No quiet on the eastern front: "Stalingrad"


Based loosely on Soviet author Vasily Grossman's novel, "Life and Fate," the film Stalingrad (directed by Fedor Bondarchuk, screenplay by Sergey Snezhkin and Ilya Tilken), a treatment of World War II's "bloodiest battle in human history," is a laborious undertaking, subjecting viewers to an overwrought visual and auditory pummeling.

Considered by most historians to be the turning point of the war in Europe, the battle of Stalingrad (now Volgograd) took place from August, 1942 to February 1943. The German Sixth Army was pitted against the Red Army and in that attenuated battle an astounding 2 million people died or were wounded.

Stalingrad is a big-budget video war game extravaganza, the Russians vs. the Germans, with a barebones storyline. A compelling work of art allows one to suspend disbelief, and it is simply not possible to accept this film's basic conceit from the very beginning. War is hell, to be sure: arbitrary, unfair, unnecessary, futile, stupid, but we only barely glimpse what this war was all about. An early miscue occurs when a building becomes a burning inferno, the Germans rush out, their bodies aflame, screaming toward the Soviet trenches, hoping to set their enemies on fire as well. The scene plays like a doomsday sci-fi movie involving zombies from the underworld.

The film's paper-thin narrative thread involves five "fathers," five Soviet soldiers teaming to rescue Katya, a teenage woman found inside the building they're trying to defend. The voiceover narration sketches a bit of the back stories of these five, enough to humanize them for us, but barely enough to allow them to emerge as full characters through the smoke and ashes of war.

The building's basement houses some of the original tenants, plus some other refugees, including the young Russian woman Masha, who becomes the lover of a German officer. Fittingly, the basement is tricked out with the bleak effects of a Piranesi dungeon. Strangely, no one looks particularly hungry, and the two young women who are the romantic objects of love appear especially well-groomed and fetching.

We do see a portrait of Lenin on an apartment wall in the building, Maxim Gorki on another, and facing the street we see an architectural bas-relief depicting Stalin and recognizable Soviet imagery. Yet the film focuses more on the Russianness of the soldiers (in what early on took on the name of Great Patriotic War), not the socialist, Soviet character of the USSR. It seems like a latter-day attempt to recall the hard-won glory of victory without acknowledging the social basis of the nation that won the battle, and the war. We even have an older soldier praying and speaking of God (no objection here except to ask if such activities would have been sanctioned by the Red Army's political commissars). We do have one officer correcting a Russian soldier who speaks of "retards," saying we have mental patients in Russia, but we don't have "retards."

Stalingrad appeals to a certain demographic: not the curious audience wishing to understand the importance of the battle, its complex geopolitical background, or the history of invasions of Russian soil. No, the ideal viewers here are young men whose film-going preferences run to 3D testosterone-driven mayhem, exploding bombs, bullets, and blood, very much like the trailers for many other shoot 'em up movies coming soon to theaters near you.

One of the five "fathers" is Sasha Nikiforov, a former opera singer, so we anticipate hearing him sing at some point, and of course we do. The aria he performs at Katya's bombed-out birthday party is Puccini's "E lucevan le stelle" from "Tosca," the tenor solo Cavaradossi sings just before he is to die as a victim of assassination. The song returns on the soundtrack also for the German officer in command, telling us that all death in war is horrible. A question occurs: Is not the death of a defender of his homeland more poignant than that of the invader?

An epilogue from the narrator says that Stalingrad turned the course of the war, and that millions and millions of people were liberated from the Nazi threat. Fortunately, he says, he never had to know another war. The filmmakers have conveniently forgotten the decade-long Afghanistan episode.

If the viewer is familiar with the basic story of Stalingrad, Stalingrad won't serve to advance your knowledge or educe your feelings of empathy. Unless 3D testosterone is your thing, stay away from this one.



Director: Fedor Bondarchuk

Writers: Sergey Snezhkin, Ilya Tilkin

Stars: Mariya Smolnikova, Yanina Studilina, Pyotr Fyodorov

IMAX 3D, rated R for scenes of war violence, 131 minutes

Photo: Still from Stalingrad.


Post your comment

Comments are moderated. See guidelines here.


  • Am I the only one getting the idea that Russian movies getting a release outside the Russian border are sooo filled with melodrama and at a certain point so full of Russian propaganda. Telling how brave they are and whatever more.And about the scene with burning Germans attacking Russian trenches....i am REALLY WONDERING if Dale Green and Eric Gordon watched this film or are basing their "review" on someone else's review. Because the house wasn't Masha's where the Ruskies are in. And the other issues..the burning soldiers were Russians who just crossed the Wolga and were set ablaze by petrol tanks being exploded as they made their way up the hill. And really...every person set to fire almost immediately loses all sense of direction but these Russian supermen lol they have their eyes focused on the German inside the trenches and walk to them without problems rofl.
    This movie has so much shit in it lol..a shame a well known actor as Kretschmann played in this crap. He deserves better.The "drama" after the German tanks destroy the building is like a comedy. Russians being filled by bullets and still can talk or move while the Germans get one shotted. And why the fuck didn't the used the radio at the start to destroy the German HQ?
    This crap was a 2 hour waste of time....skip this one if possible. Hehehe. There are better war movies out there and about Stalingrad...the 1993 one,also with Kretschmann is like a 1000x better.

    Posted by Flavio Fernández Flores , 04/19/2015 1:18pm (8 months ago)

  • There was a question of whether the prayer would have been permitted. I believe it would have due to the fact that Stalin and the Soviet communist party purposely let up on religious repression during the war.

    Posted by Daniel Banks, 09/24/2014 3:12pm (1 year ago)

  • Hello,
    While this review may seem interesting to a regular American, it disappointed me, an average European.

    First, you got some facts about the movie messed up. Those aflame are the Soviet soldiers trying to run into German trenches. That is due to the Germans putting mines and other explosives around the entry points of Stalingrad.

    There are no burning Germans running out of the house, as the house didn't burn at any point during the begining of the movie.

    Second, Masha, the young lady whom the German is visiting does not live in the same house the Soviet are defending. That is another house, as it can be concluded from the sniper and Katja watching Masha go get water.

    This movie, much like The Enemy at the Gates, was not meant to show the terror of war and how horrible it was, but the bounds between the people, which, whether you like it or not, are formed.

    Also, do not forget that regular soldiers (be it rozviedchicks or Mor-Pech, the Red Fleet Marine Infantry) weren't really into the whole Marxism-Leninism thingy, mainly because they did not have time for the kind of crap and it was utterly unnecessary for their proper functioning.

    As for the social basis of the nation, again, this is not entirely what the movie is about. This is not a great historicaly accurate documentary, but a fairly good action movie with an interesting twist.

    The religious belief of the soldiers on the fron was often overlooked and sometimes even supported by the commisars themselves.

    The war in Afghanistan in the 1980s was not as black and white as some Americans think. The Soviets built an infrastructure network there, a university in Kabul, etc. They did a lot of things similar to what the US are doing there now. What the narrator said is "shto takova voina", which literally means "such a war" or "war like that".

    There were, indeed some serious bloopers in the movie and I agree with you that they were too obvious to miss.

    I hope this sheds some more light onto the movie and hopefully will help others decide whether they still want to watch the movie or not.

    Posted by Adam Burda, 04/26/2014 8:07pm (2 years ago)

  • For an excellent introduction to these matters of historical importance, try this book.....Stalin's Wars, by Geoffrey Roberts. A diplomatic and military history that covers late 1930s to early 1950s.

    Posted by gary hicks, 03/18/2014 2:46am (2 years ago)

  • Vassily Grossman, whose book forms the basis of this film, was pretty neck-to-neck with Alexander Solzhenytsin in his anti-Sovietism and other questionable attitudes of the time. That Bondarchuk would produce such a work is disappointing.... one remembers his epic War and Peace. Twelve hours, broken into three showings, but worth every penny of admission... and time!!

    About praying to God and speculation on a commisar's response. Maybe, maybe not. In that war all stops were pulled to mobilize the people..... including the expansion of religious rites and the full legalization of the Russian Orthodox Church.

    Posted by gary hicks, 03/16/2014 1:13pm (2 years ago)

  • Thanks for that review, Eric and Dale. The subject is of immense interest to me, but I will take your advice and "stay away from this one."

    Posted by Gene Gordon, 03/11/2014 10:37pm (2 years ago)

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments