Stalingrad has become hell and paradise for those who were worthy of awards, but the only reward they managed to get was love. How they won, and how they were not defeated, who they were and who was on the other side of the street, what secret they have taken away with them – the movie will tell this story.

Also Known As: Estalinegrado, Sztálingrád, Stalingrad, Staljingrad, Stalingrado: A Batalha Final, Stalingradas, Сталiнград, Сталинград, Stalingradi, Stalingrado, Bitka za Staljingrad

Leave a Reply

No Comments

  • ole-johannessen
    ole johannessen

    Simply don’t see this movie . Probably the worst war film ever made , realistic , same-full lies for a great battle.I dint even finish the movie and that is only the second time that happens in my life…. the scene that soldiers that burned alive and don’t go to the river that is 20 meters behind them, but the still continue through the flames and attacking to the heavy armed German enemies is simply one huge offense to my logic, and the fumiest is that Germans retreat cause they couldn’t kill 20 burned alive blind soldiers……Dialog s simply awful , script too and this thing u can’t call it war movie, but pure Russian propaganda . DON’T SEE THIS

  • katherine-douglas
    katherine douglas

    This is not a movie about Stalingrad. It is a movie about superhuman Russians. It is so one sided I could only take 5 minutes of it before I gave up. If I see a title called Stalingrad I expect it to at least be historically accurate. This movie is not except for the fact the Germans lost. I could probably have endured if the movie was about a meteorite containing an alien mutagen that landed at a military base in Russia. This gave the soldiers superhuman powers and allowed them to go back in time to save a John Connor. Sorry it comes across as 60s propaganda so if you are into that? Well you will love the movie. The 1993 film was more correctly titled as was the recent film the Dutch made in 2003 as a documentary in 3 part TV series. Those are worth watching.

  • rhonda-morales
    rhonda morales

    After 10 minutes you are not sure is this Kremlin’s new propaganda movie about the Russian army.Example: Russian soldiers are on fire (totally charred) and still they make an organized attack to German lines. And win. You don’t know that should you cry or feel embarrassed, because you have just seen the worst movie attack ever.Then about the main character… The Russian version of the super man. They killed more Germans with knives than with bullets.You have to bee Russian or totally unaware of the historical facts if you even remotely like this movie.There should be warning in the front cover that this movie will spoil your brains. Experience was so bad.Don’t CHECK THIS MOVIE for your own sake!

  • balla-ferencne
    balla ferencne

    Honestly this movie is really,really bad.This should’ve been an epic historical movie about famous battle.Instead i couldn’t make myself watch it for 30minutes i was totally bored.I actually couldn’t watch it till end and walked out of cinema.I was annoyed. Why would you make such a lame movie with such an interesting story-and a lot of historical facts from which an interesting story could have been made.I love historical movies!This one only has a name of one famous battle from ww2 nothing else.What was OK in movie?-Firstly performances were not actually bad but everyone is playing one -dimensional characters-who are also stereotypes.You get to see cool effects but come on-this story deserves so much more depth and narrative and interesting characters,however it fails totally. There is not a single character in the movie,with whom you can connect and at times some scenes are pretty illogical.Also the movie is packed with boring and uninteresting dialogs.Don’t recommend it-fails on every aspect-except effects-that one is perfect,but in my opinion this story deserves much more,not only good visual effects.2/10

  • ricardo-guerrero
    ricardo guerrero

    The special effects are truly awesome. The field of battle in the beleaguered city is reproduced with no expense spared. Battle scenes reach new levels of 3D imagination and gore. And the film is the perfect advertisement for a great new digital game involving endless death and mass murder. But Stalingrad is just classic Hollywood pulp sold off as a Russian movie. Virtually every character is a fake. The German Brigade Commander is shown perpetually attended by lackeys who wash and shave him. His forces spend the entire film attempting to take a building in which a half dozen Russians are holed up with a young girl that none of them rapes. Meanwhile the German company commander spends most of his time attempting to woo a Russian girl who eventually, of course, he rapes. Instead of blowing the whole building up with tank guns these valiant Germans led by fools perpetually storm the building in their hundreds only to be shot down and blown to pieces by grenades cleverly thrown by the handful of Russians inside it. Women stand at doorways in a sniper zone just to say goodbye. The Russians perform Italian operatic arias instead of Russian folk songs whilst stupid Germans always lose their lives by endlessly pausing before pulling the trigger. But worse of all the script reads like a Stalinist message about the heroic struggle of the people against a ruthless maniac German machine that would enslave them for a thousand years. The real importance of Stalingrad as a symbol essential to win for both sides is never explained. And the ruthless sacrifice by the Soviet leadership of millions of their own people is never mentioned. Avoid this rubbish and stick to the original German version which is ten times better.

  • lusis-laimonis
    lusis laimonis

    (Review contains some spoilers!) I was hoping for a Stalingrad movie that was showed the hardship that both side went through as in the Stalingrad movie from 1993, but instead i got a love story in a war setting sprinkled with many heavy CGI effects.Even though these days it’s not possible of course to get bombers flying over a city and shot down, the movie hangs to much to the use of CGI and looks more like a showcase of what the company that supplied the CGI effects can do with their computers. It’s like they made the effects first, than made a movie around it. The movie also is heavy saturated with slow motion effects, it felt like i was watching The Matrix in Stalingrad, i don’t mind slow motion, but it was a bit too much to my taste. (Do we really have to have someone standing up from a bed walking to her window in slow motion?)They made a good use of their budget to supply realistic sets, only thing that looked really out of place was the fake spray-on snow that seemed to stick to everything, nobody in the movie seemed to notice it was becoming winter and it was cold, if snow will stick to buildings and its surroundings, it has to be below freezing point. The weapons used also look authentic, but the battlefield looks very empty when both sides were fighting, Stalingrad was the ground were the war turned for the Germans and Stalin had no intention at all to give up the city bearing his name. I don’t know when the movie actually takes place, but when the Soviets started their counter offensive they had over 1,143,000 personnel present. But seeing there is snow coming down in the movie, this is either taking place before or after the winter of 1942. But still the movie made it looked like only a hand full of Russians held a entire street, and only 30 Germans were fighting against them. But aside that, the story evolves around a girl that is discovered still living in her house turned to rubble and is being taken care for by five soldiers, the story is narrated by her son, who calls the five soldiers his five fathers. Another story beside this is a German officer, played by Thomas Kretschmann, a German actor who has played in many more WW2 related movies like the acclaimed Der Untergang(English title The Downfall), he has a so called love story with a Russian girl, a storyline we pretty much don’t care for at all.The rest of the cast is a pretty unknown cast, the woman who plays the 15 year old Russian girl is heavily miss-casted in my view, she is suppose to be 15, but in real life she is 26 year old and doesn’t look anything near below the age of 20. But she holds up in her acting and so does the rest of the cast. But back to the story, the movie is pretty much 60% talk, 40% action, people with no patience will get bored quickly, the dialogs seem to go on and on.SPOILER alert!The movie ends in what makes no common sense to me, with the Russians calling in artillery on their position and everybody is dead except Katya, the Russian girl. Instead they could have just called in the artillery and fallen back to another Russian held position behind them.But to be rap it up, the movie holds on too much to it’s (really great looking) CGI effects, has too much dialog and a side storyline we couldn’t care for at all. But the cast holds up their own when it comes to acting, the sets look realistic and the weaponry used authentic. But the ending lacked something, there is not even a single word mentioned about how the battle for Stalingrad eventually ended, how many soldiers and civilians died there, how it was the turning point for WW2, nothing! Just a big STALINGRAD in Russian in the screen.

  • adrian-antonsen
    adrian antonsen

    This is the third best movie on the battle of Stalingrad since 1993. OK, to my knowledge, there have been just three Stalingrad movies in that span of time. This movie follows in an unfortunate trend among newer Russian war movies to sport lame plots, odd plot devices, and weak direction. Technically, it is nicely done with great sets and realistic uniforms, but unfortunately, it has a tepid story, unengaging main characters (OK, captain Kahn and Masha were somewhat engaging), dull musical score, and slow motion in Every. Frigging. Scene. Hey, it worked in “Cross of Iron” because Peckinpah used it for effect, not as an excuse for lame action. Here, it robs the battle scenes of the intensity most war movies get right.From what I’ve seen of newer Russian war movies, about one in ten is really good. This one ranks among the nine others.

  • gil-cunha
    gil cunha

    Admire the ambition, but this version of Bondarchuk fails to back up its camera work, special effects and editing with enough of substance to anchor the spectator. Cant say i was convinced with the plot or the dialogs, neither my feelings were really touched. Thomas Kretschmann actually is the only one who’s character seems to be convincing. Great actor who saved this film…Descent piece of work, but not anything i would choose to watch one more time. Would have expected Fedor Bondarchuk to come up with something much more substantial, taking into consideration the topic…

  • lucas-ferreira
    lucas ferreira

    Students of propaganda films will enjoy seeing the familiar in this gem. The film is Russian, so we’re presented with the image of the stalwart and faithful Russian peasant-soldier. All of the Russians in the movie are brave and pure. Oh, and they’re superhuman, as well. A company of Russian soldiers is shown rushing the German positions while the Russians are literally on fire, their uniforms engulfed in flames. That’s from an early scene, and it gets worse later on in the movie.However, war movie buffs will find this film to be too loaded with over-the-top, in-your-face, Russian nationalistic propaganda to be anything close to realistic or historical. It’s the kind of film made by a country preparing for war and looking to brainwash its young people and make them ripe for recruitment. It’s shockingly bad, and yet there’s a creepy Stalinesque undertone that might cause concern for former Cold Warriors. Looks like the Bear is done hibernating.

  • sirkka-laurila-kumpulainen
    sirkka laurila kumpulainen

    I am an avid reader of all things Stalingrad and I must be in the minority but I loved it. I kept reading reviews that compared the love story aspect of it to Titanic, so I was expecting an over the top love story with a little bit of Stalingrad mixed in. In reality, the love story part of the film was somewhat muted, did not feel shoe-horned into a war movie, nor did it seem implausible. I think it was well cast and had excellent actors. IMO, if the exact same movie had been released with Spielberg’s name attached and the actors speaking English, it would have been well received. It seems there are biases against foreign films, perhaps rooted in the cold war. While it was not a 10, I thought it was a very solid film that made the viewers feel like they were there. Experiencing the film helped me see another facet to the battle. possible through books. Highly recommended!

  • cassandra-hodges
    cassandra hodges

    For the story, I give this movie a 5/10. I was a little bored by it. However, for the fighting, this movie gets a 8/10. This movie has some of the best fighting scenes I have ever seen. The visuals also are truly some of the best I have ever seen. Any future war movie needs to borrow from this movies visuals. I can’t overstate how blown away visually the combat was.This movie deserves better than a 5.6. I can understand a low rating for the boring scenes in between the fighting, but its just too low for what its really worth. It is clear this movie missed the mark in delivering a good story as well as making us truly love the characters who were rather still good. More fighting and less sitting around would have done this movie far better.

  • cynthia-harper
    cynthia harper

    Director Bondarchuk should be arrested for creating this criminal film. Words cannot describe the depths to which this film has sunk. Every single aspect of it is deluded, pointless, dull, illogical, and irritating. The director has no story and no characters, and uses the film to shove in scenes he thinks are cool. From what I can gather, he loves The Matrix. Not only do we get more slow motion than the average human can endure, but we get stunts that belong in a Matrix film. My God, these soldiers are ninjas, their weapons can do wonders that defy laws of physics, and… What exactly was the film about? Well, absolutely nothing. It’s part pathetic melodrama with all the qualities of a soap opera from Mexico, part Matrix. And when it’s neither, it’s just people sitting and staring, or talking nonsense. You could remove half the scenes and actually make the story more focused and clear. But what would be the point, when the story is so thin and outright insulting? How do you take one of the greatest battles of all time and turn it into a lame story about officers missing their girlfriends? In this film, Russian officers shoot soldiers in order to discipline them, and Germans hold rousing speeches about the prospect of getting sex from six-armed prostitutes in India. Has a madman written this? Or a pretentious, talentless idiot who thought Russian cinema really needed the most moronic cliches from the dumbest action films from Hollywood? This is not the first time Bondarchuk has done this. Oh, no. He has also butchered the memory of the war in Afghanistan, with his Full Metal Jacket/Platoon ripoff. How does this person keep getting any money to make films is beyond me. As I said, his filmmaking is outright criminal. It is an insult to the audience, to film as an art form, and to the Russian soldiers who fought in Stalingrad.

  • dr-jasmin-henriksen
    dr jasmin henriksen

    I can not believe that someone actually green-lighted this project. It was like I was watching a trailer for a first-person shooter video game, complete with terrible voice overs and ridiculous concept. I don’t think that there was a real set involved, most of it seemed to be CGI. More money wasted, they should have filmed the back of the directors head…it would have been more entertaining. Was there a story line? I don’t know. I don’t think so. It was guns and lots of shooting and these cartoonish voices spewing nonsense. The spoiler is that is sucked. There is no movie here. Any actor involved should be embarrassed and remove it from their resume. The director and producer should return all the money the received to the investors. This was purely an exercise to see how many pre-teen boys would rent this movie. You would think that a movie about WWII and a grand city as Stalingrad would be almost impossible to mess up, filming someones notes from that era would have been enough to make a great movie. You remember Ishtar? I do. This one was worse.

  • marica-halambek
    marica halambek

    I liked the movie! It shows ordinary people that became heroes within extraordinary circumstances. The battle scenes are astonishing and professionally shot. I watched many documentaries about Stalingrad defense and even the German veterans admitted that the Russian soldiers crashed them in combats. Kretschmann was perfect in his decadent role also. Movies about Russian heroic resistance could be made only by Russians themselves. As a total I don’t think that this movie deserves worse rating than “Saving private Ryan” or “Enemy at the gates”. In fact, the movie shows the Russian perception of the war. Some could find it propaganda, but having experienced in documentary literature and movies about Stalingrad siege and defense, for me the movie shows the real status of the war with modern cinema weapons!

  • donald-khan
    donald khan

    This is probably the worst movie about the decisive and bloodiest battle during the course of the second world war – the battle which actually allowed the Russians (in 1943 Allied forces were nowhere to be seen yet) to stop and reverse the German offensive.Is this a movie really about that deafening battle? No, absolutely not, it’s a about a group of Russian soldiers who fought for some house in the center of Stalingrad, but they were not fighting for their motherland or peace, but for a single surviving woman who inhabited that house (other inhabitants of the city lived in basements as the city was was under constant bombing and it was crammed with snipers).The movie is rife with meaningless stupid dialogs, similarly meaningless voice over (which revealed that the budget was … scarce), actions which defied common sense and any logic, especially the laws of war.For reasons which are beyond any logic, the movie tries hard to vindicate the Germans, to show them as people who are similar to the Russians, even though the former started the bloodiest war in the history of mankind, and the latter were its victims. Who cares that the Germans employed genocide and ethnic purges? This movie is above that.In short almost everything that is shown about the war is either absurd, grotesque, factually wrong or egregious.The CGI in the movie is excellent, and that’s its only redeeming quality. The script is awful, the acting is pretentious, and the portrayal of the war is beyond anything you’ve ever known.

  • daniela-lesjak
    daniela lesjak

    In the present days, a Russian rescue team is saving lives in Japan after a tsunami. They find survivors and their leader calm a youngster down telling the story of his five fathers. In 1942, a group of Russian soldiers hold a strategic building in Stalingrad against the German troops to protect the Volga River for the crossing of their comrades. They meet the seventeen year-old teenager Katya (Mariya Smolnikova) and she becomes the pride and joy of the band. Meanshile, the German Captain Koln (Tomas Krechmann) falls in love with the Russian Masha (Yanina Studilina), who resembles his deceased wife. But love in time of war may be tragic. The impressive German war movie “Stalingrad” (1993) is one of the best of the genre ever, depicting the bloody Battle of Stalingrad. The Russian “Stalingrad” (2013) is not a remake of the German movie but a melodramatic and corny love story in the environment of the devastated city and heroic attitudes of the Russian soldiers. The CGI, scenarios and battle scenes are top-notch but part of the dialogs may be lost in translation since there are long sentences in Russian that are resumed in one sentence in the subtitle. My vote is six.Title (Brazil): “Stalingrado” (“Stalingrad”)

  • john-brown
    john brown

    Seriously, why is almost every scene in this movie using slow motion? This one visual trick screwed up the film’s pacing and tension so badly that whatever else might’ve been there couldn’t have saved it. Slow motion is usually used to amplify powerful scenes, not to blanket the whole movie with it. It can obviously enhance a scene in a movie if used sparingly but the filmmakers really went comically overboard with its use in this one. The movie’s laughably propagandistic sentimentality does it no favors either though I guess Bondarchuck’s pal Putin might appreciate it (Bondarchuck has publicly supported Putin’s moves in Crimea and otherwise).The script and the dialogue were absolutely terrible and cringe-worthy. Who actually speaks in those propagandistic terms? They also set up the characters so badly, I could scarcely remember anyone’s name and didn’t care about any of them. They’re ridiculous caricatures with no humanity behind them and their actions are illogical and baffling most of the time. The characterizations are so minimal you’d struggle to see them with a microscope. The setup in the beginning and the narration overall didn’t work either, I mean was that Russian aid worker really telling the story of the bloodiest battle in human history to a group of scared German girls trapped under ruins? Way to depress them even further. The movie wasn’t really about Stalingrad either but about this hastily put together group of soldiers defending some random building in Stalingrad. You could’ve transplanted them to any other random battle and nothing would’ve changed. There’s the Barmaley statue of the dancing children and boats crossing the Volga to remind you it’s actually Stalingrad but that’s about it. If they chose this as the film’s context then the movie should’ve been about resilience and brotherhood but none of that was to be found. Instead the film’s focus was on the explosions and slow-motion combat. Michael Bay would surely be proud. I have to say I did get a few laughs from the movie though. When the few defenders of the building suddenly decide to storm out of their defensive positions à la 300 and when a gun crew manages to bank a shell off the armor of a broken T-34 to a German position around the corner, I just couldn’t contain myself. I don’t think the filmmakers intended those scenes to be funny though so make of that what you will.

  • monique-roberts
    monique roberts

    Oh dear, I expected to see some war actions like how the city was attacked on first days, more changes of battle place, more focused on time line of the greatest Stalingrad events. More passion in peaceful moments or some cross-story in nowadays would make this film even more dramatic. But this movie disappointed me. And this is why.This is a Russian film, so expect to see much of unnecessary talks and quite a bit shots that tells you nothing at all. Russian acting is Russian acting – nothing new in this case, except actors from abroad. So you have to deal with this funny and sometimes even irritating acting.The Story. Well, movie starts from very strange actions in Japan and ends like that, too. I didn’t feel necessity of these Intros and Outros. Main action starts somewhere in the middle of the battle in the city of Stalingrad. Ban, bang, bang. Some awesome burning shots and then boom – action went away. And from there a love and revenge takes place. No big tragedies of starving or cold. I really missed the reality of Stalingrad. Instead you’re given audio flashbacks/flash-forwards of main characters told by narrator. Blah, blah, blah. For what? Is it supposed to be documentary? I barely can say it’s a movie about Stalingrad as the whole War Action. More like about one place particularly – House of Pavlov, which in my opinion had too be the MAIN TITLE and not Stalingrad. But then you may think more deeply – as it goes around one girl – maybe it could be „Saving civil Katya” 🙂 ? Oh, by the way, you get even two love stories in this movie, but none contains a lap-dance or passion, so it ruins the romantic side of the movie. The whole war strategy is a real mess here on both sides. I couldn’t get it. It’s not realistic to me somehow.Characters. Well, their actions are mostly illogical as they fight for the love. They get outside without any commands given. Walking like a bosses in their own yard. Killing comrade from OTHER division for his thoughts about taking some action instead of sitting was also very strange behavior as it would get the killer to war court. And reaction of those folks after this non-sense just killed me. It was so unrealistic. There were other problems with logic in dialogs, too.Technical side of the movie is done very very well. CGI effects and background are brilliant and I really enjoyed some of the action like tanks and mines scenes, but it lacks of really fast intense action scenes of soldier fight seen in Band of Brothers, The Pacific etc. Scenes that thrills you and makes you say – „Oh, man. War is a such a terrible thing”. Slow-mo scenes were… they were nice to see, but there was way too much of it. And not in particular scenes, in which slow-mo would really make you to feel for the character. Like the main hero is looking around and feels confused, scared in slow-mo. No, you won’t get it here. Audio quality is outstanding, BUT as always and this drives me crazy as hell – some dialogs are very quiet (mainly problematic for Russian people).

  • joe-flores
    joe flores

    Unfortunately, this movie turned out to be what I expected from a Russian produced film about the Great Patriotic War. The film depicts the heroic soldiers and sailors of the Soviet Union fighting to the death the barbaric fascist invaders. The Soviet defenders are almost all saintly; one is even nicknamed Angel. The Germans are all beastly underlined by the atrocities they commit on screen against the surprisingly large number of Russian civilians living in the middle of the battlefield. This movie compares unfavorably with the German produced movie Stalingrad and Enemy at the Gates because of its simplicity. The only scenes that I found interesting showed the Germans preparing to attack and those which depicted the Soviets crossing the Volga. I have great difficulty recommending this movie especially considering alternatives.

  • stephanie-watson
    stephanie watson

    I had high expectations, since lately the Russians have made some great war movies, like Bielai Tigr, Brestskaya Krepost or 9 Rota. Gritty, realistic, well-filmed, well-acted. Unfortunately, this is not the case with Stalingrad. The actors play way too fake, the story is crap, everything is so underlined that is as dreadful to watch as the 30s Soviet or Nazi propaganda (or 40s US propaganda, really bad too). And actually this is all about this movie: propaganda, and not even good or subtle (Brestskaya Krepost was also quite propagandistic, but still a good film anyway). For example, SPOILER the first battle scene: Russians charge undeterred while on fire, burning to death but still attacking none the less, while the Germans, well entrenched and heavily armed with MGs, just throw their weapons and run SPOILER END. Really? How could anyone think there are out there watchers so dumb not to laugh out at this? The characters speak mostly in slogans, not like normal people, and everybody is ridiculously stereotypic, from the German officer to the brave devoted scout. My opinion? about 3/10, with 3 points for the filming (at least the filming crew knew what they were doing, unlike the writer or the actors). My advice? Go watch Brest Fortress (Brestskaya Krepost-2010) instead.

  • alexander-hodge
    alexander hodge

    When I seen the trailers for this movie, I was gob-smacked. The superb VFX suggested an epic movie about the battle for Stalingrad. Great, this was going to be like “The Longest Day” or one of the other huge classic World War II movies. After the initial opener set in another part of the world, we get to Stalingrad. After some opening battle scenes which are very well done indeed, the realization sets in that what looks like an epic movie is in fact one set around a square in the city, and mainly on the now famous Pavlov’s House. The events depicted are set before The Russians encircled The Germans, so we don’t get to see the sight of half starved Germans. The movie settles into segments where the Russian heroes all seem to be obsessed with gaining the attentions or affections of 15 year old Russian civilian girl (Natashka) who bravely stayed in her home despite the carnage visited on the city. The apparent intention of the movie to show a love story set in Stalingrad isn’t properly thought-through, simply because the hero who eventually wins Natashka’s heart is a bolt out of the blue, with little in the way of cluing-in the viewer as it develops. We are left disengaged and wondering what and why about this. Thomas Kretschmann plays German officer Peter Kahn, whose main priority seems to be with a Russian woman (Masha) who reminds him of his wife who died in an air raid back in Germany. He literally puts aside all common sense and military discipline with his obsession for Masha. He defies orders, displaying little interest in the battle and risking court-martial and the firing squad. There are many good things about this movie. The VFX and sound are amazing, absolutely first class and up there with the very best. The realism they crammed into the VFX just has to be seen and appreciated. The German Panzer tanks are in fact a single Russian T34 disguised as a Panzer IV and then replicated by the VFX team into several more Panzers. Others have mentioned that Panzer IV tanks of 1942 didn’t have the protective metal skirts shown in the movie, but to me that is nit-picking. The German aircraft flying overhead and the flak coming up at them is an amazing scene, as is the one where we see a damaged plane coming in and crash landing in the square. The hand to hand fight scenes are very realistic. The period uniforms seem to be quite accurate, especially the German ones. The general appearance of the uniforms is welcome and shows them grubby and dusty, which makes a welcome change from the unrealistically shiny boots and helmets in the thick of battle that we see in many war movies. Great attention to detail has been given to this. We get some aerial views of the banks of the Volga and the VFX period-recreated city damaged and on fire, which is very satisfying. They give the viewer a tantalizing glimpse and feel of how close the Germans came to victory. While overall I don’t think this was a bad movie at all, I do think an opportunity to expand it more was lost. I watched this with sub-titles and the quality of translation is pretty poor in places, with small mistakes that I found annoying. There really is little excuse for this. For me, the VFX team saved the day. Their work and that of the make-up people is a credit to them and helps make this movie visually better than it otherwise deserves to be. I am giving this movie a 7 as a mark of respect and appreciation for the work the VFX and make-up team did. There is a short (about 9 minutes I think) “VFX Making Of” on Youtube that I highly suggest watching as it shows how the VFX was done.

  • mary-malone
    mary malone

    And that’s fine. So settle in for a tale of the sorrow of war based on a small section of the most brutal battle in the history of mankind, Stalingrad. Only it’s not that either.It’s the story of five Soviet soldiers with pure souls and ample justification (which the voice overs point out regularly). Fighting off the invading Nazis I guess. If you cut out say 5 specific scenes in this movie, you wouldn’t even know they were there. I’ve seen a couple reviews that say the film does too much to humanize the Nazi beasts. I personally didn’t really see that. There’s only two of them, the junior officer who’s there I guess and the senior officer who is the cold blooded super villain. If I had to use one word to describe the portrayal of the Germans in this movie, it would be incompetent.In their defense the Russians do fight like captain America, or Captain Soviet Union as the case may be. What with their spin kicks and ability to render rifles un-fireable and rooms defended by two people impenetrable.The characters are one dimensional and interchangeable. The story is pointless and un-fulfilling. The set is pretty nice I guess. Two of the war scenes, otherwise known as THE two war scenes are also pretty good. Worth thirty bucks in 3D for two people ? Not even close.

  • andrew-banks
    andrew banks

    WWII gets the 300 treatment as our fantastic heroes defeat the nasty Germans, sometimes single handedly killing a dozen men each in slow motion blood spraying hand to hand combat. It’s that realistic, especially as Russians apparently keep fighting even when completely consumed by flames.The defenders of Stalingrad were courageous real people but this belittles them as two dimensional action heroes.A lot of effort and budget was put into making this but it was ill spent, there is no reflection, no feeling, no humanity, it is hollow. If you want to see a film about Stalingrad look up the earlier German film.

  • aunins-kriss
    aunins kriss

    Actually, this film MUST not have its name. There is nothing about Stalingrad battle… Yes, cute pictures how burned Soviet soldiers attacking German positions and slow-motion hand-to-hand battles looks nice, but that is nothing related to real history of this battle.In terms of scale the film does not give the answer at least about one local engagement in Stalingrad in WW2, especially if take into account that there were a lot of such events. Heroes behaves really strange and illogical sometimes. Very messy scene where commander made hysteric about killed German soldier who came for water. “Even animals do not devour each other at the watering!” he says. What? Hey, director, haven’t you seen “Animal planet”?..So the good name for this film is “Saving girl Katya”, but not “Stalingrad”. It’s just a director’s fantasies about THE WAR, and how does he see it, but there is nothing related to Stalingrad battle at all. Now we can easily change decorations and make film with same mental content named “Berlin” or “Kiev”, because we could simply imagine the same “war story” anywhere. So, why Stalingrad?..

  • eric-moore
    eric moore

    As others have stated here what we though we were going to get with this film was finally an epic film about the battle of Stalingrad on the scale of the likes of A Bridge Too Far – Unfortunately of the three big budgeted movies made of this battle (The other two being the somewhat mishandled Enemy At The Gates and the Excellent German Stalingrad film) this is the worst, which is a shame as it had so much potential. A group of Russian soldiers find themselves hanging onto a junction house blocking the way to the river which they must defend at all costs, and the Germans occupy the street across from them and continually fail to take it. The Russians all fall for the same girl, Katya, who is the only civilian survivor in the house. The German semi-senior officer (Kretchman) finds himself falling for a Russian woman who reminds him of his dead wife. After a promising start the film settles into over stated Russian melodrama with a huge intrusive score bashing its way into almost every scene making the moments in the film when its actually needed less effective. The film is narrated by the off spring of one of the main characters but I can’t but wonder if this was an after thought to actually fill in for the lack of character that everyone seems to possess. Any real meant to fill out the characters bones is really missing from the script and while the acting is not at fault here the blame must lay with the writing and over concept here. True, by this time in the war, men are reduced to all but shadows of their former selves and having them revealed to be more human in fragile moments works at times and is one of the films few strengths but its not enough to save the film from being predictable, hollow and at times frankly boring. What is out standing about the film is the VFX and Production design which is really first rate. The costumes and details of the period are incredibly accurate and everyone looks like they have been through several years of war already. the look of the film feels great but this cannot save the films many weak points. The Germans are all fairly one dimensional bad guys while the Russians are a little more redeemable but most of their back story always comes in the form of narration and not in their actual actions or dialogue. Some of the characters are a little more interesting than others but on the whole they’re a pretty forgettable bunch. The big ending is rather an anti climax and there is no real pay off other than we know someone survived and had a kid who went on to tell the tale of their five fathers, being five characters in this film. (Even though at one point there’s clearly six but never mind!) The battle itself isn’t put into any kind of historical context in the film in terms of the impact it had on the war or the change of history that followed. I mean this might as well have taken place in Kharkov or Rostov, save for the shots of the river, it really could have been anywhere, but we’re reminded its Stalingrad because of some statues. Films like A Bridge Too Far, The Longest Day and even the Historically inaccurate but far more watchable Battle Of The Bulge work because they tell the story of a large sweeping battle from beginning to end with and still manage to keep you interested with real characters and interesting moments. Here we have a film that can’t make up its mind if its an action film or a love story – it tries to be both and succeeds at neither. A shameful waste as the talent was clearly there.