Constantinople 1453- The Movie

he just wanted to capture istanbul which divided his country into two parts::: and wanted to be the man who ll conquer istanbul that Muhammed had wanted before...       

p.s. during medieval times, ottomans always were welcome in the cities that they conquered... Have  you ever thought about it,Heraclius???

Actually Muhammed didn't fight at all. The only thing he did was to observe the siege from a safe distance on his horse...what a fighter...

the humiliation of the ottoman navy by 4 transport ships obviously was not in his plans...

I'll provide a scenario:

The movie will be told from the point of view of the Venetian physician Nicol� Barbaro, who has a Byzantine girlfriend. He doesn't want to get involved into the fighting. As the siege draws near, he initially wants to take his girlfriend to safety (somewhere in the west, Venetia), but he gets stuck in Constantinople. (Many possibilities here: his girlfriend wants to stay there, he is tricked by some Genoese, something like that.)

Barbaro quickly distinguishes himself in battle (basically being the master mind behind all clever decisions of the defenders, such as tracing mines of Ottoman sappeurs and filling them up with water) and becomes a close friend of the emperor Constantine. He doesn't like the Genoese guy, Giustiniani; however, in the course of events they both learn to appreciate each other and realize the foolishness of their narrow patriotism. There are no similar in-depth confrontations with the Ottoman soldiers, who are computer-generated.

From time to time, a voice-over comments on the scenes by citing  passages from Barbaro's diary.

At the end, as the city falls, Barbaro and his wife (by then) and her family accompany the mortally wounded Giustiniani to the island of Chios (or Lesbos, what was it?). There Giustiniani succumbs to his wounds, and Barbaro and his wife weep bitterly. Finally he and his entourage head for Venetia, where, so much the wiser, they live on happily ever after.

- The End -


Edited by Lepidodendron - 03-Feb-2007 at 20:25

The admiral of the Ottoman fleet was called Baltoglu.

You could say Constantinople was saved by the Turks. We heard lot's of scenario's what about this one? If Turk's didn't take control she would have just carried on going down-hill ending up in a delapadated state. Be raided now and again, have more and more of the city looted, fall into dis-repair, the wealthy would migrate to other more prosperour cities and so on.

After the Turk's entered, she had another golden-age, from the cities point of view it was beneficial.

The Prophet Muhammed (p.b.u.h) was not present at the Siege of Constantinople, Eyup the stand-bearer was.

Originally posted by Bulldog The Prophet Muhammed (p.b.u.h) was not present at the Siege of Constantinople   .....not that funny   And Janissaries in 1865 not very reliable, infact a total fantasy painting based upon the imagination and not among facts.   Oh,yes. The painting should have been completed before1826 to depict a reality of 5 centuries ...     It's funny that you don't like to focus on what the Crusader's did to you which is pretty much worse than anything the Turks did

Originally posted by Feanor [QUOTE=Athanasios]We can discuss things like those in the 99,8% of the forum topics, not in the historical amusement, for god's sake!

Why not? It is related to the conquest of Constantinople.

Originally posted by Bulldog Common Anthan, your forefathers even said   "Rather the turban of the Turk than the tiara of the pope."   They couldn't have been as bad as you make out and treated Greeks better and with more respect than the Crusaders did