User reviews

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 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.

As a a Greek, I could have been pre-emptively negative about this series. However, I cannot ignore the fact that the producers did some serious research and consultation before they put pen to paper. From the small conversations to the serious arguments, it appears that they have checked first with the historians.

There is good acting, good atmosphere, good costumes, decent battle scenes and loved the fact that the producers were careful with not allowing the documentary bit to take over.

The only three things that stopped me from giving it a 10/10 are that -) The utter obsession with Justinian to the point the whole series is about him and how heroic the Italians were. -) The obsession with portraying all Greeks as treacherous cowards (you couldn't help yourselves there :) -) Portraying the Turks as inferior and Mehmed a hotheaded and reckless

I strongly recommend and can't wait for the sequel (probably about Vienna)

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!

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.

We practically are not aware of any of the Ottoman and Turkish history. To date there haven't been any American or European movies covering the conquest of Constantinople to my knowledge. I believe this indicates a bias.

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.

It seems the war was between Giustiniani and Sultan Mehmet. Also some how all the elite Ottoman soldiers are not elite at all. They died very quickly. One more thing. About 4 ships against 100 doesn't make sense. How come ottoman didn't use cannons to destroy them.

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.

Text: I removed my first comment because I hadn't watched season 2 when I wrote it. I am coming back since I have just finished it. First of all the 2 seasons differ concerning inaccuracies. The 1st one relies more on history apart from the fact that they avoid to mention that Constantinos Paleologos was Greek,as many of the greatest emperors in eastern Roman Empire,and they paid too much attention to Justiniani. Ok the latter might have been a very good fighter but he left the battlefield while Paleologos fought till death as a man of honor and a real hero. So HE was the legend and the soul not Justiniani. However many other facts are decent and correct. Mehmed was really smart educated and wanted to be a Ceasar not just a sultan. His mother Huma Hatun was not Turkish that is why they didn't mention her origin,she was probably from Greece or Serbia. Historians say that is why Mehmed was different from other sultans and much more educated Or maybe helped him his adoptive mother Mara who was from a noble family half Serbian(from her father)half Greek(from her mother). Mara was really qualified and built many churches too so the environment Mehmed grew up was civilized concerning religions and different cultures.

Constantinopolis was really difficult to be conquered that IS true but at that specific time the City was weak and the emperor abandoned and betrayed by his allies So I think all these things are present in season 1 one way or another But season 2??What happened ?? Vlad was NOT the invader he was a hostage while all his childhood so he did what he should do! He wanted freedom! And he was cruel but not against his own people I have never found any official source about something like this! He was cruel against the invaders that's normal not??

Moreover the direction tries to present that hostages live happily with ottomans. Yes ok sometimes this had happened but have you ever thought that they did not have any other option??they just try to survive this is not friendship! Vlad was much more than what season 2 presents! Don't forget that many people suffer from the taxes to ottomans they wanted independence and they had suffered a lot. Ottomans weren't educated as Mehmed,he was an exception. That is why Balcans remained so underdeveloped and we are still trying to overcome all this cultural damage!

Last but not least they mention Alexander the Great many times since Mehmed admired him as many others Caesars did and Napoleon some centuries after,but one more time without telling that he was Greek!!

We are still speaking the language he and his teacher Aristotle spoke,of course in a modern and simplified version,but nobody mentions his origin as in other Tv series! That is a little bit stupid I think Fortunately acting and battle scenes are really good I liked the actors for Mehmed,Vlad and Mehmed as a child I have seen this boy in another Turkish série he is talented!

So give it a try I think it is worth but in some points you will feel dissatisfied.

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.

For the most part, docudramas can have great acting and writing, but suffer tremendously from budget constraints that cancel those out entirely.

They can also have horrible acting and writing, and a decent budget.

Unfortunately, as any history buff will tell you, this is just part of being a history buff since most people could care less about history and thus rarely are historical works that aren't a World War special given the love and attention they deserve.

But, on the rare occasion, you do you have a docudrama that has both great writing/acting AND a big(ish) budget AND is historically accurate.

This is one of those.

If there is ANY field you simply have to give Netflix credit for, it's how much they support historical documentaries and docudramas, moreso than just about any platform does or ever has. Not only do they have a great selection of them, but a lot of the Netflix produced ones are actually quite good.

Like, who'd have thought, right?

However, what is MOST important to me, more than any other thing that makes any sort of film production "good," is historical accuracy. And in this regard, Rise of Empires excels.

Anyone who says otherwise either doesn't know history or doesn't know what a docudrama is.

Here is a fact of life about history: We almost never, like literally just about never, have any idea the conversations that actually took place behind closed doors when some of the big moments you do read about in history books happened. We know this battle happened, this guy was assassinated, this mission was planned, attempted, and failed...but rarely do we know what was ACTUALLY said in the King's chambers when it was planned.

Enter: Docudrama. Take what we know for sure, and fill in the blanks. Sure, it's entirely possible many of the conversations in RoE never happened even remotely as they did in the show.

However, Rise of Empires, both season 1 and 2, captures pretty much every major KNOWN fact and event and portrays it with supreme detail, while ALSO making it clear the writers did their research on the characters they're writing for, and so make it likely that this very well could be roughly how these unknown background moments actually went.

As for historical accuracy, maybe with a few small exceptions, like seeing Mehmed II leading the front line of his armies into battle (when it was much more likely he stayed in the back commanding troops), or the bright, fanciful colors of Ottoman uniforms replaced with colorful-compared-to-Crusaders-but-still-dull ones, it really is quite accurate.

And as for the filling in of the blanks...imagine Game of Thrones, but without the fantasy and nudity. All of the political intrigue, espionage, family drama...basically the real life events that inspired GoT...are front and center here. Machiavelli confirms this stuff not only went on, but was quite common...why would it be any different with a man named Vlad "the Impaler" Dracula?

Are you familiar with the phrase "real life is stranger than fiction?" Well that phrase exists because of people like Vlad Dracula, and historical moments like what's seen in season 1 and 2 of Rise of Empires.

So, long review short, even if you aren't particularly a history buff, or have even the slightest interest in Ottoman history, if you like medieval battles and good performances, this really is a must see. We don't get many medieval productions these days, so you kind of have to take what you can get...and as of now, this is as good as it gets.

And, honestly, I don't think it'll get any better than this unless it's a big budget Hollywood production. And it's unlikely those will feature commentary from real historians and experts on the subject, so, in all seriousness, Rise of Empires is really quite a gift to humanity and history lovers alike.

Thanks for actually doing something that makes me not question bothering to keep paying for you, Netflix. I, for one, am grateful.

As a turkish person i thought that it is really non-sided and great everything was good the costumes the acting the special effects the battle sequences there was some flaws of course i thought guistiniani had more screen time than it should have and aksemsettin was not present in the show at all (he was always with sultan he was his teacher and mentore he convinced the mehmed to capture the city when mehmed thought of giving up) other than that it was great i recommend you to watch it it feeds you with information

I think the idyllic representation of Ottomans should stop. It's nothing glorious in Empires! If only we're thinking how the janissaries were formed, and you'll understand the sickening aspects of Empires oppression. The "heroic" janissaries were ruthless soldiers, because they were raised from childhood in a draconian structure, grabbed from the parents arms, usually coming from the Balkan countries as a direct tribute for the Empire, thrown in a foreign lands, forced to adopt other religion than their own religion. The irony is janissary could end up fighting against his own parents lands. But I still appreciate the producer tried with certain accuracy to take in consideration historical data .

Too bad Netflix didn't do season 2 about Huniadi. It makes no sense why Vlad hates Mehmed so much. His hostage time with the ottomans couldn't have had such an impact on his personality. People weren't that complicated then... If the viewers had seen Ioan Huniade's war with the empire and how Vlad's family was involved, things would have had more clarity and truthfulness. Plus viewers would have had the chance of finding out how Vlad's family came to be known by that name... On the other hand it's good that western civilisation has a chance to know more about this famous or rather infamous ruler which inspired Stocker.

Unfortunately, the Romanian historians invited to participate in the making of the documentary are not the most representative. Or were not given enough space to complete and explain the story....

A great story told about the Conquest of former Constantinople, renamed to Istanbul after fallen into the hands of the Ottoman Turks.

The ever long lasting Eastern Roman Empire led by the courageous Emperor Constantin XI Dragasses fights to survive once more against a huge army led by the young, ambitious and master tactician Mehmet II, in a battle that inspired many writers and poets since then.

This movie isn't far from truth, as it seems well documented and also well displayed as both a documentary and an artistic movie.

As a history fan, I give a 10stars rating without hesitation to this title.

I gave it a 7rating due to high quality of visual effects. Moreover the actor playing the main character, Mehmed II, seems to be a great actor. Overall Production quality is good. On the other hand, the historical explanations, details are not really truthful. They made heroes out of Genoese and Venetians. ??!!! What about the story behind the conquest by Ottoman emperor? What was the emotional reason behind it ? Why are there no details about the christians' crusade wars? Where is the talk about revenge? Where is the talk about the importance of Istanbul ? Plus, Mehmed's mother is known, she is Hüma Hatun, she even has a grave! But this productions says: "mehmet's mother is unknown". That is very confusing! This whole production is mainly lacking the truth. I didn't find it objective at all. The history has been demonstrated as if it was a Spartans movie. What about the customs and traditions of Turkish people? This documentary is Really really brain washing !! Who the f. is Giustiani?? Why is he at the center of this documentary? For example why didn't we see more of Zaganos Pasha? Isn't he more important as the right hand of the conqueror?? Doesn't he deserve more scenes than Ana character? Why is the emotional struggle of Ottoman army NOT shown, why does this production heavily weigh in towards the emotional struggle of Byzantine fighters? This production is very biased. This is a documentary but unfortunately NOT OBJECTIVE and NOT TRUTHFUL. Where are the great Turkish historians who can tell us the story better? For example Professor Ilber Ortayli. He should have been involved in this production.

Another problem is with language. The narrator is great, he gives a lot of fresh air while watching, nice to ears. However the spoken English of all actors/actresses is horrible. I could barely understand what they were saying. I had to watch it with English subtitles. Since English subtitles is a must to be able understand, then why was the outspoken language between ottoman characters not in their own language? Why do our ears need to suffer? History is needs to be represented as it is. In the production they could have easily made: the narrator speaks in English, historians speak in English, Byzantine characters speak in English or Latin, Ottoman characters speak in Turkish. At least among each other. It was ridiculous. At one point Ana speaks Turkish when she is talking to Sultan Mehmed, Apparently her parents are Turkish so she does speak the language, but when Ana meets the wounded Ottoman soldier, she suddenly forgets Turkish and they speak in English. B.S.!! Net net, if season2 is in the making, it needs to be objective and truthful.

"VLAD VS MEHMET", Netflix a second series of docu-drama "Rise of Ottoman Empire". I enjoyed this historically depiction of the Vlad the Impaler real character: brave, patriotic, bloody, tragic yet charming... Finally Turks are doing justice to Vlad, showing what lead him to the point of infamous impaling his enemies. Daniel Nuta did an amazing job, I see so much talent and future for him. Superstar Tuba B. Shines as ever as Sultan's Stepmother Sofia, looking for alliance against Vlad. When will Romanians do something similar for our heroic character? He saved Hollywood more than once. In 2007 in a meeting Sony, I proposed a real story of our tragic king. "Dracula Untold" followed, Luke Evans did a great job as Vlad.

I am 100% sure that not even 50% of what they told is real. There are so many things said wrong. I don't understand why the Ottomans are seen as heroes for so long, but considering that the director is a Turk, it makes sense. But I'm not going to sit here and do a bad review because I really liked both actors. Especially Daniel, he is made for this role, you could see the sparkle in his eyes, something special indeed. I hope we will have more series like this but with a bigger budget. And one more thing, use the native language of the respective countries as much as possible, we have subtitles, that's not the problem.

It could be good if they cut documentary parts with so called experts (since a lot of those "facts" were wrong anyway. unknown mother of mehmet? 30 sec with google and u know who she was) and made it as fictional adventure show.

This is awesome. I didn't know anything about Sultan Mehmed and Vlad. I can't believe Dracula family was real. Their sons were raised with Mehmed. Only historians knew all these facts I guess.

I really loved it!! It's highly charged, awesome and epic battle scenes!! Superb acting by Cem Yigit (Sultan Mehmet The Conquerer) & Birkan Sokullu ( Giustiniani) and not to mention an easy to follow narrative on what transpired during that period and how Constantinople was conquered by the Ottomans led by Mehmet II in the 15th Century at just the age of 21! Sure..it's not too accurate on few points or some infos haven't been included but enough to make one understands and keep ones interest and curiosity throughout the series. I'm so looking forward to the second season if any. A must watch.