Well, why did I give 6 stars? Cause it was a good film, the flow of the movie was somehow forced, different pieces of the movie could not constitute a whole in my opinion, and it was due to the need to tell as much as possible in a limited amount time. But still acting, the story, scripts were above average. Now, lets talk about haters "read some history" propaganda. I am not gonna say Turks were the complete victims, genocide claims are totally empty and so forth. All of these arguments have some valid points from academic point of view.
Ottoman Empire had harbored many nations; although the word "nation" and what it represents are very newly formed concepts in history (depends on the nationalism movement in 18th history). Moreover, just read and accept this, nationalism is a sociologically constructed human made concept, it has absolutely no biological foundation. And OK, Ottoman Empire had its faults and different practices during its time history, but seriously consider Europe between 1400-1800, just to say "the world is a sphere" was enough to spend you life in jail. So, saying something like "for like years we were crushed and forced into sudden and unexpected practices" does not justify brutish approach and it certainly does not mean Turk cannot be victims after.
OK you know International Institute of Social History; it is an archive on social history and an independent scientific Institute founded in 1935. Read "Turkey. A Modern History" by Erik-Jan Zürcher if you somehow manage to spare your precious time, he was the head of the institute for 15 years. It is one of the most objective approaches you can find for Turkish history. There, apart from everything else (including Genocide claims of Armenians), you would see that the events in gallipoli war was not really that different from what you see in the film. So, instead of ranting on saying things like "I am oh so so angry, cannot write, so angry, cannot see, crap this is, ohh very angry, Greeks and Armenians are the victims always, Turks are always the oppressors always, ohh angry", get out of your high school history books and make real research for once in your incredibly valuable life.
Ottoman Empire had harbored many nations; although the word "nation" and what it represents are very newly formed concepts in history (depends on the nationalism movement in 18th history). Moreover, just read and accept this, nationalism is a sociologically constructed human made concept, it has absolutely no biological foundation. And OK, Ottoman Empire had its faults and different practices during its time history, but seriously consider Europe between 1400-1800, just to say "the world is a sphere" was enough to spend you life in jail. So, saying something like "for like years we were crushed and forced into sudden and unexpected practices" does not justify brutish approach and it certainly does not mean Turk cannot be victims after.
OK you know International Institute of Social History; it is an archive on social history and an independent scientific Institute founded in 1935. Read "Turkey. A Modern History" by Erik-Jan Zürcher if you somehow manage to spare your precious time, he was the head of the institute for 15 years. It is one of the most objective approaches you can find for Turkish history. There, apart from everything else (including Genocide claims of Armenians), you would see that the events in gallipoli war was not really that different from what you see in the film. So, instead of ranting on saying things like "I am oh so so angry, cannot write, so angry, cannot see, crap this is, ohh very angry, Greeks and Armenians are the victims always, Turks are always the oppressors always, ohh angry", get out of your high school history books and make real research for once in your incredibly valuable life.