Rise of Empires: Ottoman

If you intend to shoot a docu-drama with some historians commenting on it, you need to base your story on the real facts.

This is not a docu-drama about Mehmet nor Ottomans; this is a story of the great defence strategist, mighty Guiliani.

If it's another legendary story; I could give it 8 (which I did because I respect the work done).

As a docu-drama I could only give 3 maybe.

A docu-drama should be researched well. This one was not. Where's the Orthodox Patriarch? Mehmet gave him the Ecumenical Power right after the conquest. This was the greatest wisdom of his time. And Mehmet was a great strategist, artist as well as an intellectual.

This story has very few accurate facts. That was disappointing.

All chronicals besides turkish ones say that Vlad scored a great victory at the Night Attack and Mehmed fled the camp. If this was not the case then i ask you Where would he gather so many ottomans to impale near Targoviste? How about time to impale?

Recommend HistoryMarche on youtube for a better view on Vlad the Impaler

The show has it.s ups and downs , depictes some aspects good and some rather miserable. Since it.s a documentary, historical facts should be represented as they were and not florished to make Mehmed more apealing to viewers. I still recommend the show and the actors playing Vlad and Mehmed did a great job. Still better than hollywood movies. At least Constantinopole had a ditch in front of the walls and this was the most esential defending construction during that time. Enjoyed the costumes as well. Anyway, keep this genre going as it.s way better than any movie.

Yes historically not accurate, lots of BS etc.. But it was entertaining. I actually watched the whole series in a day. Mehmed vs Vlad is better than the previous one. I like the actor who played Mehmed ( Cem Yigit Uzumoglu) I think he was great. Story telling was also great ( I think he is the guy who played the lanister in GOT) . But what people should notice is the actor who played Vlad Dracula. He wasn't acting, it looked real. We don't see this level of acting very often. Absolutelly amazing. I think he is World Class and he should be in Hollywood. What a great actor. Well Done Daniel. I wish you all the best. And would like to see more from you. 10/10.

This is a historical fiction docuseries, showing the Fall of Constantinople from a Turkish perspective. Historical fiction is by definition not fully historically accurate, because past events are placed on a narrative arc and dramatized in order to build a strong story. Accept this and you'll be a happier viewer.

The iron-willed Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror is beautifully played by Cem Yigit Uzümoglu, who's destined to become a global star after this memorable performance. Because of Cem's passionate portrayal of the young Ottoman ruler Mehmed II, I found myself rooting for him despite of the tragic fates of many soldiers, mercenaries and innocent civilians.

This series was produced and directed by a Turkish film team, and most actors are also Turkish. Critics who claim that the series is biased in favour of the Romans are clearly missing something. In this particular story the Romans are defending themselves against an attack, and many of the victims are civilians, so there's bound to be scenes where we sympathize with them. This is how good storytelling works, and it would have been a creative failure not to include that side of the story.

'Rise of Empires: Ottoman' is a powerful, visually impressive and absolutely bingeworthy series that will linger in my mind for a very long time.

I'm not sure what exactly the future of this series is - will the next seasons be about Ottomans, other empires, or will there not even be more seasons? Regardless, this first season could more aptly have been named the Siege of Constantinople, as it is almost all about that famed siege. Good thing too, because 6 episodes seems to be the perfect length for depicting the siege in full. And the series is very well paced, although some of the flashback scenes feel a bit too long.

The siege itself is exceptionally well depicted. The budget was either very high, or very well used, because the quality of the CGI, the sets, and the costumes is simply superb, and the actors too are brilliant. The show doesn't quite bias towards one side. If there is a bias, there is a bias against realism. Both sides are depicted in a more positive light than should be. The Genoans and Venetians were far less scheming than they were in real life, and the mercenaries defending the city more adept and brave than they truly were. Conversely, the show also glosses over the Ottoman plundering of the city. But apart from that criticism, I can't really find anything I disliked about the depiction of the siege itself. I also really appreciated that the show stressed the importance of it - the demise of the 1500 year old Empire, giving birth to one that would last nearly 500 years more.

I'm not sure I quite like the docudrama style of storytelling. I think it is a tad lazy compared to just telling a story through actors. But that is a minor issue I have with an otherwise excellent depiction of a legendary siege.