pesic-1
Did they wait for sixteen years after making "Burnt by the sun" to finally give us this film? Did we need to see this? Do they feel they have finally told that epic story that absolutely needed to be told? OK, so what's the story? What have you stuffed into these three hours of film? Well, nothing, really. Nothing happens most of the time. And when something does happen, it is bizarre and over the top. It looks like a film made by a first-time director who is insecure and turns the shock to 11 just to make sure the audience reacts properly, but only ends up creating exaggerated and laughable scenes time and again. I have to admit I didn't even see the whole thing. I had to jump over some of the really boring scenes just to make it until the end. It is that bad.I'll stick to the 1994 film and pretend this pile of rubbish doesn't exist. No, it's still not really bad enough to merit just one star, but I'm giving it anyway, just to show how disappointed I am and how the sequel pales in comparison to the first film. Have you people lost your mind? And I won't even get into a discussion over how historically accurate the film is.Don't watch this, you will only be baffled and irritated.
iamkoan
One of the best war movies. How can we, who have never been there understand war? The madness, the horror. Makes no difference , is it 1943 or 1941 or Afghanistan. I cannot understand war.But I can understand being human. Our frailty,red blood,our dreams, skin and bones. This is what the movie is about. We are not made of symbols such as Motherland, Nazis, Stalin,Communists,Soviets,heroes etc, propaganda is made of symbols.We are made of flesh and blood. War is so crazy we hide from it behind imaginary heroes, historical facts , we want some rational to hide from the madness. This film does not comfort by providing meaning,symbols and chronology, maybe that is why so many bad reviews.
sandor-931-380533
Those who rated only 1 to 3 star this move, shame on you. They were probably expecting some Hollywood trash like Inglourious Bastards with lots of special effects and some video game feeling. I have seen the Russian version of the film, didn't quite understand the dialogs, but even couldn't stop viewing it. This was an amazingly good movie, excellent actors (real actors and not media hyped celebrities) probably not as good as the first one, but still much better than most highly rated Hollywood production on WWII.Russian films on WWII seem to me more credible, more human, probably because they don't feel the need to justify ans explain themselves and their leaders.
voodoo-27
I guess, it's the worst movie I've ever seen. After this spit at Russian history Mikhalkov is a "spent bullet" director for me. If you want to know about the history of WWII in Russia don't watch this movie because all you'll see is several scenes of "how Mikhalkov wanted it to be". He's gone too far in his quest to alter the history. He shows a silly death of "kremlin cadets" just to "prove" how dull the Russian commanders were. But in a real world these "kremlin cadets" stopped Nazi's near Moscow. The final scene is absolutely amoral, it's like a knife to the heart of those who died defending their motherland. In fact, it's hard to find a scene in this movie where people are not silly. I've read a lot of feedbacks from people who fought in this war and these people say that Mikhalkov is a liar and they curse him.
AD
