Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

lord woodburry Contrary to other reviewers I found The Day of The Siege to be an excellent film well grounded in history. The Mouslem Turks in 1683 advanced from Constantinople to Vienna for a second attempt at unlocking the door to Western Europe. The push on Vienna led a century earlier by the intrepid Turkish Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent had been repulsed.The Mouslem general The Vizier Mustafa leads a mighty horde of Turks and their allies and invests the City. True to Mouslem principles, Mustafa offers the inhabitants an opportunity to surrender peacefully. Though abandoned by the Emperor, the scratch force making up the garrison agrees to fight on.It is at this juncture that Mustafa makes the critical mistake. An ally suggests a cover force to protect the besieging forces from an attack from the North. Convinced that the terrain is too difficult, Mustafa ignores the recommendation and concentrates his forces on the siege with a great deal of initial success: The Turks break the wall. Fatefully Mustafa hesitates. Historians speculate that he wanted to swallow the city whole so that marauding Jannisaries didn't loot and destroy an important commercial center and base of operations for a further push into Germany badly divided by civil war between Christian factions.Mustafa's delay gives the Polish King Jan III just enough time to drag his canon through hostile terrain to attack the Turks and relieve the outnumbered garrison.I think the film was an excellent portrayal of Mustafa as an honorable warrior who made two strategic blunders, of Jan III who appreciated the first rule of strategy: attack where the enemy never expects to find you and of the Holy Roman Emperor who prefigured The Bush's flight on a different 9-11 when he abandoned his wife, his capital and his country to run away.

John Gillmartin ... this was a great hour and a half !!!... was it historically accurate ??? I really don't know and neither does anyone else ... ... movies are for entertainment, documentaries & seminars are for education ~ I was entertained. The cinematography was good, acting was fair to good ... a little long (for my taste) IMHO I think it reminded me that both faith & history a) have a place, b) have flesh and blood under their shadows, and 3) that God is not dead and never was.Good job even if people on both sides are disappointed.

gpbach This movie show mostly charismatic Marco d'Aviano and his role during siege of Vienna and the IMDb storyline didn't talk about this movie and you need put "September Eleven 1683" to the box with all Italian catholic films. Remember you can't confront it with high budget Hollywood productions. As catholics low budget movie for catholics audience is good. Also if you know history of Poland and expect historical film about the siege of Vienna REMEMBER this is NOT a film about the great victory of Sobieski, the Polish cavalry, or about the political intrigues of European sovereigns in the 17th century.From other hand matteo-cortigiani-1 are totally right about this movie. Now if any movie has positive view of Christians(especially Catholic) must be bed. Sad but true :-(

denis888 Oh, what can I really say here? I love the history of great battles and the Polish events of the 17th century, Jan Sobieski was a distinguished king and a great warrior, and the very topic of Kara Mustapha and the peak of Ottoman Empire's power in Europe all seem to be very exiting topics to make a great film about. Did the filmmakers succeed? No. Why? First, and foremost, extremely poor special effects. They are so naive, amateurish and so obviously bad, that even a mere kid can immediately say that this is drawn, this is computerized and this was very sloppily assembled on a very simply software. Shame. The worst moment? he very battle, of course. My, it is so caricature, so unassumingly badly done, so fast and hasted, that one can marvel with a mouth open. Terribly poor effects and very laughable attacks recall all the great previous Polish movies on war, but here the battle simply sinks. Even the great casting cannot help. All the stars seem to be a bit lost and absent, with only two great exceptions - Adamczyk and Abraham - they did a marvelous job. But they did not save the poor film from a fail. Immense failure.