Fetih 1453 (Conquest 1453) Reviews
April 19, 2013
Did however appreciate the affect they placed in the Ottoman ranks wondering about the Hungarians to arrive, and the 3 Geonese ships that passed the Ottoman Navy. The actor in place of Mehmed did excellent, great acting. I would not however higher Urban's daughter, besides her striking blue eyes, she needs some work. Also the fighting by the Greeks themselves of rather having the Turks control the city rather than the Pope. Overall its good to watch to learn histroy. However it needs to be polished. As stated it is predictable, and obviosuly if you are a Historian you would know what is to happen. However there are great movies out there that reflect off history and the Director has performed such a great job at creating the suspense that the viewers are watching (and you know the end should be good), but still, it's the action.
This movie is accurate in portraying how the Latins did not want to help the Greeks vs. the Ottomans. It was too much an Omnipresent type of Narrative. A not historically accurate love triangle of Urban's daughter and the Giovanni Giustiniani, who died AFTER leaving the city with his men on a ship and NOT at the hands of her "found' lover. The acting was not so great from her part. It was "too" predictable at times to figure out the emotions. The last scene of Mehmed in the Hagia Sophia was too political, making him seem like a poster child ...by literally holding a crying, then smiling child. The extras were not given enough direction on how to act, or either the dept. in charge of visual effects. The computer graphics are subpar.
Did however appreciate the affect they placed in the Ottoman ranks wondering about the Hungarians to arrive, and the 3 Geonese ships that passed the Ottoman Navy. The actor in place of Mehmed did excellent, great acting. I would not however higher Urban's daughter, besides her striking blue eyes, she needs some work. Also the fighting by the Greeks themselves of rather having the Turks control the city rather than the Pope. Overall its good to watch to learn histroy. However it needs to be polished. As stated it is predictable, and obviosuly if you are a Historian you would know what is to happen. However there are great movies out there that reflect off history and the Director has performed such a great job at creating the suspense that the viewers are watching (and you know the end should be good), but still, it's the action.
March 10, 2013
the story can be written more deep down. I cannot see complete story line and does not see how brave and talent of Sultan.
June 18, 2012
The film's problem is that it is just too gung ho. You can tell that they've seen Hollywood epics before. They clearly liked what they saw, although they didn't completely understand it except for the parts about slow motion, because imitation is the highest form of flattery. But no Hollywood film would be so unabashedly war-hungry. They don't have any real motives either and whatever you think of Hollywood films they always keep an eye on providing motivation. Here it's missing. Why are they attacking the Greeks? Well, that's just what Turks do innit? But the Greeks are shown as a pretty ineffectual lot who posture a lot but pose no real threat. When the film does show motivation (in the minor characters) it's laid on pretty heavy. Like the one guy who doesn't want to build war machines so the evil Greeks try and kidnap his daughter only for him to be rescued by the hero Turk. Or the same girl, who turns out to have been enslaved by the Greeks (the Ottomans were the big importers of slaves at this point. The Janissaries were composed entirely of enslaved boys taken from their families as tribute. The Greeks weren't really capable of even leaving Greece) only to be rescued by her father. Subtle.
Basically this is not a black and white situation (what is?) and cannot easily be fitted into one. Instead of either accepting that and going for realism or else finding a moral justification (however insane) for people's actions they simply ignore the problem. Which means that most of the film is just one thing happening after another. And I just don't care. The character motivation is similarly scarce since they all act like extras from 300. Also, for a film about Muslims fighting a holy war against Christians (and the film certainly sets itself up this way by starting with Mohammad) it has exactly twice the number of suicide bombings I'd expect to see.
I wanted to like this movie. OK, I tell a lie. I wanted to ENJOY this movie. Not the same thing at all. The plot is about the Turkish conquest of Constantinople. It's a Turkish film. I kinda knew going in I wasn't going to like where it was going. But at the same time it is showing an awesome moment in history that really should have been filmed before now. I wanted to revel in the spectacle and enjoy the action.
The film's problem is that it is just too gung ho. You can tell that they've seen Hollywood epics before. They clearly liked what they saw, although they didn't completely understand it except for the parts about slow motion, because imitation is the highest form of flattery. But no Hollywood film would be so unabashedly war-hungry. They don't have any real motives either and whatever you think of Hollywood films they always keep an eye on providing motivation. Here it's missing. Why are they attacking the Greeks? Well, that's just what Turks do innit? But the Greeks are shown as a pretty ineffectual lot who posture a lot but pose no real threat. When the film does show motivation (in the minor characters) it's laid on pretty heavy. Like the one guy who doesn't want to build war machines so the evil Greeks try and kidnap his daughter only for him to be rescued by the hero Turk. Or the same girl, who turns out to have been enslaved by the Greeks (the Ottomans were the big importers of slaves at this point. The Janissaries were composed entirely of enslaved boys taken from their families as tribute. The Greeks weren't really capable of even leaving Greece) only to be rescued by her father. Subtle.
Basically this is not a black and white situation (what is?) and cannot easily be fitted into one. Instead of either accepting that and going for realism or else finding a moral justification (however insane) for people's actions they simply ignore the problem. Which means that most of the film is just one thing happening after another. And I just don't care. The character motivation is similarly scarce since they all act like extras from 300. Also, for a film about Muslims fighting a holy war against Christians (and the film certainly sets itself up this way by starting with Mohammad) it has exactly twice the number of suicide bombings I'd expect to see.
March 24, 2013
Undeniably stupid, but the learning curve for historical movies is steep indeed....
March 23, 2013
Un peu long mais dans l'ensemble intéressant. Les amateurs de films historiques devraient apprécier. Ce n'est évidemment pas un film américain à gros budget mais pour un film Turc c'est plutôt bien fais
March 12, 2013
Aunque peque un poco de transparencias y efectos un tanto cutres, se deja ver. Eso sí, qué pena de esos últimos 3 minutos un tanto propagandísticos...
Vacationer UK
September 15, 2012
wow. such a stupid movie. stupid acting stupid script and stupid CGI.
October 19, 2012
A good movie for a very important and strategical event in the History of Islam
October 7, 2012
Huge and impressive production for the first turkish international movie. Extremely biased! great costumes and good music. The quality of visual effects is not mature yet for the movie category. The acting skills and drama level are kind of shallow.
September 22, 2012
I quote from Wikipedia:
"In 1453 Sultan Mehmed laid siege to Constantinople, driven in part by a desire to convert the city to Islam.[22] The Sultan promised his troops three days of unbridled pillage if the city fell, after which he would claim its contents himself.[23][24] Hagia Sophia was not exempted from the pillage, becoming its focal point as the invaders believed it to contain the greatest treasures of the city.[25] Shortly after the city's defenses collapsed, pillagers made their way to the Hagia Sophia and battered down its doors.[26] Throughout the siege worshipers participated in the Holy Liturgy and Prayer of the Hours at the Hagia Sophia, and the church formed a refuge for many of those who were unable to contribute to the city's defense.[27][28] Trapped in the church, congregants and refugees became booty to be divided amongst the invaders. The building was desecrated and looted, and occupants enslaved or slaughtered;[25] a few of the elderly and infirm were killed, and the remainder chained.[26] Priests continued to perform Christian rites until stopped by the invaders.[26] When the Sultan and his cohort entered the church he insisted it should be at once transformed into a mosque. One of the Ulama then climbed the pulpit and recited the Shahada."
A good propaganda movie like the ones filmed back in the 60s. Unistorical.
I quote from Wikipedia:
"In 1453 Sultan Mehmed laid siege to Constantinople, driven in part by a desire to convert the city to Islam.[22] The Sultan promised his troops three days of unbridled pillage if the city fell, after which he would claim its contents himself.[23][24] Hagia Sophia was not exempted from the pillage, becoming its focal point as the invaders believed it to contain the greatest treasures of the city.[25] Shortly after the city's defenses collapsed, pillagers made their way to the Hagia Sophia and battered down its doors.[26] Throughout the siege worshipers participated in the Holy Liturgy and Prayer of the Hours at the Hagia Sophia, and the church formed a refuge for many of those who were unable to contribute to the city's defense.[27][28] Trapped in the church, congregants and refugees became booty to be divided amongst the invaders. The building was desecrated and looted, and occupants enslaved or slaughtered;[25] a few of the elderly and infirm were killed, and the remainder chained.[26] Priests continued to perform Christian rites until stopped by the invaders.[26] When the Sultan and his cohort entered the church he insisted it should be at once transformed into a mosque. One of the Ulama then climbed the pulpit and recited the Shahada."
September 13, 2012
C'est une question culturelle délicate : il est hautement improbable qu'un pays baille des fonds pour mettre en scène une défaite nationale : ainsi, on ne verra sans doute jamais de film français sur Waterloo, ou de film américain sur Pearl Harbour (je reprends : de BON film américain sur Pearl Harbour). Qui aurait bien pu s'occuper d'un film sur la prise de Constantinople en 1453 ? Ah ben oui, évidemment...les Turcs. De quoi craindre, vu qu'il s'agit d'un film à vocation populaire retraçant un événement fondateur de leur imaginaire national, des débordements de nationalisme primaire. Hé bien non, même pas : "Fetih 1453" se montre plutôt équilibré dans son traitement d'une situation politique complexe : Byzantins, vizirs Ottomans et Latins sont tous pris dans une toile de complots, de fausses promesses et de trahisons qui conduiront fatalement à la guerre ouverte. Seule la bienveillance du sultan Mehmet II lors de la prise de la ville semble exagérée puisqu'il est avéré qu'il déporta tous les habitants qu'il n'avait pas exterminé. L'aspect historique a en tout cas fait l'objet d'un travail de fond comme en témoigne l'abondance de personnages et l'espace somme toute très modeste réservé à l'inévitable romance sans laquelle une épopée historique ne serait pas ce qu'elle est. Quand au siège de la ville proprement dit (qui occupe quand même une bonne moitié des 2h30 du film), il dépasse toutes les attentes en terme de panache, de mise en scène et de rythme: remplacez Constantinople par Minas Tirith et vous aurez une idée de la démesure et de l'ampleur visuelle de cette bataille qui sonna le glas de l'empire romain d'orient.
September 10, 2012
I almost don't even want to rate this. This is the epic story of the Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II and the events that led up to him seizing Constantinople. This is the most expensive and highest grossing movie in Turkish history... granted, that translates to modest figures by U.S. box office standards, but that is beside the point. I did myself a huge disservice by watching this with less than acceptable subtitles; they were absolutely impenetrable, and it made full comprehension of the film impossible. The reason why I didn't just turn it off and wait for intelligible subtitles to be released is that after about a half hour of watching, I was able to discern that it wasn't really my type of movie anyway, so I might as well finish it out. It plays a lot like a history lesson, with lots of talks of military planning/strategy, which has never been of any interest for me. The battle scenes are pretty cool, but it's nothing that you haven't already seen before in Kingdom of Heaven or Lord of the Rings. I can definitely see how this movie could mean a lot to people in or from the Middle East, as it is well made and gives a good visual picture of a story that is centuries old, and one that hasn't ever had a big screen adaptation before, at least to my knowledge. I do realize that if I had the ability to completely understand what was being said, I may feel very different about this, but at the end of the day, I do have to rate this for myself.
September 7, 2012
50% satisfied. "Making history may require only bravado, but making historical movies demands subtlety as well." - Mark Jenkins
Kursat T.
August 14, 2012
En iyi TÃ 1/4rk filmlerinden.
