Ascensão: Império Otomano

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.

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.

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.

I was pleasantly surprised that a second season came out, and about Mehmed II and the notorious Vlad no less. I really liked the first season because it's like a storytelling by historians with the flare of well done reenactment. Obviously, there are liberties taken for the drama, but it's cool to have a mix of history with what could be another Vikings type show. Although some of the the acting isn't Oscar worthy, the actor playing Mehmed has a memorable face and owns the role.

I am hoping they do another one about the Romans or, better yet, the Egyptians. But I love this retelling because I'd take a guess that the average Westerner doesn't know a lot about the Ottoman Empire. I'd like another season, please!

I found this mix of drama and documentary highly entertaining, visually impressive, and educational. I've read a few books about the siege of Constantinople, and always thought "what a great story, why doesn't anyone make a movie out of it?". When I found out that this was a Turkish production, I was afraid it'd be based as they are too close to the subject to be objective, but the basics of the story are accurately displayed. Yes, they puffed up Giustiniani and added a couple of female characters while other protagonists are missing. They simplified a lot of stuff and didn't go in depth into what preceded the siege and the motivations of the characters. But most of what made the cut is historically accurate, always allowing for the conflicting accounts and various viewpoints. Choices were obviously made on basis of which made better dramaturgical sense and which were more realistic, not in order to glorify this or that side. Some Turkish reviewers insist that "this isn't how it happened" (meaning "not what was I taught at school") and even believe that sultan Mehmet actually designed his cannons himself. Now maybe that's reported by one of his biographers but how possible is it that a 20-year old prince with no knowledge of metallurgy designed the most advanced weapons of his time? Anyway, I found that the producers used the source material well and come out with a gripping docu-drama that generally respected historical truth. If you want more nuances, read some books! I'm already looking forward to the next series.