Change Your Image
laufeyson-64475
Reviews
The Little Drummer Girl (2018)
So disappointed...must be the worst recent BBC series.
OK, I watched the whole series now. What a mess. Such bad acting, an awful chemistry between the leads, such a fake execution and overly romantic ending!
I'm not surprised that John le Carré himself (the author of the novel which this idiotic series is based on) stated that people won't like this adaptation and that it is very slow.....(what he meant= boring).
I love slow-paced drama, so the negative aspect of this series is not that it is slow...by all means, it is lifeless, unauthentic, dull and does not ring true. I think they tried to pump up the dull atmosphere and acting with the vibrant and bizarre colourful clothes, but no...did not help.
I also thought that Hollywood would finally stop casting young actresses opposite old actors? There is between Joseph and Charlie 20 years of age difference, 20 years!!!!
The director surely tries to make the "couple" cute and normal, but such a girl would never look at that guy, never!
Skarsgard may be sometimes a good actor and fine looking, but he really looks close to 50 now, which means older than his actual age, so their age gap appears huge and disturbing. Their chemistry and the kissing just feels ugly and wrong and totally creeps me out. He is also extremely bad at romantic scenes and feels devoid of any emotion.
Do every colleagues or friends have to end up in bed together? Hollywood, come on... just stop with that, just stop!
There is absolutely no reason why Charlie would (after getting scared and creeped out in Athens) to agree and be a puppet of the Israelites. They did not give her enough information, motivation and time to choose, and nobody would travel all the way through Yogoslavia back then ALONE in the car for a mission so mysterious, unresolved and without any motivation. Btw, the statement about Yugoslavia borders bringing no big problems made me laugh, as I know very well how the borders back then were (like hell!), and today it certainly got better but it is still not great..especially the borders in Bulgaria and Macedonia. Alwayssss problems (Umm bribemoney).
I can see that Michael Shannon may get acting nods, although it's not his best work...but all the other actors are just awful and repeating their same facial expressions in every goddamn movie and series. When you feel that the scenes appear fake and would not happen in real life, then you know that the actors also do not believe in all that drama they are poorly delivering. The series is drowning in bad acting and editing.
This series truly may be the worst from BBC lately and without the big names attached to it, it would not be watched or get any accolades....so, I hope it won't steal the awards, marketing and attention from other deserving high-calibre series. 1/10
Sharp Objects (2018)
Should Have Been a Movie Instead.
3 Episodes in and not much has happened regarding the development of the story.
Amy Adams and Patricia Clarkson are a force to watch, feel, sense and admire.
However, the series seems to test the patience of the viewer and make us ponder, whether we would still continue watching it, if Amy Adams (or another amazing actress) would not stare in it.
Do we really wait by now in excitement for a new episode? Not really.
The problem is neither the acting, nor the cast, nor the writing (which is great), nor the setting....it is the directing.
Having awarded an Emmy for Jean-Marc Vallée' mediocre directing last year for Big Little Lies (which was outstanding except the direction), HBO decided to use its incompetent employee again for a female-led story.
I understand that it is his filmmaking idiosyncrasy to put fast flashbacks in every space possible. However, how unnerving does it actually get to watch every episode consisting merely of flashbacks? Fast and short ones. Also at every end of each episode.
It's not going to stop. And this is called a filmmaking method...yeah, sure. This is called incompetence of delivering subtle and trauma-based memories from depressed and grieving characters. If you can't think of anything else than filling every episode with car rides, short interrogations with the same disturbed characters, two insults from the mother to Camille, long close-ups of Camille and only flashback scenes, then you surely are an incompetent director who should not be hired anymore.
This story with that cast and writer would make a great movie. Expanding it into 8 episodes, one episode does only contain 1-2 important scenes and the rest are only atmospheric, music video clip-like scenes.
Why should I continue watching it? It would be enough to watch a recap of every episode and that's it.
Big Little Lies (2017)
Where is the Big Revelation? Don't expect a Masterpiece!
What makes this series watchable and fine? It's the great performances. Special mention to Robin Weigert who plays Kidman's therapist.She is really talented,as her scenes seem very real and I felt intimidated by her way of asking questions. She is not the typical therapist who listens and gives a few common advice to her patients but is instead alarmed at Celeste's situation and takes on the role of a friend for her. The scenes with Celeste and the therapist are my favorite ones, as they are actually quite teaching. They emphasize that victims of any kind of abuse should have witnesses and should not remain silent about their problems. Men with egos, money and connections may end up playing the victim and blaming the wife if there are no witnesses or evidence for the abuse or cheating.
I was really shocked while reading the comments on the internet after each episode. People can be so shallow and ignorant. Many women drooled over Skarsgard and made comments like: "He could abuse me any time" and then "He is sooo hot".Like,really?He is an abuser, a rapist!That's what the series wants to show that not every abuser is the same,some can be so nice to his children,to his neighbors,etc, but may actually be a pedophile or a wife-beater. I also read comments from people proudly stating that Skarsgard is such a good guy in real life and that he can pull off the abuser role so well, but I asked myself as for how they could be so sure about that? Do they know him? The last time I checked his name on the internet,I saw several articles about him where he seemed like a cold, uncaring, sarcastic goofball/asshole. Never lived with a woman together. Just hangs around with some loser type for a short time, probably just to demonstrate that he is not gay. People really should stop being so shallow, as APPEARANCES ARE DECEITFUL!
Moreover,I always liked Kidman as an actress and it is great to see that people have finally acknowledged that with this series.She is really a scene-stealer and although she messed up her face with plastic surgery and uses bad wigs, she looks really stunning here.I also liked to see a mature and talented actress opposite an actor who is younger than her,as it is never a problem when older men act opposite young and beautiful women! I also have to note that Skarsgard looks older than his age (he's 40 years old),whereas Adam Scott who is 44 years old looks in his early 30s. Reese also looks very young and fit although being 40 years old, she would certainly look younger opposite Skarsgard.
In addition, I think this is Reese's best work to date. I'm actually not a fan of hers and think of her as an average actress, but her cool attitude and her way of delivering her lines so accurately, fast and fiercely definitely deserves some nod and recognition. However, I'm not happy with her ego which she so often exhibits, as she changed her character from the book to guarantee an Emmy by making her a cheater. She stated that she does not like sympathetic characters, but she AND the screenwriter should know that there are many other ways to make a character flawed than letting them cheat on their spouses. I was disappointed with that change, as it came out of nowhere, while she presented herself as conservative towards the upbringing of her daughter and hated her first husband for leaving her (and cheating). There is no way that she would suddenly do that..bad writing all over.
Although the series started well, the last episode is so underwhelming and poorly executed that I have to give the series all in all a 6 out of 10. I had high expectations for the finale but was let down. The confrontation between Jane and the rapist is missing, although the plot centers heavily on them. There is no way that Jane could identify Perry as her rapist while he wears a bad Elvis costume. Perry would also not remember her, as they were both drunk on that night and Jane was surely not his first victim. There had to be confrontation scenes between the both, Celeste and Mad and Ed. While every woman there was in shock because of Perry's aggressive behavior, Reese and Celeste still somehow manage to look at Jane and understand what she is thinking. Come on, really? She just could be shocked to see Celeste's husband for the first time and how he misbehaves. I really can't believe how the actors could approve the ending.Why did we have to watch the ocean and the waves and the women and children run on the beach, accompanied with muted confessions at the police station?
I really can't stand Jean-Marc Vallée as a director. Instead of showing the actors and their facial expressions, he films the landscapes, ocean,the cars, and uses a bad greenish coloring which makes the actors look old and pale! His way of showing flashbacks(which I also hated in "Wild")and the unnecessary interrogation scenes is so badly executed that it just annoys. He never zooms the actors, but films them askance or from afar.If you want to focus on women's lives and adapt a novel from a female writer, why don't you instead hire a female director?If Reese&Nicole fear that a woman director won't do justice to the series, then they shouldn't talk about feminism and support at all.I would have definitely hired a woman as a director who would be more sensitive with the material.Jane who was raped seemed like a psycho and suddenly at the end, she is so happy that Perry died that she does a cartwheel. LoL.
Taken as a whole: Great soundtrack, good acting(except Kravitz, partly Woodley),terrible directing and editing!Shame.
Brimstone (2016)
Worryingly Disturbing, But So Is Reality!
As a Western fan, I really enjoyed this movie, the directing, scenery and cinematography are very beautiful and nice to look at! The story is also very compelling, as it seems real and touches on the controversial topic of the difficult lives of women, however, I still wait for a contemporary movie about such difficulties, as physical, verbal and sexual abuse. It's still happening (no matter where you live!)and instead of making movies about a different century (where people cannot relate to), there should be movies about the contemporary problems and issues of women.
Since the director is Dutch, I liked that the Reverend and his family are also Dutch, although he could not pull off the accent. I would have also preferred another actress instead of Carice van Houten, as she appears too modern and sexy - this sexiness which she also showed in Game of Thrones was probably enough to seduce Guy Pearce in real life. Apart from Pearce's creepiness and perversity, Dakota Fanning is the real star in this movie. She really impressed me. She was different in every scene, constantly shifting between being fierce, vulnerable, strong, attractive and frightened. I'm happy that she and Kit Harington were chosen at the end, as the previous actors who were under contract for this movie, Wasikowska and Pattinson, are horrible actors. No range and no facial expressions. They would have destroyed this movie and the audience could not have been able to relate to their characters and feel Liz' sorrows.
Yes, the Reverend is sadistic, he is a pervert and ruthless. So is society. I can imagine that many perverts and creeps will watch this movie to satisfy their needs and debauched minds. I don't think that they will feel ashamed of themselves by watching it, as those people cannot be healed.
Moreover, I want to give my personal opinion about the director Martin Koolhoven. I followed him on Twitter and read a few of his posts about religions and Islam. First, he defended his movie being not sadistic, but rather a feminist approach to a male-oriented Western movie. He asked for objective point of views and not being ignorant in their statements. However, he is also the same person who posts anti-Islam rants and pigeonholes them all. He reacted to those gay protesters who were marching for Moslems because of the travel ban in the US and claimed that the Moslems in return would have killed them, etc. Is this not an ignorant statement of him? Not everyone is the same. Just because he presents the Reverend as evil in the movie does not also mean that every Christian is evil. There are many modern, sophisticated, gay, feminist Moslems in the world. In addition, these Moslems criticize each other, too and hate those old-fashioned, stupid, misogynistic fellow believers. I think he should also try to be careful in his rants and arguments, because as far as I know, filmmakers, writers and artists are open-minded and peaceful people who are not ignorant about other cultures and religions and can distinguish between good and evil.
Miss Sloane (2016)
This is Not a Pro-Gun Control Movie, you ignorant fools!
Instead of deciding for myself, I believed all the negative hype and shitstorm about this movie...I should be ashamed of thinking that people saw the movie and gave constructive criticism. How many of those haters have actually watched this movie?? This movie is so frustratingly underrated. It was even only screened in the US. Why is John Madden not nominated/awarded for his directing?
This movie shows two sides: Pro and Contra of gun control. The movie is about lobbying and how some politicians (senators)can be lead by money and power without giving a damn about their country, the people, and their safety.
Jessica Chastain gives a masterclass in acting. She is almost in every frame and totally owns every scene she is in. Her performance is again so powerful, thrilling and enigmatic. I really can't understand why she was not nominated for an Oscar, as she had so many lines to speak rapidly and fiercely. Her character does everything to win by eliminating every grain of morality and compassion. It is up to the viewer to find her likable or not. Or to relate to her. She is not one-dimensional and shows many layers of herself.
I also loved "The Debt", again directed by Madden and starring Chastain. They are certainly a great duo. Mark Strong should also be mentioned, the great actor who seems to be cruelly underrated in every movie he is in. The question is, why? Not young, no six-pack, bald, not American? I just wish that such powerful movies with a great objective message should not be ignored and forgotten. While actresses like Natalie Portman were nominated for an Oscar, for an unauthentic, cold and forced performance, Amy Adams for Arrival and Chastain for Miss Sloane remained neglected and unrewarded.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)
Refreshingly Entertaining with Outstanding Effects!
Although I don't like David Yates' directing, I think he did his best with this movie. The cinematography isn't perfect, but the colour contrasts are really beautiful to watch. The movie is highly entertaining and I recommend it to everyone (especially to families/adolescents).
PROS: -Eddie Redmayne's acting! He is a real cutie in this film. His interaction with his "fantastic beasts" are adorable! -Eddie's chemistry with Dan Fogler and Fogler's believable chemistry with Alison Sudol. -Alison Sudol is gorgeous, sweet and pulls off her role without a doubt. -Colin Farrell's scenes. He has the most interesting ones. -The Beasts in general. All scenes, especially the ending are beautifully scripted and filmed. -The score is beautiful and fitting. Pacing and editing are fine. (why did Warner Bros and David Yates screw it in The Legend of Tarzan then???) -Great CGI. Worth to watch in IMAX3D.
CONS: -Katherine Waterston's acting... she gives a very disappointing performance in this movie. I know her previous work and her acting isn't that dull actually. Apart from that, she looks extremely plain and black hair makes her look hideous. -Unfortunately less Colin Farrell. - Johnny Depp as Grindelwald. Seriously? How bad was that?! -Very few magic spells are recited. That was very disappointing, as we're watching the world of the wizards, aren't we? -There are many movies which take place in the US, therefore, I think the Harry Potter universe should have stayed in England. I hope the sequels will be filmed in Hogwarts and we will get to see more wizards, teachers and so.
Overall the movie is really refreshing, as it has an original screenplay that isn't based on a novel, comic book, etc. The movie also gives a profound message about the desire to be accepted into society, especially when one is different than the majority.
Captain Fantastic (2016)
Why are Indie Films SO GOOD?!
OK, I know the answer. The scripts and the ideas are original and unique. There is usually no studio to force some guidelines upon directors. Therefore, they can mostly remain self-contained in their creative decisions.
First of all, you have to respect Viggo Mortensen, not only because he's a terrific actor(artist), but due to his down-to-earthness. He said in an interview for this movie that he doesn't care, whether a movie will be a big-budget one or not, or that he will get a huge salary. He says that he has to like the script and think of the story and the character he's going to play as unique and interesting. Oh sorry, like his character in the movie says, we shouldn't just say "interesting" when describing sth., but be more precise :)) I think he deserves to be nominated for the Best Actor Oscar for his performance in this movie. He played the smart-crazy-lovable hippie-father so well! Everyone in this movie does a great job, the child actors are so sweet and clever.
What the movie is mostly about is that there can be many different perceptions of people about life and religion within one society, but we have to respect each other and show love. In order to be successful and sophisticated, one has to be interested and open-minded to learn new things. Just going to school and university doesn't guarantee cleverness. Most students forget what they've learned within weeks after the exam. It's important to retain the knowledge.
Warcraft (2016)
I never loved LOTR, nor did I play Warcraft, but I love this movie!
I went to the cinema without expecting much, although I really enjoyed the trailers. I love fantasy flicks with a good storyline, strong performances and with some action in it. This movie has it all. As stated in my title, I never played the game, so I can't judge whether they did justice to the game, but on its own it is very entertaining. Can't wait to watch the sequel. I watched it in IMAX 3D and it was worth it, although I don't always enjoy wearing 3D glasses ;) I assume I belong to the minority, but I never enjoyed the Lord of The Rings trilogy, and since I read a few times that Warcraft shares some similarities to that trilogy, I wanted to clarify my opinion to this. For me Warcraft isn't that boring and protracted ;). It has more action sequences and I really liked the CGI in that.
What I should also mention is that the choice of casting Travis Fimmel was a fabulous idea, because for me without him this movie would be only average. I admire directors who don't cast the wannabe A-list actors who look good, but can't act... Duncan Jones doesn't seem like that, as the actors he chose for Moon (2009) and Source Code (2011) were really good. Hope to see more indie films directed by him in future.
High-Rise (2015)
Disturbing, Insane, Mind-Bending, Real and a Guilty Pleasure!
This movie is not for everyone. I'm sure it is also not intended to be. I'm certain that you have to be a realist to understand the message in the movie (not even a pessimist!), as it shows human psychology very well - that somehow everyone keeps a beast within oneself. Some manage to tame it, some unleash it with appalling consequences. The movie is based on the dystopian eponymous novel by J.G. Ballard. I don't think that it's a fiction which shows the far future. I can already sense the human mania today. Greed, jealousy, racism, yearning for attention and fame...and many other quirky notions are highly present, not because of high-rise buildings, as it was something new in the 70s, but because of the social media in general. I've witnessed many moments, where someone totally went bonkers because his WLAN got disconnected. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
First of all, a huge thumbs up to Laurie Rose for the sublime cinematography. I think the most prominent reason why this movie gets so much attention is because of his craftsmanship. The second aspect definitely is the awesome cast. When you have Jeremy Irons, Tom Hiddleston, James Purefoy, and Keeley Hawes, then you can be sure that even if the movie is not good, they will still own the scenes they are in! For me, the script is shaggy, as it has plot holes, such as the intentions of all the people and their obsessions are unclear and why they can't leave the high-rise, why no police comes for investigations, etc..etc. The 2nd half is too long, the editing is odd, some scenes could have been longer, some must've been shorter. The ending is abrupt without any clear conclusion, nor does the last track suit the ending. The movie could've definitely been better with a more profound focus on the characters and the editing of the movie.
Luke Evans surprised me a lot in his vicious supporting role (as Richard Wilder), as he shines a lot through it and I really think that instead of romantic and passive lead roles, he should do more powerful villain roles or comedies. He can really act, which I couldn't see in his mediocre big-budget movies.
I'm also quite happy having watched Tom Hiddleston in a unique performance after a truly awfully directed and scripted movie Crimson Peak (where he is still excellent alongside Jessica Chastain). I also think that although Hiddleston's role here is a slightly passive one, it is not that composed and sedate as his Adam in Jim Jarmusch's Only Lovers Left Alive (which movie I also loved). If I hadn't known him as Loki from the Thor franchise films, I would've definitely looked his name up and watched all his movies after watching him in High-Rise, because he exhibits a neurotic side of himself with his intense acting as Dr.Laing, who is unconcerned, immoral, yet panicked, and amiable. Although Tom shows a very different side of himself in this movie, I can sense his real self in the character of Laing. Giving the impression of a calm and sane man, he ends up being the most insane.
If you want to watch this movie, you should be warned that it is not animal-friendly with lots of violence concerning humans and animals. It doesn't actually deserve a 10/10, what I've given it, but I really love mindfuck movies (psychological thrillers/horrors), and I enjoyed the performances in it a lot. It didn't give me the feeling of an indie film, or rather of a low-budget film, as it is rich and colourful in many aspects. That's why I want to see more stuff like that and want people to support such films ;) Well done, Ben Wheatley!
The Huntsman: Winter's War (2016)
Better than the Trailer shows and better than the First one!
I think the trailers don't do justice to the movie in regard to showing the real quality of it. The movie has amazing visual effects and wonderful original characters. People thought the movie is actually more about WOMEN, but I can assure you that the Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth) has a quite important and major role, but I think his scenes were overshadowed in the trailers.
The three female leads are AMAZING. Apart from looking gorgeous, all three are incredibly talented and badass. I wished Raveena (Charlize Theron) had much more scenes, but she owns every scene she is in. One of my favourite actresses is Jessica Chastain and everyone who likes her will be much pleased, since she has many great and powerful scenes. She is a real badass. Her profession does not consist of constantly looking beautiful or feminine, as she presents here a very strong, masculine, yet emotional warrioress. I love how she always plays dominant and characterful figures who are also inspiring and compelling. You can easily follow how she changes her facial expressions, one second she is very tough, then suddenly she becomes very romantic and vulnerable. A terrific actress.
Everyone who likes the first one, will surely like this one, too, since it has lots of fairy tale traits (apart from Snow White). There are very very dark scenes, which I loved, but there are also humorous and light scenes where the balance is really well made.
I think you shouldn't hesitate and go enjoy this beautifully made movie with great performances. Everyone who loves fantasy and fairy tales should watch and recommend the movie to others.
The Night Manager (2016)
Great Potential Wasted by a Terrible Director!
First of all, I'm a big le Carré fan, The Night Manager is not his best work, but definitely a good one. Did this series accomplish to pay tribute to the novel? NO, definitely not. The reason for that is Susanne Bier, the director! Just because she won the Oscar for her Danish film doesn't mean that she is competent to adapt a le Carré novel! She totally destroyed it. The way she zooms the actors till their nostril hair is just despicable to watch and totally distracts from the story. All people who like this series are either "fan girls" or people who are easily pleased. That's a good thing actually, to never question anything and accept every flaw...BUT I'm not like that. Everything that is bad, should be criticized. Just because you have good actors, doesn't mean that the quality of the series is equally good. In this case, it must be enough for many "fan girls" to see Hiddleston almost naked in every episode or active in a sexual intercourse? Is he a sex object? As far as I've read in an article, he is a feminist, so he wants to balance the nudity in films. However, he seems to use his body and his fan girls to achieve a huge fandom and bigger roles. His ass was also a huge advertisement while promoting Crimson Peak. That kind of conception surely is not about balancing nudity, but using nudity to become popular! This is exactly what many women do: Using their bodies beyond their talents! Sorry, I can't praise that. Especially not then, when Hiddleston is a very awkward kisser. Have read similar criticism about him several times on the internet, too. Plus, Elizabeth Debicki is supposed to be attractive in the role of Jed. Who the f*** finds her attractive? Maybe, if she would have long hair, but the director always shows her brought neck that makes her look very masculine. Her one-dimensional acting consists of her looking drunk and shocked, she is a very very untalented actress, but gets roles because of her height. That shouldn't be like that.
Apart from that, the reason why Susanne Bier is a terrible director (which was actually proved with her movie "Serena") finds evidence in the fact that in the 4th episode she used the location Marrakech, Morocco as ISTANBUL!! Does she think that people don't know how Istanbul looks like? I've visited Istanbul many many times and the Haydarpasha port SURELY doesn't look like that, nor do the hotels look Arabic or oriental. Go on, just google for yourselves! Plus, the license plate numbers were not Turkish. You thought nobody is going to notice? I'm actually pretty sure that this is against the law, and if someone from Turkey notices that they will take legal action against the director and the crew of this series! You can't just use the name of a city and film it somewhere else! Another big flaw is that in the last episode Angela Burr calls the Upper Mesopotamia area, "Kurdistan", a non-defined "land" insisted by Kurdish people, or rather by terrorists who still since many years attack civilians to gain independence! To use such a term just inflames political conflicts, what actually Brits love to do! Just google what Kurdish terrorists do to civilians and you will see that it's nothing peaceful and that nobody should encourage them, as in this series, to use the term "Kurdistan" for a non-existent land. The area already belongs to Syria, Iraq, Iran and Turkey and Kurdish terrorists forcefully want to make it theirs!
Hugh Laurie, Tom Hollander AND Natasha Little (who steals every scene from all the female cast) are mind-blowing!! Definitely worth-watching just for them. However, the ending which differentiates from the ending of the novel is very unpleasant, it's like a Disney version from the original. Ridiculous, illogical, implausible..and..and..and. Hugh Laurie is such a great actor that he is unfortunately terribly wasted in this series.
The Night Manager: Episode #1.4 (2016)
Is Tom Hiddleston a sex object???
First of all, Susanne Bier is one of the worst directors working today. I'm sorry to say that, but she is just awful. The way she zooms the actors till their nostril hair is just despicable to watch and totally distracts from the story. I watch this series, because I love the novel and all novels by John le Carre in general. This series does definitely not deserve any praise, nor any positive review. The only reason why this series gets positive reviews, or rather high ratings is due to Hugh Laurie and Tom Hiddleston. Just because you have good actors, doesn't mean that the quality of the series is equally good. What outrages me the most are the fan girls who tend to view everything subjectively and don't distinguish between bad and good, or average. In this case, it must be enough for them to see Hiddleston almost naked in every episode or active in a sexual intercourse? Is he a sex object? As far as I've read in an article, he is a feminist, so he wants to balance the nudity in films. However, he seems to use his body and his fan girls to achieve a huge fandom and bigger roles. His ass was also a huge advertisement while promoting Crimson Peak. That kind of conception surely is not about balancing nudity, but using nudity to become popular! This is exactly what many women do: Using their bodies beyond their talents! Sorry, I can't praise that. Especially not then, when Hiddleston is a very awkward kisser. Have read that several times on the internet, too.
Apart from that, the reason why Susanne Bier is a terrible director (which was actually proved with her miserable movie "Serena") finds evidence in the fact that in this episode she used the location Marrakech, Morocco as ISTANBUL!! Does she think that people don't know how Istanbul looks like? I've visited Istanbul many many times and the Haydarpasha port SURELY doesn't look like that, nor do the hotels look arabic or oriental. Go on, just google for yourselves! Plus, the license plate numbers were not Turkish. You thought nobody is going to notice? I'm actually pretty sure that this is against the law, and if someone from Turkey notices that they will take legal action against the director and the crew of this series! You can't just use the name of a city and film it somewhere else!
All in all, I can say that Hugh Laurie is terribly wasted in this series.