I am following a course on World History 1300 - 1900, offered by Princeton University and taught by professor Jeremy Adelman.
One of the classmates found drew attention to a Turkish movie about the Ottoman's conquest of Constantinople in 1453. I got interested and decided to watch the movie.
I would like to say something positive about this movie. It is interesting, but it also fails decisively on many aspects. The movie starts in the 627 in Medina. There Mohammed pronounces that one day the city of Constantinople certainly will fall. An eagle then flies across time and space and lands in Adrianopolis. We see young Mehmed and his friend Hasan, busy engaged in sword fighting. We learn also that Mehmet has some daddy issues.
People with deep knowledge about this time have doubted the accuracy of these historical reconstructions. Indeed the makers of the film should have used some of their budget to consult a historian. For a wider audience this will be their vision of this particular time and so they should care -- prodesse et delectare. These two can easily be combined by a skilled filmmaker.
Once he is in the power, Mehmed sees in a vision (or is it a nightmare?) Osman, the founder of the Ottoman dynasty who encourages him to conquer Constantinople. And this will be his concern now.
However, there is already another emperor in Constantinople. He, Constantine XI, is particularly hostile against the Ottomans, which is not very surprising as the Ottomans had conquered much of what used to be the Byzantine Empire. To call this process 'the spread of the Ottoman Empire' seems to be a blunt euphemism. This spreading was, needless to say, the result of attacks, wars and battles. While we see crusaders butchering around, mutilating women and children, the Ottomans never engage in such cruelty. They are, on the contrary, heroic fighters. And they fight against vicious morons...
These battle scenes may attract viewers, but for me this computer-generated war is rather boring. And these animations are not really well done. There is no fire without smoke, but here we have a lot of fire without burning.
We get a hint of the Ottoman's technological superiority, although the director decided not to elaborate on that theme.
The most spectacular strategic decision is merely hinted at. Mehmed decided to drag his ships behind the Byzantine defense lines. We see only a brief sequence in bad cgi-footage.
These things may be known to Turkish viewers, but greater emphasis on these themes might have given an international audience a better insight into the Ottoman's achievements.
At last we arrive at May 29, 1453. The Ottomans fire their cannons and boom the defense wall cracks. I think they managed to enter the city through an unlocked gate, but such an action doesn't have mythological qualities.
The end should have been silence - but here it is nasty propaganda. The sacking of Constantinople never occured. Mehmed sees the body of the dead emperor Constantine and orders him to be buried according to Christian rites. This is to shown the Ottoman's tolerating other belief-systems. However, the body of the emperor was never found.
Then Mehmed finds the frightened women, children and old people in the cathedral. He tells not to be afraid, from now they will live peacefully together (of course, as there nothing left of the Byzantine Empire to conquer). A girl that was weeping before, now smiles to dear uncle Mehmed.
History happened. This seems to be a half-fictional account that sometimes has parallels from history. If you omit central features, you falsify history and build mythology instead. -- Maybe this is why the present prime minister of Turkey is said to have liked this movie.
I give it two good-will points, so that it ends up with 4/10.
One of the classmates found drew attention to a Turkish movie about the Ottoman's conquest of Constantinople in 1453. I got interested and decided to watch the movie.
I would like to say something positive about this movie. It is interesting, but it also fails decisively on many aspects. The movie starts in the 627 in Medina. There Mohammed pronounces that one day the city of Constantinople certainly will fall. An eagle then flies across time and space and lands in Adrianopolis. We see young Mehmed and his friend Hasan, busy engaged in sword fighting. We learn also that Mehmet has some daddy issues.
People with deep knowledge about this time have doubted the accuracy of these historical reconstructions. Indeed the makers of the film should have used some of their budget to consult a historian. For a wider audience this will be their vision of this particular time and so they should care -- prodesse et delectare. These two can easily be combined by a skilled filmmaker.
Once he is in the power, Mehmed sees in a vision (or is it a nightmare?) Osman, the founder of the Ottoman dynasty who encourages him to conquer Constantinople. And this will be his concern now.
However, there is already another emperor in Constantinople. He, Constantine XI, is particularly hostile against the Ottomans, which is not very surprising as the Ottomans had conquered much of what used to be the Byzantine Empire. To call this process 'the spread of the Ottoman Empire' seems to be a blunt euphemism. This spreading was, needless to say, the result of attacks, wars and battles. While we see crusaders butchering around, mutilating women and children, the Ottomans never engage in such cruelty. They are, on the contrary, heroic fighters. And they fight against vicious morons...
These battle scenes may attract viewers, but for me this computer-generated war is rather boring. And these animations are not really well done. There is no fire without smoke, but here we have a lot of fire without burning.
We get a hint of the Ottoman's technological superiority, although the director decided not to elaborate on that theme.
The most spectacular strategic decision is merely hinted at. Mehmed decided to drag his ships behind the Byzantine defense lines. We see only a brief sequence in bad cgi-footage.
These things may be known to Turkish viewers, but greater emphasis on these themes might have given an international audience a better insight into the Ottoman's achievements.
At last we arrive at May 29, 1453. The Ottomans fire their cannons and boom the defense wall cracks. I think they managed to enter the city through an unlocked gate, but such an action doesn't have mythological qualities.
The end should have been silence - but here it is nasty propaganda. The sacking of Constantinople never occured. Mehmed sees the body of the dead emperor Constantine and orders him to be buried according to Christian rites. This is to shown the Ottoman's tolerating other belief-systems. However, the body of the emperor was never found.
Then Mehmed finds the frightened women, children and old people in the cathedral. He tells not to be afraid, from now they will live peacefully together (of course, as there nothing left of the Byzantine Empire to conquer). A girl that was weeping before, now smiles to dear uncle Mehmed.
History happened. This seems to be a half-fictional account that sometimes has parallels from history. If you omit central features, you falsify history and build mythology instead. -- Maybe this is why the present prime minister of Turkey is said to have liked this movie.
I give it two good-will points, so that it ends up with 4/10.
