Why is it kept secret that the Ottomans entered the city from a small, unguarded gate? Why is it kept secret that Giustiniani was wounded by a cannonball? Why, by the way, is he depicted as evil? And why we hear nothing about the Emperor's last stand in the battle? This is what annoyed me the most...Constantine Palaiologos was fighting alongside his troops. After realizing that the city is doomed, he tore his imperial suite and no one could distinguish him from the rest of the soldiers. He died fighting, defending his city, his people and his faith...he was depicted throughout the movie but his last stand was somehow suddenly forgot by the filmmakers...and last, but not least..without any intention to criticize the Turks but with all due respect the last scene of the film was rather funny..it is recorded in History what happened after the capture of the city, how many were enslaved and tortured..Mehmed II did indeed offer freedom to Christians, but there is no word in the film about the impaled and tortured Christians, or the fact that the Emperor's head was put in the Hippodrome.. Generally, my rating is 6/10 for the effort and some quite good fight scenes.
158 Reviews
Had great potential but failed
gok-302-59839926 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This movie arguably has the best cinematic concept and special effects in Turkish cinema. Because Turkish cinema has no experience in historical or action movies, it would be wrong to expect a Hollywood quality production. Still it has better combat scenes than I expected.
While these properties can be overlooked, I am very disappointed how the movie turned out. I will be listing these in the order of importance:
1.The movie doesn't reflect or promote the Ottoman Empire and culture the way it should. If I watched this movie in another language I would have thought this is just another European kingdom. Only %10 percent of the movie has Ottoman Culture (praying, war camps, janissaries)
2.Music.. Seriously it couldn't be worse.. There are dozens of awesome Ottoman marches. "How come they are not included?" is not enough, "HOW DARE THEY NOT INCLUDE THESE MARCHES???"
3.The scenario is really bad. Scenario is what people look at this type of movies and the execution of the events is just facepalm level bad. Even though I know the whole story I had a hard time understanding, where we are, what time is it, who are these people, what are these people doing here? They payed to much attention to the cannon but no attention to the ships being pulled to Haliç, which was clearly the main reason the siege succeeded. They should have at least made a 1 minute scene where Mehmed was offering this brilliant idea. The movie is probably really confusing to people who have no knowledge about the history of this battle. This battle changed the era of world and we should have been given more info about why Istanbul is so important why Mehmed wants it so bad. In the movie it just seems like a purposeless childish desire.
4.Giovanni vs Hasan. The fighting scenes are great yeah but why do they look like twins? Why do they look like some random bandits wandering around the battlefield? They are the commanders and best warriors in the battlefield! Surely they should wear an armor and a uniform instead of running around in combat with bare arms like Hercules. Mehmed should have been the main hero in the story not Hasan..
5.The Mehmed we should see in the movie is around 17-22 age. However the actor Devrim Evin is 30 years old and looks 35! They should have picked a charismatic and younger actor. Btw he is the Sultan he should have the best outfit in the empire but even his viziers have better outfits.
6.Troops are not promoted properly. Janissaries? They are not shown as much as they should. And where are their guns? Hand-held rifles probably haven't been invented yet but I am pretty sure they had rifles that had to be set to ground before firing.
7.Where is Deliler(Crazy) Unit? They are known for being the first troops in battle and using Ottoman slapping technique that can knock out enemy knights and horses in armor, when the enemy sees Deliler in front lines they feel depressed cause those dudes kill people by only slapping! How can this awesome stuff not be included in a movie?
8.The leader of 2 sides just don't meet and chat in the middle of the battlefield before war starts. They will be assassinated at first sight.
Yeah they did the battle effects and action parts but they messed up all the other parts big time! How can you have a budget this size and fail this much? The stuff I listed aren't that hard to include in a movie. They just had to think of it instead of making useless action scenes. We aren't here to watch the 1v1 battle of heroes or awesome arrow shower etc.. We are here for the history, for the logic, for the heroic and brilliant moments which weren't even thought of by the producers..
I am sorry but 12 year old kids and illiterate people may find this movie great but in reality this actually had a great potential but is totally failed the great opportunity..
In my opinion the TV series about Sultan Suleyman, The Magnificent Century is better in all the aspects except action and special effects. Yeah it has some lame love scenes but the overall environment is simply better.
While these properties can be overlooked, I am very disappointed how the movie turned out. I will be listing these in the order of importance:
1.The movie doesn't reflect or promote the Ottoman Empire and culture the way it should. If I watched this movie in another language I would have thought this is just another European kingdom. Only %10 percent of the movie has Ottoman Culture (praying, war camps, janissaries)
2.Music.. Seriously it couldn't be worse.. There are dozens of awesome Ottoman marches. "How come they are not included?" is not enough, "HOW DARE THEY NOT INCLUDE THESE MARCHES???"
3.The scenario is really bad. Scenario is what people look at this type of movies and the execution of the events is just facepalm level bad. Even though I know the whole story I had a hard time understanding, where we are, what time is it, who are these people, what are these people doing here? They payed to much attention to the cannon but no attention to the ships being pulled to Haliç, which was clearly the main reason the siege succeeded. They should have at least made a 1 minute scene where Mehmed was offering this brilliant idea. The movie is probably really confusing to people who have no knowledge about the history of this battle. This battle changed the era of world and we should have been given more info about why Istanbul is so important why Mehmed wants it so bad. In the movie it just seems like a purposeless childish desire.
4.Giovanni vs Hasan. The fighting scenes are great yeah but why do they look like twins? Why do they look like some random bandits wandering around the battlefield? They are the commanders and best warriors in the battlefield! Surely they should wear an armor and a uniform instead of running around in combat with bare arms like Hercules. Mehmed should have been the main hero in the story not Hasan..
5.The Mehmed we should see in the movie is around 17-22 age. However the actor Devrim Evin is 30 years old and looks 35! They should have picked a charismatic and younger actor. Btw he is the Sultan he should have the best outfit in the empire but even his viziers have better outfits.
6.Troops are not promoted properly. Janissaries? They are not shown as much as they should. And where are their guns? Hand-held rifles probably haven't been invented yet but I am pretty sure they had rifles that had to be set to ground before firing.
7.Where is Deliler(Crazy) Unit? They are known for being the first troops in battle and using Ottoman slapping technique that can knock out enemy knights and horses in armor, when the enemy sees Deliler in front lines they feel depressed cause those dudes kill people by only slapping! How can this awesome stuff not be included in a movie?
8.The leader of 2 sides just don't meet and chat in the middle of the battlefield before war starts. They will be assassinated at first sight.
Yeah they did the battle effects and action parts but they messed up all the other parts big time! How can you have a budget this size and fail this much? The stuff I listed aren't that hard to include in a movie. They just had to think of it instead of making useless action scenes. We aren't here to watch the 1v1 battle of heroes or awesome arrow shower etc.. We are here for the history, for the logic, for the heroic and brilliant moments which weren't even thought of by the producers..
I am sorry but 12 year old kids and illiterate people may find this movie great but in reality this actually had a great potential but is totally failed the great opportunity..
In my opinion the TV series about Sultan Suleyman, The Magnificent Century is better in all the aspects except action and special effects. Yeah it has some lame love scenes but the overall environment is simply better.
Good film but with big historic mistakes
vakalo23 August 2012
It is absolutely clear that the conquest of Constantinople was a great victory for the Ottamans who finished what the crusaders started in 1204. BUT. We must respect history and the director of the film did non respect history at all. During the siege, Constantinople had nothing to do with the glorious city of the past. Only 40.000 of once 1.000.000 people lived inside the walls which were defended only by 7.000 soldiers. 2.000 of them were foreigners. The Ottomans had an army of about minimum 100.000 soldiers. Some say that the army had 200.000 or more soldiers. The Byzantine empire was found at that time at the lowest level of her past glory and in the absolute decline. It is know to everybody who knows only a few things about history that the Ottomans entered the city though an unguarded small gate known as Kerkoporta which has been left open by mistake. This gives a picture of history as it really happened and nobody can argue about that.Because it is history! The Byzantine empire had come to an end as it happens in all the empires in history. There is no place here to talk about more historic facts. I understand that the film maker wanted to give to Mohamed the part of the glory that he deserves. But the end of the film it is absolutely ridiculous and was made only for propaganda reasons. People who study history knows very well what happened at that days when a city was conquered. Massacres. That happened in Constantinople as well. The director the only thing that he does not tell us is that Mohamed gave candies to children! The conquest is without doubt a great achievement of the Ottomans. It helped them built their empire. The dominated east for about 500 years. But without of course knowing Mohamed gave west a great gift as after the fall of the city all the great men escaped to the west and they helped Renaissance to begin. The film is not bad at all and in my opinion is by far better than Hollywood films of that kind. The Turks are making a great effort to raise their country and are to be praised for this.Since i visited Constantinople a few times i can say that progress is visible in Turkey. Hope that in the future they will make again films like this and even better. But please respect history. History can not change because some people want to do propaganda thank you
characters all wrong
andy-akdeniz26 May 2015
I started watching this movie last night and only watched the first hour. As far as I've seen the actors do not fit the historical characters mostly. The main character "Fatih Sultan Mehmet" gives a feeling of a weak man determined to destroy the Byzantium empire. He is reflected as a sick minded, obsessive person with no human feelings. If you can recall the Turkish TV series "Sultan Murad the 4th" with Cihan Unal starring as the sultan , compared to him , Sultan Mehmed character is a weakling. I think that is an insult to the actual person who is considered as one of the most heroic sultans in the Ottoman lineage. Most of the other characters also seem like they can't reflect the persona of a 15th century historical figure. They play their parts as if they are in a contemporary movie. It seems to me that the producers didn't employ serious historical consultants in the making, but they just made up stuff as they wished. If you compare the characters in this movie to a real good historical movie such as "mission" with Robert de Niro, you can see what I mean.
I think the reason behind the bad casting is in the politics in Turkey. The financiers were probably from one conservative group, the production crew an the cast were from modernists, and as a result, they didn't cast some of the actors in Turkey who would fit to some of the roles perfectly because they were affiliated with other groups. It's a pity that political wars in Turkey weakens everything from economy to film industry.
Other than these, this movie deserves praise for some good action scenes, computer generated graphics and visual effects, costumes, and set designs.
I think the reason behind the bad casting is in the politics in Turkey. The financiers were probably from one conservative group, the production crew an the cast were from modernists, and as a result, they didn't cast some of the actors in Turkey who would fit to some of the roles perfectly because they were affiliated with other groups. It's a pity that political wars in Turkey weakens everything from economy to film industry.
Other than these, this movie deserves praise for some good action scenes, computer generated graphics and visual effects, costumes, and set designs.
Great history, great movie.
kngtr18 February 2012
I think everyone must watch this film, because there is a great history, great actions and great war... 1453, The conquest of Constantinople by the Ottomans signaled the end of the Byzantine empire; the Battle of Castillon concluded the Hundred Years' War... The Fall of Constantinople was the capture of the capital of the Byzantine Empire, which occurred after a siege by the Ottoman Empire, under the command of 21-year-old Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II, against the defending army commanded by Byzantine Emperor Constantine XI. The siege lasted from Friday, 6 April 1453 until Tuesday, 29 May 1453, when the city was conquered by the Ottomans.
Faith Sultan Mehmet Conquest of İstanbul
isa_turan17 February 2012
Best movie made in TURKEY about history of Ottoman Empire Sultan Faith Mehmet Conquest of İstanbul. Dreams realized film. May be turning point for Turkish cinema. Just focus on the advantage that the Conquest of Istanbul. Special effort was spent for each sequence.
Faruk Aksoy's "Conquest 1453", historical-epic Hollywood does not conform to modern examples. However the Turkish cinema belonging to this area are accustomed to give B-class function works by transforming a class of cheap transfers. Conquest of the New Age of Istanbul, Faith Sultan Mehmet and Ulubatli Hasan started focusing on the stories that brought the nationalist outlook, as well as '70s Hollywood often makes dreams come alive on screen. The essence of story about the project to produce this important historical event in Hollywood who strut "Conquest 1453", can be considered as one of the turning point of the popular Turkish cinema.
Faruk Aksoy's "Conquest 1453", historical-epic Hollywood does not conform to modern examples. However the Turkish cinema belonging to this area are accustomed to give B-class function works by transforming a class of cheap transfers. Conquest of the New Age of Istanbul, Faith Sultan Mehmet and Ulubatli Hasan started focusing on the stories that brought the nationalist outlook, as well as '70s Hollywood often makes dreams come alive on screen. The essence of story about the project to produce this important historical event in Hollywood who strut "Conquest 1453", can be considered as one of the turning point of the popular Turkish cinema.
A rather skewed portrayal of Turkish History
TravelTrousers12 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
As an outsider who knows little of the history of Turkey or the Ottoman empire by the end of this movie I was supposed to feel that Mehmed II besieged and sacked Constantinopal purely to protect the orthodox Christians....
But a movie made by Turks about presumably one of their most important events in history wouldn't have gone down so well if Mehmed was portrayed as a blood thirsty egomaniac with daddy issues. I guess getting the Christians to call him the anti-Christ a couple of times was reason enough to justify the invasion...
I guess it would be the same if a British film company made a film about the heroic bombing of Dresden....
I watched the whole thing and found it rather interesting but in no way justified of it's high score. It wasn't a total waste of my time but then when you've watched everything in the top 250 it's hard to find *really* great movies...
I think they did a pretty good job on their budget. The effects were pretty good, the actors all did a good job and the direction/cinematography was just fine.
I did find a few problems with the plot and such though.
Why did the trapped sappers kill themselves so far from the wall? Why didn't the second suicidal sapper just use a small candle burning down to set off the explosion? The use of two burly guys with beards and long hair made it slightly confusing at the start (Im sure they're very famous in Turkey but they could have differentiated them a lot more). When you're fighting with sharp swords it's not a good idea to use your hands to hold the blades to block...
My biggest problem was the stupid length of the siege. They messed around for 2 months and then *boom* and *boom* they're in and it's all over! I would have been there 2 hours, aimed ALL my canons at the gate and be in the sauna with the girls by sunset...
Glad to see Turkish cinema going for it though! :)
But a movie made by Turks about presumably one of their most important events in history wouldn't have gone down so well if Mehmed was portrayed as a blood thirsty egomaniac with daddy issues. I guess getting the Christians to call him the anti-Christ a couple of times was reason enough to justify the invasion...
I guess it would be the same if a British film company made a film about the heroic bombing of Dresden....
I watched the whole thing and found it rather interesting but in no way justified of it's high score. It wasn't a total waste of my time but then when you've watched everything in the top 250 it's hard to find *really* great movies...
I think they did a pretty good job on their budget. The effects were pretty good, the actors all did a good job and the direction/cinematography was just fine.
I did find a few problems with the plot and such though.
Why did the trapped sappers kill themselves so far from the wall? Why didn't the second suicidal sapper just use a small candle burning down to set off the explosion? The use of two burly guys with beards and long hair made it slightly confusing at the start (Im sure they're very famous in Turkey but they could have differentiated them a lot more). When you're fighting with sharp swords it's not a good idea to use your hands to hold the blades to block...
My biggest problem was the stupid length of the siege. They messed around for 2 months and then *boom* and *boom* they're in and it's all over! I would have been there 2 hours, aimed ALL my canons at the gate and be in the sauna with the girls by sunset...
Glad to see Turkish cinema going for it though! :)
An insult to Turks, an insult to filmmaking
picaresk10 March 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This film is an insult to Faith Sultan Mehmet, to Ottoman history, and to the intelligence of any audience. It is the very example of how western orientalizm can be internalized. The reason why the conquest of Constantinopolis was a matter of survival for the Turks -the economical, political reasons- were totally non existent. Mehmet II, a well educated man, is nothing more than a religious zealot in this film. Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos, who is well respected by the Turks, is a caricature.
Suicide bombings, only a phenomenon of late 20th century, is a common theme in the film: all Ottoman soldiers behave like suicide bombers! What is this? What are they trying to imply? This is a part of the recent series of superficial films and TV shows which seem to aim de-educating Turkey, constantly attack reason, and play at Turkish people's feelings of being under attack of western contempt, orientalizm and memories of WWI defeat.
The side themes fail as hard as the main theme: an absurd love story, a wife with no dialogue, unexplainable motives of Urban, and so on...
This film is harshly criticized in Turkey. I can't imagine why it is being defended so eagerly on IMDb. Because it fails in stirring any feeling of satisfaction of national pride as well. No character study, no context, no wit, not even a propaganda, just the first depiction of the conquest with a relatively big production, a way to imagine how it was, and that's why people go to see this movie in masses. One can't deny the production of war scenes is an improvement for Turkish film industry, but unfortunately, that's all.
Suicide bombings, only a phenomenon of late 20th century, is a common theme in the film: all Ottoman soldiers behave like suicide bombers! What is this? What are they trying to imply? This is a part of the recent series of superficial films and TV shows which seem to aim de-educating Turkey, constantly attack reason, and play at Turkish people's feelings of being under attack of western contempt, orientalizm and memories of WWI defeat.
The side themes fail as hard as the main theme: an absurd love story, a wife with no dialogue, unexplainable motives of Urban, and so on...
This film is harshly criticized in Turkey. I can't imagine why it is being defended so eagerly on IMDb. Because it fails in stirring any feeling of satisfaction of national pride as well. No character study, no context, no wit, not even a propaganda, just the first depiction of the conquest with a relatively big production, a way to imagine how it was, and that's why people go to see this movie in masses. One can't deny the production of war scenes is an improvement for Turkish film industry, but unfortunately, that's all.
Very bad effects and too much inspiration!
oraygungor22 February 2012
It is like a mix of Lord of the Rings, Troy, 300, Scorpion King etc... Every moment when I was watching this movie was taking me to another movie. It is too much inspiration!
There isn't a slight effect that is different than these movies, and the story and everything is exaggerated too much!
The most important part where the humans carry the ships onshore only takes 1 min in the whole movie! This event is the most important historical event and it takes only one min!
If you are planning to watch this, you should be aware that; the history is not covered correctly and too much exaggeration, the most important parts only takes a few min (ship being carried by many people onshore), It is totally the same effect for other movies that we have known, maybe taken from these movies directly, I don't know and the end was so poor.
I cant believe I paid 15 TL for this movie!
I would not pay any penny for this movie if I knew these!
There isn't a slight effect that is different than these movies, and the story and everything is exaggerated too much!
The most important part where the humans carry the ships onshore only takes 1 min in the whole movie! This event is the most important historical event and it takes only one min!
If you are planning to watch this, you should be aware that; the history is not covered correctly and too much exaggeration, the most important parts only takes a few min (ship being carried by many people onshore), It is totally the same effect for other movies that we have known, maybe taken from these movies directly, I don't know and the end was so poor.
I cant believe I paid 15 TL for this movie!
I would not pay any penny for this movie if I knew these!
Conquest 1453
alicagriay18 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The biggest budget job in Turkish cinema sector, I think that $17.000.000 was spent in this movie.When you see this budget, naturally you expect great things, you want to spend your time for a visual show. Unfortunately, I couldn't find that I expected. In fact, for 160 minutes, we would deserve better movie. The movie starts in 600's years, Mecca. Our prophet Hz.Muhammed says that ''Constantinople will definitely be conquered one day, what a nice commandment is the commandment that conquers it, what nice soldiers is the soldiers that conquers it.'' Couldn't be better starting for this movie but later Then we go Ottoman Empire and bear witness to that II.Mehmed gets throne. And we understand after a few minutes that the movie for kids. In fact, almost the movie for kids because it contains a lot of violence. I don't want to be unfair for done work. But I wish better things. In this movie, everybody talks Turkish even if Byzantium people. OK, I can understand this but. Why are all the Ottomans talking Turkish as if they live in our era. I don't expect to Ottomans language but I don't want to it of course. I want to talking about costumes. I didn't like costumes obviously. I don't think that Ottomans wore these. Even if they did, every costume can't be new and clear.(I'm talking about soldier) When we come to effects, I think that extreme bad. When I saw the scene of sinking ship, I closed my eyes. A lot of PC games effects better than this movie's. I can accept the fake beard on players in short movies but I can't say the same thing for $17.000.000 movie. I think that there was a lot of unnecessary love scene about Ulubatlı Hasan. The other thing about Ulubatlı Hasan, I saw the Aragornfrom Gondor instead of Ulubatlı Hasan. The movie showed basic information maybe some wrong information us. But a lot of people liked this movie and will continue like. I think that these people can't tell apart myths from real. Can the movie get money? Of course, it can, it will do very much. I hope that we will see better movies in future from our directors. But I call the directors, please don't touch our history, if you don't know our history and you can't make good movie.
One word ; disappointment!
tolgaelverdi6 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Well,before reading my review, you should know something about me first. I don't like commenting on movies generally, because it's relative, you like or you hate, i have no right to comment. Another thing that needs to be considered, i'm from Turkey. Finally, i'm not racist.
Why i write this comment even if i say liking/disliking a movie is relative ? Because of high-rated comments. I can't believe how people voted this movie 8.9 There are lots of historical and scientific inaccuracies, acting is terrible, really terrible and visual effects are worse than acting. I can not even decide what kind of movie is this ? Romance? Drama? Sci-Fi? Action? or anime ? Yes, it is possible, there are lots of bad movies around the world. But this one is over-rated and on the other hand, lots of money has spent on it.
There are some scenes that i was ashamed, like those so-called romance scenes.I decided to quit watching so many times.
They could have made a great documentary without wasting such huge amounts of money.
Why i write this comment even if i say liking/disliking a movie is relative ? Because of high-rated comments. I can't believe how people voted this movie 8.9 There are lots of historical and scientific inaccuracies, acting is terrible, really terrible and visual effects are worse than acting. I can not even decide what kind of movie is this ? Romance? Drama? Sci-Fi? Action? or anime ? Yes, it is possible, there are lots of bad movies around the world. But this one is over-rated and on the other hand, lots of money has spent on it.
There are some scenes that i was ashamed, like those so-called romance scenes.I decided to quit watching so many times.
They could have made a great documentary without wasting such huge amounts of money.
A touchstone for the Turkish film industry...
muratnarar19 February 2012
First of all, the movie is definitely worth watching. Although it is not perfect in terms of the script and the digital effects, we must admit that the effort is worthy of commendation. It is a significant step for the Turkish film industry with its $17M budget and more importantly, its bravery to make the movie of the conquest of Istanbul, a great historical event that is divine for not only the Turks but also the entire Muslim world. Of course we need to criticize, but the critics should be as supportive as possible in order not to discourage people. By the way, even though it is a $17M budget movie, it is not fair to compare this movie with Hollywood productions since the budgets of similar Hollywood productions are more than $100M. For all these reasons, it is a great production, definitely worth to watch, and everyone should be supportive about it to make the Turkish film industry better.
Is it realistic? No. But what about other films so well rated here?
monastiraki23 April 2022
Would you understand that someone rates "Saving private Ryan" with a 1, because it depicts germans like evils and morons?
This film has many problems, but it's not more manichaeistic than western (american) films about christians, WWII or Vietnam's war.
And it's worth to see it at least because it's a different subject, from another point of view.
This film has many problems, but it's not more manichaeistic than western (american) films about christians, WWII or Vietnam's war.
And it's worth to see it at least because it's a different subject, from another point of view.
Historically inaccurate, but more importantly bad as a movie
sithocan13 September 2012
I will not go into how the movie is historically accurate (it's simply inaccurate), how it favors Turks and hides their devils (though one should think how could balkan nations manage to preserve their religion, language and culture under Ottoman ruling for 2-4 centuries while all British and French colonies lost all in a century before commenting on this topic), how Vatican was portraited as selfish (I haven't heard anything about their conditioned support until this movie).
My main disappointment is the movie itself. Though its budget is quite high for any Turkish movie, it's not on par with Hollywood productions. So, I didn't expect Hollywood quality special effects and I'm not disappointed in this regard. They are cheap, though not cheapest, compared to Hollywood. But I think that's all can be done within its budget. So it doesn't bother me.
My concerns are about things that has nothing to do with the budget. I don't know if it's due to script or directing but storytelling is awful. The story jumps from here to there and back so suddenly. It's like watching sketches joined as a movie. Also I don't understand why Arabic people talk in Arabic but Byzantians and Italians talk in Turkish.
And there is no character development. Why Giovanni Giustiniani is bad? He behaved kindly to Era. We haven't seen him acting badly to his men. And bam, he became evil. When I think objectively, I see a thoughtful man who is doing his job very good (just how a respected commander should be). So they should fight as respectful rivals at the end. If the director wanted us to hate him, then he should have portraited him as an evil. And why Era developed a sudden feeling of revenge? As an adopted Muslim, she spent all her life with Christians (except her childhood) and she hasn't shown any dislike to the community she's been in. She's just like an happy Christian. Also, the foreseen one, Mehmet The Conqueror is portraited as a man obsessed with taking Istanbul. He should have been a wise and intelligent commander. But when everything goes bad, he begins to shout and insult his men. This is the behaviour we see from cruel kings in Hollywood productions. It's not the behaviour the hero should have. He should not lose his temper, he should have been patient (Look at Saladdin in Kingdom of Heaven while his attacks become ineffective). And his motive should not simply be based on Hz. Mohammed's word. There should be other reasons (for example ongoing threat to Ottomans, etc) for the need to take Istanbul and the prophet's word should have been shown just before the end credits.
There are many illogical things (scriptwise). One of them is: Ottoman tunnel diggers has been digging tunnels for 2 days and they are still outside the citywalls. But when Byzantines become aware of them, they also dig tunnels but they reach them (which is outside the city walls) in almost ten minutes? Byzantine soldiers digging faster than digging specialists?
For cinematography, I won't say anything. It's just not good.
Overall, it's a miss. It has the potential but not because of limited budget but bad script and directing, the movie wasted his chance.
PS: Some will say "Do not overcriticize your country's work". But as I said, I have nothing to say against technical aspects, it's one of the best when considered within its budget, but scripting and directing has nothing to do with budget and these are the ones that make this movie bad. Nothing else.
My main disappointment is the movie itself. Though its budget is quite high for any Turkish movie, it's not on par with Hollywood productions. So, I didn't expect Hollywood quality special effects and I'm not disappointed in this regard. They are cheap, though not cheapest, compared to Hollywood. But I think that's all can be done within its budget. So it doesn't bother me.
My concerns are about things that has nothing to do with the budget. I don't know if it's due to script or directing but storytelling is awful. The story jumps from here to there and back so suddenly. It's like watching sketches joined as a movie. Also I don't understand why Arabic people talk in Arabic but Byzantians and Italians talk in Turkish.
And there is no character development. Why Giovanni Giustiniani is bad? He behaved kindly to Era. We haven't seen him acting badly to his men. And bam, he became evil. When I think objectively, I see a thoughtful man who is doing his job very good (just how a respected commander should be). So they should fight as respectful rivals at the end. If the director wanted us to hate him, then he should have portraited him as an evil. And why Era developed a sudden feeling of revenge? As an adopted Muslim, she spent all her life with Christians (except her childhood) and she hasn't shown any dislike to the community she's been in. She's just like an happy Christian. Also, the foreseen one, Mehmet The Conqueror is portraited as a man obsessed with taking Istanbul. He should have been a wise and intelligent commander. But when everything goes bad, he begins to shout and insult his men. This is the behaviour we see from cruel kings in Hollywood productions. It's not the behaviour the hero should have. He should not lose his temper, he should have been patient (Look at Saladdin in Kingdom of Heaven while his attacks become ineffective). And his motive should not simply be based on Hz. Mohammed's word. There should be other reasons (for example ongoing threat to Ottomans, etc) for the need to take Istanbul and the prophet's word should have been shown just before the end credits.
There are many illogical things (scriptwise). One of them is: Ottoman tunnel diggers has been digging tunnels for 2 days and they are still outside the citywalls. But when Byzantines become aware of them, they also dig tunnels but they reach them (which is outside the city walls) in almost ten minutes? Byzantine soldiers digging faster than digging specialists?
For cinematography, I won't say anything. It's just not good.
Overall, it's a miss. It has the potential but not because of limited budget but bad script and directing, the movie wasted his chance.
PS: Some will say "Do not overcriticize your country's work". But as I said, I have nothing to say against technical aspects, it's one of the best when considered within its budget, but scripting and directing has nothing to do with budget and these are the ones that make this movie bad. Nothing else.
A huge step for the Turkish Cinema
ahmet_gench19 February 2012
First of all , the movie is about the conquest of Istanbul ( Constantinople ) by the Ottoman Turks under the lead of Sultan Mehmet Han. After the conquest , he was given the title " Conqueror " and since then he has been known as Mehmet the Conqueror.
This is clearly the most important incident took place in the history of the Turks , so the expectations were pretty high. What I believe is that they thrived under the pressure. In terms of the accuracy of the story , almost everything looked fine. There were a few extra stuff added such as the love that took place between Eva and Ulubatli Hasan.
And the visual effects.. This is what I was wondering. To me , they rock ! . There were some scenes that I haven't even seen in Hollywood movies. This one will encourage the producers to make such movies again and again. This was just the first and huge step leading to the others that will come after Conquest 1453.
All in all , this movie rocks ! Even if you are not Turkish , you should have a look at it and I am sure that from the moment you start watching it , you won't dare go to the toilet.
This is clearly the most important incident took place in the history of the Turks , so the expectations were pretty high. What I believe is that they thrived under the pressure. In terms of the accuracy of the story , almost everything looked fine. There were a few extra stuff added such as the love that took place between Eva and Ulubatli Hasan.
And the visual effects.. This is what I was wondering. To me , they rock ! . There were some scenes that I haven't even seen in Hollywood movies. This one will encourage the producers to make such movies again and again. This was just the first and huge step leading to the others that will come after Conquest 1453.
All in all , this movie rocks ! Even if you are not Turkish , you should have a look at it and I am sure that from the moment you start watching it , you won't dare go to the toilet.
It is a great movie about Ottoman
xibox_1619 February 2012
This is the best movie in Turkey ever made. Everybody should watch and see how Turkey cinemas developed. For war movies such this, the movies' budget looks ridiculous. So it is good work. While you're watching it, you do not get bored even a minute. The characters are awesome, especially Sultan Mehemd, Hasan and Giustiniani. The Musics are also fantastic. Benjamin Wallfisch has a sign on this amazing musics as well. In short, you just see it and then decide. Faith Aksoy, the director, made bad movies in past like Recep İvedik but his new movie is very different and great. You should see this great movie. It shows Ottoman Historiy and Tradition incredibly. It is really great. I did not watch a movie like Fetih 1453 in Turkey's cinema history. Faith Sultan Mehmed is great sultan in Ottoman History. He is a giant. I will continue in Turkish. Noo :( I tried but not permission. Anyway where were we? I hope this movie will come the U.S.A and Europe. The people who live in these countries have a chance to see this amazing movie. If you have a little information about the history of Ottoman, you love it so much.
Very beautiful film - ignore the naysayers!
bc_rocker2 August 2015
So I finally got around to watching this film after having it on my list for quite some time. I have almost no historical knowledge of the Ottoman/Byzantine empire from this time period; I went into this film looking to be entertained, to watch a pseudo-historical period piece similar to something like "300" (expecting less action) and that's exactly what I got.
The cinematography, sets, landscapes, and costumes were all very beautiful. There was a surprising amount of military-related action, and while there were a few slower moments involving politics and character relationships, overall I was entertained and didn't really find the film boring at all despite the 2 hour 40 minute run time.
I see a lot of criticism on this forum regarding the historical inaccuracies and the possible vote-manipulation but I really can't understand why. The film doesn't market itself as a documentary, it's as historically accurate as 300 or Gladiator. The film stands on it's own if you go into it with an open mind without any expectations other than being entertained. As for the vote-manipulation by Turkish people, I myself am not Turkish, I'm Canadian (english/german ancestry) and in fact don't even know a single Turkish person. I easily rate this film 7/10 based on the quality and entertainment value and have already recommended it to several friends who all enjoyed it as much or more than I have.
Ignore the naysayers! If you enjoy a beautiful and well-made film with a touch of political intrigue and big-scale siege warfare you will enjoy Fetih 1453 (Conquest 1453)
The cinematography, sets, landscapes, and costumes were all very beautiful. There was a surprising amount of military-related action, and while there were a few slower moments involving politics and character relationships, overall I was entertained and didn't really find the film boring at all despite the 2 hour 40 minute run time.
I see a lot of criticism on this forum regarding the historical inaccuracies and the possible vote-manipulation but I really can't understand why. The film doesn't market itself as a documentary, it's as historically accurate as 300 or Gladiator. The film stands on it's own if you go into it with an open mind without any expectations other than being entertained. As for the vote-manipulation by Turkish people, I myself am not Turkish, I'm Canadian (english/german ancestry) and in fact don't even know a single Turkish person. I easily rate this film 7/10 based on the quality and entertainment value and have already recommended it to several friends who all enjoyed it as much or more than I have.
Ignore the naysayers! If you enjoy a beautiful and well-made film with a touch of political intrigue and big-scale siege warfare you will enjoy Fetih 1453 (Conquest 1453)
Exaggeration and Sublimation of Ottoman History
aleladebirali18 September 2012
Almost everything in the movie, is very blown up: Costumes, characters, places... Not everything fits to what really happened back then, nor does it have to. But that doesn't mean that the director has the right to irritatingly twist history in favor of conservatives in Turkey.
He falsely presents Emperor Mehmet II as a superhero that makes almost no mistakes, and as a monogamous person. Of course, the facts that he was a wine drinker, a lover of ancient Greek and Roman arts, that he let the city to be sacked for two days, he hanged one of his viziers, and killed all his brothers and made a law that allows and suggests his successors to kill their brothers "for continuation of the state", were all ignored! And we see "the enemies" always speak with a sneaky voice which shows that they're the coward and evil guys. Byzantine Emperor has a weird "digital palace" that has numberless columns, and lives in corruption. War scenes and military costumes are so unrealistic, as well... The list goes on.
Shortly, what I saw was a religious, peasant point of view and a foolish sublimation of Ottoman history. That's what happens with big budget and very limited mentality.
He falsely presents Emperor Mehmet II as a superhero that makes almost no mistakes, and as a monogamous person. Of course, the facts that he was a wine drinker, a lover of ancient Greek and Roman arts, that he let the city to be sacked for two days, he hanged one of his viziers, and killed all his brothers and made a law that allows and suggests his successors to kill their brothers "for continuation of the state", were all ignored! And we see "the enemies" always speak with a sneaky voice which shows that they're the coward and evil guys. Byzantine Emperor has a weird "digital palace" that has numberless columns, and lives in corruption. War scenes and military costumes are so unrealistic, as well... The list goes on.
Shortly, what I saw was a religious, peasant point of view and a foolish sublimation of Ottoman history. That's what happens with big budget and very limited mentality.
an anecdote
ceyhundemirtas8819 February 2012
In the hell,there are boilers and some people is boiling in them. Hell-hounds are standing for each boiler. Just one boiler has no hell-hound. Somebody asks that "Why is that boiler has no hell-hound?". And the answer comes "Dont worry! They are Turks! When somebody attempts to go out the others pull along his arms.They can stop themselves". So; don't do that.i think we should not exaggerate to negative review. I really very like this movie and i can watch again and again.i give 8 stars for this movie objectively but now it s time to 10. Costumes,fight scenes,acting,musics are good.Script and fiction are not very bad.A good start,we can make betters.Thank you producer.
Excellent for Turkish Cinema
alpayacar19 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I think the movie is very successful.It's the most expensive movie in Turkish cinema. Cast selection, visual effects, sword scenes are very successful. People criticize movie about historic mistakes.Director focused on Ulubatli Hasan.Some of critics said this is copy paste of Hollywood movies like Troy,The Lord of The Rings and Braveheart. On the other hand the budget seems too high in Turkey. Otherwise $17,000,000 is not high for Hollywood's historic production. This is the success of the director. Faruk Aksoy tried to his best. Fetih 1453 is a milestone for Turkish Movies. The success of this movie will encourage movie producers and directors in Turkey.After then we can see Turkish movies in Top 250.
fake kingdom of heaven, lead actor fake aragorn
abdullahkesgin-296-8341679 March 2012
Warning: Spoilers
17 million dollar budget may be the highest number in Turkish film making industry, but this does NOT make it sufficient or even close to sufficient for a film like Fetih. Acting is less then amateur cause they don't have enough payment to hire real actors. Ships and language do Not suit ottoman era. There are enormous historical mistakes even conflicts. Make you wonder whether the director consulted some or any historians. Sword fighting scenes are unbearable. Ulubatlı Hasan has nothing to do with being an ottoman nor a turk. Director tries to make a replica of Aragorn which he fails desperately. Because even if he did it successfully it would again has no value as Ulubatlı Hasan was an ottoman, and Aragorn a fiction hero. His way of fighting does NOT resemble Turkish techniques, he is just moving like a disgustingly cheap samurai with cheaper aragorn hair and beard cut. This director has no clue about the character even about the character's outfit. He could have at least looked into any history book and get a clue.
The worst scene was the illegal sex scene which has no way to happen in Hasan's life.
Visual effects are worse then that are in power rangers, especially the scene where the ship sinks. İt was SO bad that it was the scene i left the theatre. And ships in this movie are not the ships Sultan Mehmet had transported through land which was considered "impossible" at the time. This transportation of battle ships across the landscape İS one of the hardest decisions made by a leader if not the only one, in the history of mankind. And the effect of this decision on the people or on the historians of that time is totally ignored in this movie. Sultan Mehmet the Conquerer, the wise, the loyal, who has great piety is just an arrogant kid in this movie. The charismatic scholar of Islam, great hodja Akşemseddin (his name means "the sun of religion") is again totally ignored.
The scene where two kings meet on horse backs DİD NOT happen in the siege, it's from Ridley Scott's K.O.H. Enough writing about this film, it doesn't worth to write about. Director has just edited scenes from foreign films, so he is not a real director, he is a fake editor. İ gave it 1 out of 10 because there's no scoring system below zero in İMDB.
The worst scene was the illegal sex scene which has no way to happen in Hasan's life.
Visual effects are worse then that are in power rangers, especially the scene where the ship sinks. İt was SO bad that it was the scene i left the theatre. And ships in this movie are not the ships Sultan Mehmet had transported through land which was considered "impossible" at the time. This transportation of battle ships across the landscape İS one of the hardest decisions made by a leader if not the only one, in the history of mankind. And the effect of this decision on the people or on the historians of that time is totally ignored in this movie. Sultan Mehmet the Conquerer, the wise, the loyal, who has great piety is just an arrogant kid in this movie. The charismatic scholar of Islam, great hodja Akşemseddin (his name means "the sun of religion") is again totally ignored.
The scene where two kings meet on horse backs DİD NOT happen in the siege, it's from Ridley Scott's K.O.H. Enough writing about this film, it doesn't worth to write about. Director has just edited scenes from foreign films, so he is not a real director, he is a fake editor. İ gave it 1 out of 10 because there's no scoring system below zero in İMDB.
Stop historical debates , it's a movie data base ... !!
ahmed_nasser99022 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I just watched the movie yesterday , as a movie it's fantastic , maybe a match to Hollywood movies of same genre . However , most of reviews here are discussing the movie from a historical view forgetting that any period of time in history is seen by different ways by everyone according to their belief , So, as a Muslim I see Mohammed Al Faith as a great man , leader and a Sultan , others (I mean people of other European countries who were in wars with the Ottomon empire) will see him as a Barbaric killer , so , let's put history aside and talk about the movie from a cinematic view ... Story is good for me , I believe that the content historically is correct ,so, I like it and I'm proud of Mohammed AL Faith as a Muslim conqueror and somehow the true founder of the Islamic Caliphate of Ottomon empire . Music is good ... Acting is very good and I didn't know before (as Egyptian) that the Turkish actors are that talented . Visuals and direction are absolutely STUNNING , if i didn't know before watching that it's a Turkish movie , I would say that it's a Hollywood production ...
Finally , please put politics and history aside and enjoy the movie as a movie , and if you can't stand the historical mistakes(from your point of view) simply , don't watch it .!!
9 out of 10
Finally , please put politics and history aside and enjoy the movie as a movie , and if you can't stand the historical mistakes(from your point of view) simply , don't watch it .!!
9 out of 10
Not Much About History
almodather15 November 2019
Waste of time
dorimi22 August 2012
As someone said before "I am sorry but 12 year old kids and illiterate people may find this movie great but in reality this actually had a great potential but is totally failed the great opportunity..." Im great fan of history and i was waiting for opportunity to watch this perspectively awesome movie, but ... I've just wasted 2h30m of my time.
1. Those two Ottoman spies - really? I think director watched too much of James Bond series. They just like two superheroes who could defeat whole army. Really stupid move. 2. Much more fantasy then history. Nothing to add. 3. Absolutely Turkish -not for foreigners eyes. I guess director find out who were those lost people of Atlantis - definitely Ottoman people. 4. Why Romans (Byzantines) shown as inbred imbeciles? Sad move by director.
1. Those two Ottoman spies - really? I think director watched too much of James Bond series. They just like two superheroes who could defeat whole army. Really stupid move. 2. Much more fantasy then history. Nothing to add. 3. Absolutely Turkish -not for foreigners eyes. I guess director find out who were those lost people of Atlantis - definitely Ottoman people. 4. Why Romans (Byzantines) shown as inbred imbeciles? Sad move by director.
Splendid cinematography, spectacular battle sequences n one of the best sword fighting choreography.
Fella_shibby8 October 2017
I first saw this on a dvd which I own.
Revisited it recently on a blu ray which I own.
People may crib why n how, this n that, ifs n buts, lauda lasun, etc.
The fellas who have rated this low n hav posted negative reviews n are cribbing bah historical mumbo jumbo, they are the same fellas who are okay with Hollywood propaganda movies.
Coming back to this movie, it is one of the best in the genre.
As an entertaining period war film, this film is an amazeballs.
I love Hollywood films. They too make fun of their villains n show their heroes as the best people.
Consider this as jus a film n enjoy the battle sequences.
Haven't seen much of Turkish cinema but this film n Valley of the Wolves made me a fan of their movies.
Both r solid action entertainment.
The actor who played Hassan is terrific.
Fans of Troy, Kingdom of Heaven, Gladiator, Red Cliff, etc may enjoy this epic action film.
Revisited it recently on a blu ray which I own.
People may crib why n how, this n that, ifs n buts, lauda lasun, etc.
The fellas who have rated this low n hav posted negative reviews n are cribbing bah historical mumbo jumbo, they are the same fellas who are okay with Hollywood propaganda movies.
Coming back to this movie, it is one of the best in the genre.
As an entertaining period war film, this film is an amazeballs.
I love Hollywood films. They too make fun of their villains n show their heroes as the best people.
Consider this as jus a film n enjoy the battle sequences.
Haven't seen much of Turkish cinema but this film n Valley of the Wolves made me a fan of their movies.
Both r solid action entertainment.
The actor who played Hassan is terrific.
Fans of Troy, Kingdom of Heaven, Gladiator, Red Cliff, etc may enjoy this epic action film.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
