This is a great story, however the acting isn't. The female lead is not believable & it could have been a much better performance or casting choice.
155 Reviews
Female lead could've been better
lyndsayholcomb6 July 2019
A Triagle of Love in World War I
claudio_carvalho17 September 2017
In 1914, in Philadelphia, the wealthy and idealistic nurse Lillie Rowe (Hera Hilmar) learns in a lecture by Dr. Jude (Josh Hartnett) that there is an American medical mission founded by Dr. Garrett Woodruff (Ben Kingsley) in the countryside of the Ottoman Empire that needs donation. She decides to donate and deliver herself the truck that belonged to her deceased brother and medical supplies using her heritage. On the arrival, she stumbles upon the Ottoman Lieutenant Ismail Veli (Michiel Huisman) that helps her to visit a mosque. Lillie is forced by the government to be escorted by Lieutenant Ismail to drive to the mission and he is assigned to spy the local Armenians. Lillie works in the hospital and falls in love with Ismail while Jude suffers from unrequited love. Meanwhile the World War I begins and the mission is in the middle of the Ottoman Empire where the Russians are coming.
"The Ottoman Lieutenant" is a beautiful romance with a triangle of love in World War I. The cinematography is impressive; the direction is excellent; and the cast has great performances. The story could have used a less polemic and unpleasant background instead of the Armenian Genocide. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Amor em Tempos de Guerra" ("Love in Times of War")
"The Ottoman Lieutenant" is a beautiful romance with a triangle of love in World War I. The cinematography is impressive; the direction is excellent; and the cast has great performances. The story could have used a less polemic and unpleasant background instead of the Armenian Genocide. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Amor em Tempos de Guerra" ("Love in Times of War")
An answer to the Armenian funded "The Promise"
rick-georgesco28 July 2017
The way I see it this is the answer to the Armenian funded "The Promise". Both films have good and bad parts, it's obvious both do have a hidden political message. Both tried to fill the cast with some resounding names. Frankly it seems to me that this movie does not have the intensity generated by its nemesis The Promise. Cinematography is very good but it missing depth, long shots riding over the wheat fields too much repeated, some content empty scenes....well to me it's 5 stars!
Great Historical Texture
aydogdu1018 May 2017
Art management is great. As a historical movie, It has a very successful interpretation. The orientalist point of view is not on the uncomfortable level. It will be a special place among historical films. Such movies do not come often. The cast have been quite accurate. They did not seem inaccurate in their roles.
Budding Talent
amanbirsingh1 April 2020
Things working out for The Ottoman Lieutenant are its fresh talent, though it needs Ben Kingsley to balance that, exotic settings in the Pontus, and an emotional theme that works itself out toward the climax. Good to see Josh Hartnett attempting himself but it clearly the Turkish main lead that does better and establishes himself over the routine.
A good 'break' movie for those who like dedicated cinema, the director does well to stay near his followers and their interpretation as the movie progresses without any needless higher doubts or questions. One can expect more to be said from this team in the future.
A clear case of subjective acceptance where one can take a step back from hard analysis and allow an easy movie an easy reception. Good Show!
A good 'break' movie for those who like dedicated cinema, the director does well to stay near his followers and their interpretation as the movie progresses without any needless higher doubts or questions. One can expect more to be said from this team in the future.
A clear case of subjective acceptance where one can take a step back from hard analysis and allow an easy movie an easy reception. Good Show!
Female lead was miscast, but good story
feistybetty2 August 2020
Female lead has limited emotional range, and i don't quite see why an Icelandic actor with an accent was cast as an American. We have A LOT of American actresses with farbetter emotional range that could've served this movie well.
Half loved it
jodyscott3119 December 2020
I really wanted to love this movie completely. For me, half the actors were phenomenal and half were not. Michiel Huisman was absolutely phenomenal in the role of The Ottoman Lieutenant. His passion shown through in the entire performance. I did not care for the lead actress Hera Hilmar in this role. She came across as dull, uninspired, unbelievable and with flat affect & tone to her voice and performance, in my opinion. I do not know her other work, but I was uninspired by her performance here. This should have been an extremely romantic and epic movie but Michiel should not have to carry it himself. In addition, I did like Ben Kingsley's role, but did not care for Josh Hartnett. If the lead actors had been evenly matched and evenly phenomenal then I would have rated this movie better.
A bad movie, don't waste your time.
falcon29120 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
A Turk voting 4, oh no it must be a miracle, one can easily say. I watched it then I vote for it, maybe it is the difference, or I was not paid to vote for it, maybe it is the difference, I don't know. But let me say, this movie sucks.
The movie tells a story of a love triangle between an American doctor, an American nurse, and a Turkish officer. This is the main story. As always Hartnett is the loser as the American doctor. Huisman is the Turkish officer who will be dead at the end of the movie and the winner of the fight to win the nurse's love, and Hilmar is the nurse so the prize.
The first problem of the movie is the chemistry between players, well the problem is there isn't any chemistry and Huisman and Hilmar were not even allowed to kiss. If you are trying to make a propaganda movie disguising as drama or romance, you must allow them to kiss. If it is for the Turkish audience, then still in our movies and TV series even Turkish players kiss, then why? Then why did you pay that much money to all these famous players? Still, Hartnett was believable and he and Kingsley made the movie watchable. Instead of scenery shots, I would like to watch Kingsley and his drama more. Also, Bilginer was good.
About historical facts. Without getting into too many details, producers of the movie tried to show the events in Turkish aspect of the view. History was in the background, but main themes were not all Turks were bad, so not all Armenians, but it was the Russians. Of course, the events were not as it was depicted in this movie, but it is too be honest irrelevant to this movie.
Shortly, do not watch it, you must have better options, take a walk, do some gardening, watch TV, play video games. But don't watch it. It is not a historical movie, it is not a romance movie, it is not a drama, but it is a bad movie. Just this.
The movie tells a story of a love triangle between an American doctor, an American nurse, and a Turkish officer. This is the main story. As always Hartnett is the loser as the American doctor. Huisman is the Turkish officer who will be dead at the end of the movie and the winner of the fight to win the nurse's love, and Hilmar is the nurse so the prize.
The first problem of the movie is the chemistry between players, well the problem is there isn't any chemistry and Huisman and Hilmar were not even allowed to kiss. If you are trying to make a propaganda movie disguising as drama or romance, you must allow them to kiss. If it is for the Turkish audience, then still in our movies and TV series even Turkish players kiss, then why? Then why did you pay that much money to all these famous players? Still, Hartnett was believable and he and Kingsley made the movie watchable. Instead of scenery shots, I would like to watch Kingsley and his drama more. Also, Bilginer was good.
About historical facts. Without getting into too many details, producers of the movie tried to show the events in Turkish aspect of the view. History was in the background, but main themes were not all Turks were bad, so not all Armenians, but it was the Russians. Of course, the events were not as it was depicted in this movie, but it is too be honest irrelevant to this movie.
Shortly, do not watch it, you must have better options, take a walk, do some gardening, watch TV, play video games. But don't watch it. It is not a historical movie, it is not a romance movie, it is not a drama, but it is a bad movie. Just this.
Movies Are Not Politics, Nor Are They Documentaries.
ChipperX16 March 2017
While some reviewers cannot see beyond the work of the actors and
director in a project, others pay to escape life and be immersed in a
world we cannot otherwise visit.
The Ottoman Lieutenant is a grand, sweeping movie that has war as its
backdrop. This movie is not a documentary. The artists who worked to
bring us this bit of fiction immersed themselves beautifully within the
project, and their hard work stands out, much like the Merchant Ivory
films. The movie itself does not ask for a review of its accuracy, it
simply asks that we put aside the trappings of our present environment
to imagine a different vista.
If you are interested in enjoying beauty for its own sake, then you
will enjoy this film. If you are still intent on reliving the
atrocities of the past, then l suggest you stick to documentaries, and
only those with which you wholeheartedly agree.
- Chipper F. Xavier, Esq.
Could have been an epic
carolrmag6 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
It is a good movie, when it could have been a great one. The acting, image, directing, scenes - they were all very good. The problem was the script. The storyline wanted to be everything and ended up missing. Here is a case where the "less is more" sentence would have been a bless. They wanted a love triangle and they put it there; they wanted an historic movie. They got one and it was accurate; They wanted action and it is there. In the end you get a lot of information with a lack of depth. Nothing is as compelling as I wish it would be. The history, the love triangle, the true love story, the courage, the intrigue... It all lacked depth and it is really sad, because the story deserved to be awesome.
Disappointment!
allanersesyan5 June 2017
Boring, long and could not get into the characters. Waste of money and inaccurate history. Don't waste your money or time on this film. The main characters did not have any chemistry, I didn't feel the love between them and again there is inaccurate history in this film. Not sure how they were able to get Kingsley to act in this movie. Horrible movie.
deeply flawed film, as both romantic epic
armyforever-2874116 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Unabashedly old-fashioned and romantic, this World War I-era movie fearlessly plucks at the heartstrings while offering glorious, big- screen cinematography ... and a bit of revisionist history. The Ottoman Lieutenant may may lack big-name movie stars. And, because it was funded largely by Turkish financiers, it shines a positive light on the country, largely ignoring the Armenian Genocide of 1915. But if you judge it based on goal of telling a romantic story against an intense wartime backdrop, like a mini-Dr. Zhivago or The English Patient, it succeeds handsomely.
The three characters involved in the love triangle are very appealing, and their human qualities make their relationship all the more complex. Plus, Ben Kingsley is wonderfully hammy as the founder of the Turkish hospital. Veteran director Joseph Ruben, who usually makes low-level thrillers (like the excellent The Stepfather) forgoes any tricks and simply uses a gorgeous widescreen backdrop with spectacular landscapes and plays of light to underline his story. The telling of it is smart but not confusing, tragic but not weepy, and swoon-inducing without being dopey.
The three characters involved in the love triangle are very appealing, and their human qualities make their relationship all the more complex. Plus, Ben Kingsley is wonderfully hammy as the founder of the Turkish hospital. Veteran director Joseph Ruben, who usually makes low-level thrillers (like the excellent The Stepfather) forgoes any tricks and simply uses a gorgeous widescreen backdrop with spectacular landscapes and plays of light to underline his story. The telling of it is smart but not confusing, tragic but not weepy, and swoon-inducing without being dopey.
Exciting and spectacular movie based on historical events with a love triangle
ma-cortes25 September 2022
Extraordinary film correctly based on real deeds and set during the last days of the Ottoman Empire in which a twisted romance is developed . A world both exotic and dangerous, and on the brink of what is about to become World War I. Now, with invading army forces at their doorstep, and the world about to plunge into all-out war, a woman must make a thorny decision . It deals with a love triangle between an idealistic American nurse (Hera Hilmar) and a Turkish officer (Michiel Huisman) in World War I , along with an American doctor (Josh Harnett) . Set in a land on the brink of war the most dangerous place to be is in love.
This The Ottoman Lieutenant (2017) is the answer to Terry George's The Promise (2016) that followed a love triangle among a medical student , a sophisticated women and an prestigious American reporter , in which was a strong denounce about the Turkish genocide against Armenians , while The Ottoman Lieutenant (2017) though it recognizes that there were Armenian massacres, these were caused due to the disastrous consequences of the war and that the Armenians allied themselves with the Russian invaders against the Turks. The film has an acid critic to the indolence of European nations and international community and specially , the abandon of foreign policy . Protagonist trio gives sensational performance , Hera Hilmar as a strong-willed young woman, Michiel Huisman as a Lieutenant in the Ottoman Imperial Army and Josh Arnett as a doctor who runs a remote medical mission within the Ottoman Empire. Being accompanied by a great support cast , such as Ben Kingsley , Haluk Bilginer , Jessica Turner , among others . The movie has a colorful and evocative cinematography by Daniel Aranyó . As well as evocative and stirring music by Geoff Zanelli . This love triangle movie was professionally directed by Joseph Ruben. He his a fine craftsman who has made attractive films , most of them thrillers and action movies , such as : "The Forgotten" , "Return to Paradise" , "Money Train" , "The God Son" , "Sleeping with the Enemy" , "The Believer", "The Stepfather" and "Dreamscape" . Rating : 6.5/10 . Acceptable and decent drama .
The flick is based on actual facts , these are the following ones : It's calculated that in the indiscriminate massacre were cruelly killed by Turks approximately 1.5 million Armenians . In fact, director Joseph Ruben wanted to disown this film because of the post-production changes that deny the Armenian Genocide. This genocide against Armenians is called ¨Armenian Holocaust¨ that was the Ottoman government's systematic extermination of Armenians , mostly Ottoman citizens within the Ottoman Empire and its successor state, the Republic of Turkey . The starting date is conventionally held to be 24 April 1915, the day that Ottoman authorities rounded up, arrested, and deported 235 to 270 Armenian intellectuals and community leaders from Constantinople to the region of Ankara, the majority of whom were eventually murdered. The genocide was carried out during and after World War I and implemented in two phases: the wholesale killing of the able-bodied male population through massacre and subjection of army conscripts to forced labour, followed by the deportation of women, children, the elderly, and the infirm on death marches leading to the Syrian desert. Driven forward by military escorts, the deportees were deprived of food and water and subjected to periodic robbery, rape, and massacre. Other indigenous and Christian ethnic groups such as the Assyrians and the Ottoman Greeks were similarly targeted for extermination by the Ottoman government in the Assyrian genocide and the Greek genocide, and their treatment is considered by some historians to be part of the same genocidal policy. Reports of the conflict reached then United States Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire Henry Morgenthau , Sr. From Aleppo and Van, prompting him to raise the issue in person with Talaat and Enver. As he quoted to them the testimonies of his consulate officials, they justified the deportations as necessary to the conduct of the war, suggesting that complicity of the Armenians of Van with the Russian forces that had taken the city justified the persecution of all ethnic Armenians. The Armenians were marched out to the Syrian town of Deir ez-Zor and the surrounding desert. There is no evidence that the Ottoman government provided the extensive facilities and supplies that would have been necessary to sustain the life of hundreds of thousands of Armenian deportees during their forced march to the Syrian desert or after . By August 1915, The New York Times repeated an unattributed report that "the roads and the Euphrates are strewn with corpses of exiles, and those who survive are doomed to certain death. It is a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people". Turkish leaders : Talaat Pasha and Djemal Pasha were completely aware that by abandoning the Armenian deportees in the desert they were condemning them to certain death . Most Armenian diaspora communities around the world came into being as a direct result of the genocide.
This The Ottoman Lieutenant (2017) is the answer to Terry George's The Promise (2016) that followed a love triangle among a medical student , a sophisticated women and an prestigious American reporter , in which was a strong denounce about the Turkish genocide against Armenians , while The Ottoman Lieutenant (2017) though it recognizes that there were Armenian massacres, these were caused due to the disastrous consequences of the war and that the Armenians allied themselves with the Russian invaders against the Turks. The film has an acid critic to the indolence of European nations and international community and specially , the abandon of foreign policy . Protagonist trio gives sensational performance , Hera Hilmar as a strong-willed young woman, Michiel Huisman as a Lieutenant in the Ottoman Imperial Army and Josh Arnett as a doctor who runs a remote medical mission within the Ottoman Empire. Being accompanied by a great support cast , such as Ben Kingsley , Haluk Bilginer , Jessica Turner , among others . The movie has a colorful and evocative cinematography by Daniel Aranyó . As well as evocative and stirring music by Geoff Zanelli . This love triangle movie was professionally directed by Joseph Ruben. He his a fine craftsman who has made attractive films , most of them thrillers and action movies , such as : "The Forgotten" , "Return to Paradise" , "Money Train" , "The God Son" , "Sleeping with the Enemy" , "The Believer", "The Stepfather" and "Dreamscape" . Rating : 6.5/10 . Acceptable and decent drama .
The flick is based on actual facts , these are the following ones : It's calculated that in the indiscriminate massacre were cruelly killed by Turks approximately 1.5 million Armenians . In fact, director Joseph Ruben wanted to disown this film because of the post-production changes that deny the Armenian Genocide. This genocide against Armenians is called ¨Armenian Holocaust¨ that was the Ottoman government's systematic extermination of Armenians , mostly Ottoman citizens within the Ottoman Empire and its successor state, the Republic of Turkey . The starting date is conventionally held to be 24 April 1915, the day that Ottoman authorities rounded up, arrested, and deported 235 to 270 Armenian intellectuals and community leaders from Constantinople to the region of Ankara, the majority of whom were eventually murdered. The genocide was carried out during and after World War I and implemented in two phases: the wholesale killing of the able-bodied male population through massacre and subjection of army conscripts to forced labour, followed by the deportation of women, children, the elderly, and the infirm on death marches leading to the Syrian desert. Driven forward by military escorts, the deportees were deprived of food and water and subjected to periodic robbery, rape, and massacre. Other indigenous and Christian ethnic groups such as the Assyrians and the Ottoman Greeks were similarly targeted for extermination by the Ottoman government in the Assyrian genocide and the Greek genocide, and their treatment is considered by some historians to be part of the same genocidal policy. Reports of the conflict reached then United States Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire Henry Morgenthau , Sr. From Aleppo and Van, prompting him to raise the issue in person with Talaat and Enver. As he quoted to them the testimonies of his consulate officials, they justified the deportations as necessary to the conduct of the war, suggesting that complicity of the Armenians of Van with the Russian forces that had taken the city justified the persecution of all ethnic Armenians. The Armenians were marched out to the Syrian town of Deir ez-Zor and the surrounding desert. There is no evidence that the Ottoman government provided the extensive facilities and supplies that would have been necessary to sustain the life of hundreds of thousands of Armenian deportees during their forced march to the Syrian desert or after . By August 1915, The New York Times repeated an unattributed report that "the roads and the Euphrates are strewn with corpses of exiles, and those who survive are doomed to certain death. It is a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people". Turkish leaders : Talaat Pasha and Djemal Pasha were completely aware that by abandoning the Armenian deportees in the desert they were condemning them to certain death . Most Armenian diaspora communities around the world came into being as a direct result of the genocide.
Completely unconvincing
hayirenefb30 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is a story that is taking advantage of people's ignorance in regards to the world history, particularly the region in questions. The acting is rather stale, the movie is horribly fake. while the natural beauty of the landscape is being taken advantage of by the makers, it cannot compensate for the obvious intent of the propaganda which is the main original not so hidden intent. Definitely not worth your hard earned dollars. Go see something more exciting.
a story
Kirpianuscus13 January 2018
A war film. or a romantic one. each discovers what he want. and the only delicate aspect could be the unrealistic expectation. because it is less a political movie, it is less a pledge for a cause or the other but one of beautiful - bitter stories about people, emotions, contact between different worlds and the result of this meet. a film who preserves its noble intentions to the first scene to the last, against pathetic scenes and too many black/white perspective or too sentimental parts. but this does it touching. and, maybe, useful, remembering many other stories about same theme.
Finally a non-Armenian view to 1915.
engin_ozdemir125 July 2017
First of all, great cast and cinematography.
Good script and a fresh look to 1915, which was necessary, one sided propaganda movies about 1915 financed by the Amenian lobby doesn't tell the whole truth about the issue. This movie we can call a little bit "objective" in comparing with the other ones and give the viewer a chance to see the other side of the story, a chance to have another perspective. A must see.
Good script and a fresh look to 1915, which was necessary, one sided propaganda movies about 1915 financed by the Amenian lobby doesn't tell the whole truth about the issue. This movie we can call a little bit "objective" in comparing with the other ones and give the viewer a chance to see the other side of the story, a chance to have another perspective. A must see.
Love amidst genocide and war
ravitchn8 December 2017
I am amazed that this movie could deal with the background of the Ottoman Turkish genocide of the Armenians in eastern Anatolia without ever coming to grips with what really happened. The movie deals with the early days of WWI in Anatolia, with a large Armenian population which is clearly headed for death and also a Kurdish population in the service of the Ottoman government which is never mentioned. The real culprits here are the Russians, described as brutal savages and Cosacks (which they were but that is a partial view) and some of the Turks, but not of course the Ottoman lieutenant whose allegiance wavers between his nationalism and his love for an American nurse. Love wins out, as does death and genocide.
I am wondering if Armenians in America and elsewhere are complaining about a movie which is somewhat pro-Turkish and not at all sympathetic really to the Armenian cause. This is a complicated subject and both sides, Armenians and Turks, are guilty of much but the victims were largely Armenians and they get most of the sympathy in real life, except for those countries trying to make nice with the Turks. But the movie prefers a romance to historic truth. That can be OK but surely not for everyone.
The movie manages neutrality between victims and murderers but the romance helps you to ignore this, if you are not of Armenian heritage.
I am wondering if Armenians in America and elsewhere are complaining about a movie which is somewhat pro-Turkish and not at all sympathetic really to the Armenian cause. This is a complicated subject and both sides, Armenians and Turks, are guilty of much but the victims were largely Armenians and they get most of the sympathy in real life, except for those countries trying to make nice with the Turks. But the movie prefers a romance to historic truth. That can be OK but surely not for everyone.
The movie manages neutrality between victims and murderers but the romance helps you to ignore this, if you are not of Armenian heritage.
Merhaba, Miss Lillie Rowe!
lavatch1 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
While the title of this film is "The Ottoman Lieutenant," the protagonist is in fact Miss Lillie Rowe, the strong-willed young woman from Philadelphia, who visits Eastern Turkey in 1914, determined to deliver a truck and medical supplies to an American Christian mission hospital outside the city of Van.
Miss Rowe has witnessed the racism in Philadelphia that segregates hospitals, and she finds herself in Turkey in the middle of two men who love her, one a Christian (Dr. Jude Fisher) and one a Muslim (Lieutenant Ismail Veli of the Ottoman Imperial Army). She also finds herself in the broader conflict of the Muslims interacting with the Christian Armenian population in Eastern Turkey.
The film combines romance and history in an epic style with breathtaking vistas and landscapes in Turkey. Two of the most spectacular scenes were a glimpse of Agri Dagi (Mount Ararat) and the picturesque island of Ahtamar, as Miss Rowe was introduced to Turkey by the Ottoman Lieutenant. The film also made use of documentary footage from World War I and voice-over narration delivered by Miss Rowe to explain how Turkey sided with the Germany in World War I and faced an invasion from Russia.
The senior physician at the mission, Dr. Woodruff, seems fatalistic that the medical facility might only serve as triage. By contrast, Miss Rowe genuinely believes that she can make a difference. She even sets Dr. Woodruff right in assisting him out of his depression and addiction to ether. He had suffered the loss of his wife to typhus, and, with the guidance of the idealistic Miss Rowe, he finally emerges from his indolence.
The background on the Armenian genocide is developed haphazardly throughout the film. We learn from Dr. Jude Fisher that "this war in Europe will split the country down the middle." But there is only a vague sense of the Armenian slaughter that decimated the Armenian population in the early part of the war. The filmmakers would have us believe that the Turkish army was primarily intent on eliminating the Armenian "rebels" who had gone over the side of the Russians. It is not until the ethically minded Ottoman Lieutenant takes a stand against civilian killings at the end that we get a glimpse into the atrocities committed against the Armenians at large.
Overall, the film primarily develops the romantic narrative in the unfolding love triangle of Lille Rowe, Dr. Jude Fisher, and Lieutenant Ismail Veli. While the relationships were clearly developed, the film gave short shrift to the emerging passionate relationship of Miss Rowe and Lieutenant Veli. In the most intense scene, the Lieutenant stops and asks Miss Rowe, "Are you sure?" That is a definite sign of lack of confidence not only on the part of the lieutenant, but by the filmmakers in handling the romantic content of their movie. And when Miss Rowe has to prompt her lieutenant to kiss her by asking what is the word kiss (Buse) in Turkish, the audience is genuinely concerned that the direction of this romantic relationship may not run a smooth course.
There was a nice touch on the part of the filmmakers in developing a broader them of spirituality. When the Lieutenant takes Miss Rowe into the Blue Mosque in Constantinople, she asserts that "it's like being inside God's thoughts." That non-demoninational statement is effectively developed as a spiritual theme that joins the two characters in their quest to serve humanity in a time of crisis.
Miss Rowe has witnessed the racism in Philadelphia that segregates hospitals, and she finds herself in Turkey in the middle of two men who love her, one a Christian (Dr. Jude Fisher) and one a Muslim (Lieutenant Ismail Veli of the Ottoman Imperial Army). She also finds herself in the broader conflict of the Muslims interacting with the Christian Armenian population in Eastern Turkey.
The film combines romance and history in an epic style with breathtaking vistas and landscapes in Turkey. Two of the most spectacular scenes were a glimpse of Agri Dagi (Mount Ararat) and the picturesque island of Ahtamar, as Miss Rowe was introduced to Turkey by the Ottoman Lieutenant. The film also made use of documentary footage from World War I and voice-over narration delivered by Miss Rowe to explain how Turkey sided with the Germany in World War I and faced an invasion from Russia.
The senior physician at the mission, Dr. Woodruff, seems fatalistic that the medical facility might only serve as triage. By contrast, Miss Rowe genuinely believes that she can make a difference. She even sets Dr. Woodruff right in assisting him out of his depression and addiction to ether. He had suffered the loss of his wife to typhus, and, with the guidance of the idealistic Miss Rowe, he finally emerges from his indolence.
The background on the Armenian genocide is developed haphazardly throughout the film. We learn from Dr. Jude Fisher that "this war in Europe will split the country down the middle." But there is only a vague sense of the Armenian slaughter that decimated the Armenian population in the early part of the war. The filmmakers would have us believe that the Turkish army was primarily intent on eliminating the Armenian "rebels" who had gone over the side of the Russians. It is not until the ethically minded Ottoman Lieutenant takes a stand against civilian killings at the end that we get a glimpse into the atrocities committed against the Armenians at large.
Overall, the film primarily develops the romantic narrative in the unfolding love triangle of Lille Rowe, Dr. Jude Fisher, and Lieutenant Ismail Veli. While the relationships were clearly developed, the film gave short shrift to the emerging passionate relationship of Miss Rowe and Lieutenant Veli. In the most intense scene, the Lieutenant stops and asks Miss Rowe, "Are you sure?" That is a definite sign of lack of confidence not only on the part of the lieutenant, but by the filmmakers in handling the romantic content of their movie. And when Miss Rowe has to prompt her lieutenant to kiss her by asking what is the word kiss (Buse) in Turkish, the audience is genuinely concerned that the direction of this romantic relationship may not run a smooth course.
There was a nice touch on the part of the filmmakers in developing a broader them of spirituality. When the Lieutenant takes Miss Rowe into the Blue Mosque in Constantinople, she asserts that "it's like being inside God's thoughts." That non-demoninational statement is effectively developed as a spiritual theme that joins the two characters in their quest to serve humanity in a time of crisis.
Terrible script and acting - B movie - forget the history it is just bad
filmtravel10126 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this film not knowing what it was about thinking perhaps due to the title it was similar to one of the my favorite films The English Patient. Unfortunately it was like a low budget B film that wished it had actors like Nicole Kidman and Eric Bana but instead hired 2 actors that sort of look like them.. but are not good enough to be lead actors at this stage of their careers and cant carry a terrible script but kudos to the director for even attempting to shoot it.
Here are the problems about this film that had some potential and yet have little to do with the history issues which is rather pathetic also but only a minor issue of the main problems.
The 2 main lead actors have no chemistry and Hera the female lead is as bland as water and sounds like a 14 year old teenager that just reads her lines with no depth whatsoever, but maybe one day will perhaps have some potential as she matures but in this film she has no emotional scale to be a lead. It was so painful to watch and her narration was so childish it made one almost wish they hired someone else to narrate it.
And her male leading man is also even more bland so there is the main problem with this film. Forget about the terrible script/dialogue that can be forgiven due to the majestic landscapes which are fantastic and the best part of the movie is the supporting cast of Josh and Ben that are wonderful but not enough to carry the entire film. Honestly i do not understand why they did not switch the roles of Josh and this dull lead actor. At least those two seem to have a little chemistry. Bad decision making just like Valerian that also bet on the 2 wrong actors and bombed.
Spoiler: And the funny part is when the lead actor is sent... totally alone on a suicide mission. This is a lieutenant, not a private or low level soldier is sent to blow up an armory of weapons inside a castle guarded by Russian soldiers. Yes more like a suicide mission 007 would do alone. Did the writer really think this through or was there not enough money in the $40 million budget. Simply hilarious and this is the son of a big military man. This is just one example of how pathetic this story is not to mention the lead actor asking the American lead to go out of her way to help some Armenians after he was almost killed by them. Yes that would be high on his list of things to do. The film writing just gets more silly and ends with him thankfully dying and his body being tossed out of a boat into a lake. Hum.. but i don't think muslems really like being buried in water esp if land is right in sight of them.
I give it a 4 star rating because of the supporting cast and the beautiful landscapes and not sure how on earth 13k people are giving it 8.1 which is impossible to imagine. Rotten tomatoes is more in line with a 21% rating. 2/10.
Here are the problems about this film that had some potential and yet have little to do with the history issues which is rather pathetic also but only a minor issue of the main problems.
The 2 main lead actors have no chemistry and Hera the female lead is as bland as water and sounds like a 14 year old teenager that just reads her lines with no depth whatsoever, but maybe one day will perhaps have some potential as she matures but in this film she has no emotional scale to be a lead. It was so painful to watch and her narration was so childish it made one almost wish they hired someone else to narrate it.
And her male leading man is also even more bland so there is the main problem with this film. Forget about the terrible script/dialogue that can be forgiven due to the majestic landscapes which are fantastic and the best part of the movie is the supporting cast of Josh and Ben that are wonderful but not enough to carry the entire film. Honestly i do not understand why they did not switch the roles of Josh and this dull lead actor. At least those two seem to have a little chemistry. Bad decision making just like Valerian that also bet on the 2 wrong actors and bombed.
Spoiler: And the funny part is when the lead actor is sent... totally alone on a suicide mission. This is a lieutenant, not a private or low level soldier is sent to blow up an armory of weapons inside a castle guarded by Russian soldiers. Yes more like a suicide mission 007 would do alone. Did the writer really think this through or was there not enough money in the $40 million budget. Simply hilarious and this is the son of a big military man. This is just one example of how pathetic this story is not to mention the lead actor asking the American lead to go out of her way to help some Armenians after he was almost killed by them. Yes that would be high on his list of things to do. The film writing just gets more silly and ends with him thankfully dying and his body being tossed out of a boat into a lake. Hum.. but i don't think muslems really like being buried in water esp if land is right in sight of them.
I give it a 4 star rating because of the supporting cast and the beautiful landscapes and not sure how on earth 13k people are giving it 8.1 which is impossible to imagine. Rotten tomatoes is more in line with a 21% rating. 2/10.
This is proper art
magbroalican7 May 2017
Very emotional movie, great acting, great cast, great plot. Simply incredible. I'm not really an emotional person, and the only movie that I've ever got teary eyed in was Hachiko. But then this movie made me just as much emotional if not more. Would definitely suggest it to everyone. Don't know about the historical value of the movie. But if you watch it without any prejudice, I guarantee that you will enjoy it. It's more than just a movie, it is.
Politically correct period drama
imranahmedsg9 May 2018
A decent period drama which provides some insight into social values of the early 1900s. Through relationships between a young American Christian doctor, an idealist American nurse dismayed by white supremacist beliefs and a Turkish Ottoman lieutenant fighting for justice and the survival of the Empire the film addresses many issues, including interfaith relationships, the alleged Armenian massacre and the 'White Man's Burden.'
The film is primarily set in Eastern parts of a collapsing Ottoman Empire where a Christian missionary hospital is being run Americans. As the war develops and Russian participation increases battle lines are drawn by the main characters. Humanitarian choices are also on offer.
At times predictable, the film makes a pleasant change from the usual Hollywood period drama set in Europe or the US. The cinematography is good with some remarkable scenes. The Ottoman Lieutenant will appeal to the socially conscious in a world increasingly filled with racism and discord.
The film is primarily set in Eastern parts of a collapsing Ottoman Empire where a Christian missionary hospital is being run Americans. As the war develops and Russian participation increases battle lines are drawn by the main characters. Humanitarian choices are also on offer.
At times predictable, the film makes a pleasant change from the usual Hollywood period drama set in Europe or the US. The cinematography is good with some remarkable scenes. The Ottoman Lieutenant will appeal to the socially conscious in a world increasingly filled with racism and discord.
Disappointing Cheesiness and Shallowness
fatihdevos27 July 2017
I was really looking forward to this movie. At last, a Hollywood flick about the Ottoman region during the Great War, a theme very close to my heart because my roots are Turkish. The reviews also looked quite promising, and the high IMDb score gave me extra motivation to spend my evening with this movie. And although the costumes, the Ottoman people, the setting and a lot of scenes (e.g. Istanbul panorama) are quite beautifully and accurately portrayed (even though Van doesn't look like Kapadokya at all, where a lot of scenes seem to have been shot), I really felt more and more disappointed as the movie was continuing. The typical Hollywood romance that you always have to endure when watching these historical movies, was way too cheesy to be bearable this time, partly due to the mediocre lead acting (Ben Kingsley's performance was the only convincing one as far as I'm concerned). The story was also very oversimplified, and seemed to lose more and more of its credibility near the end, especially when the Armenian theme was brought into it (not because of my own political convictions, I don't take a stand in this matter because I wasn't there, but because of the shallowness and the lack of nuance in the way it was portrayed). I really had high expectations for this one, and in a way I am happy that they made this movie, but I believe they could have, and should have delivered a less cheesy, and more elaborate product with that kind of budget. What a pity.
Nice movie
yelenabilgic7 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
This is very nice movie and really i'm very happy to watch it. Scenario is historical based and casting is perfect. Even you can't understand how your time will go so fast... Additionally that movie is throw light on a piece of near past and you are easily understanding that Armenians are telling lie about 1915 events between Armenians and Turks... Armenians has killed too many Turks during the war and Turks has just defended themselves, so at the and Turks has won that fight... Anyway, when you watch that movie, you will see what kind of things really happened and how Armenians are telling lie... Have nice watch,
A very enjoyable movie
woodyi18 August 2018
I know there is a great deal of argument around the Armenian peoples' plight in Turkey but I thought this movie was even handed. It was a love story set against a horrible backdrop but portrayed individuals who all exhibited varying dispositions. One can't dismiss it as propaganda; propaganda is the work of powers and fanatics.
Diabolically awful
wilbur1014 August 2017
The most awful couple of hours of two-dimensional clap-trap I have subjected myself to for several years. Don't waste your time on this drivel. I can't believe Ben Kingsley allowed himself to be duped into this nonsense. Shockingly wooden acting, criminally historically inaccurate, and a script that most ten-year-olds would find insultingly beneath them. This film is a barrage of banality. Awful. Really awful. I'm serious.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
