Stalingrad

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 1:08 pm

I read somewhere that one could see bmp's in that movie- where? Are there any other wrong details in the movie? I always thought that Stalingrad along with the thin red line was the best war movies.

regards

Jason Pipes · Post by **Jason Pipes** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 1:57 pm

I don't recall BMPs per-say as it's been awhile since I saw the film but suffice to say that in general it wasn't a terribly accurate film from what I recall.

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 2:11 pm

what do you mean by that? was it inaccurate or accurate?

regards

Jason Pipes · Post by **Jason Pipes** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 2:26 pm

Um, that would mean I was saying it wasn't very accurate!

It was a film about two fictional character set against the backdrop of one of the wars most brutal and horrific battles. During most of the entire film you got the impression that Stalingrad was a lonely battle with no sounds or other people around save for the few people involved in the sniper duel. In just that sense alone it was inaccurate.

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:11 pm

aren't you mixing this up with enemy at the gates? I'm talking about vilsmaiers film, it's a german/ russian production.

Jason Pipes · Post by **Jason Pipes** » Fri Sep 27, 2002 3:39 pm

Ack, you are correct! Sorry about the mix-up.

Michael Dorosh · Post by **Michael Dorosh** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 12:16 am

Stalingrad was just as bad as Enemy at the Gates - worse in many respects - though I haven't seen the full mini-series version of Stalingrad.

The number of coincidental meetings between the heroes of the film and the only woman in Stalingrad (apparently - and pretty good looking to boot) really stretched belief - as well as the coincidental meeting with the same Russian boy twice, and the coincidental meetings with the Military Police officer several times...

Pretty much a "standard Hollywood" movie, despite being a German production. Certainly nothing like Band of Brothers, but then again, what ever could be?

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 12:22 am

well, the movie is no documentary so it needs a story-line...I don't have any proplem with the coincidations. what is the mini- series version? actually it's a german/ russian production.

regards

gorbag · Post by **gorbag** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:09 pm

The thing that peeved me about "Enemy at the Gates", well one of many things, was they took a perfectly good war movie and mutated it into a love story with a backdrop of faux WW2.

And for as hard pressed for weapons as the Red Army was at that time, would they really be wasting expensive Mosin-Nagants on assault troops like that rather than handing them PPSh41s?

charlie don't surf · Post by **charlie don't surf** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 3:25 pm

we are not discussing enemy at the gates, sorry!

regards

Michael Dorosh · Post by **Michael Dorosh** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 4:47 pm

gorbag wrote:The thing that peeved me about "Enemy at the Gates", well one of many things, was they took a perfectly good war movie and mutated it into a love story with a backdrop of faux WW2.

And for as hard pressed for weapons as the Red Army was at that time, would they really be wasting expensive Mosin-Nagants on assault troops like that rather than handing them PPSh41s?

It wasn't a war movie, dude! It was a love story with a WW II backdrop, just like you say. Some people DO like girls, and I thought the love story was convincing. Certainly better than Pearl Harbor, which we all can agree was abominable.

Do you really mean to argue that PPSh SMGs were ALWAYS available in quantity at the same place and location that Mosin-Nagants were being issued? I tend to doubt it, but if you believe the part about unarmed human waves, what do the weapons matter?

gorbag · Post by **gorbag** » Tue Oct 01, 2002 7:18 pm

When they advertise it to me as a war movie, and I spend the money thinking it's a war movie, I'd like it to be a war movie. When I want to go see something with romance in it, I'll go and see a movie with romance in it and not expect it to actually be a movie about a sniper duel, so relax.

And I'm not arguing anything about the quantity of rifles vs. SMG's, but they had the presence of mind to try and jam in all sorts of factual tidbits throughout the movie to give it the aura of "authenticity". And if the arms factories were chopping rifle barrels in half to rush out the SMGs for close quarter battle, I'd expect to see an SMG or two in someone else's hands besides the NKVD troops.

Ethelian · Post by **Ethelian** » Thu Oct 03, 2002 1:05 pm

Personally i thought Stalingrad a very good attempt at recreating a "small" part of the battle.

I don't think you could ever recreate the battle in full and the ppl who made the film did a good job of trying to convey the horrors that went on.

Ethelian

Fridolin · Post by **Fridolin** » Thu Oct 03, 2002 3:07 pm

Mmmm... I should say the 'German' Stalingrad is much, much better than Enemy... (whose only virtue lies in its title, reminiscent of Classical Rome). Combat scenes and behaviour of Landser, portrait of combat officers, etc not terribly bad in Stalingrad. The T-34 attack was among the best combat scenes filmed so far -even if distances, ranges etc. are not totally right). Problem lies with the Nazi officer who seems to be everywhere and the Russian girl.. problem really lies, IMO, in the 'bad conscience' of the German filmakers, who HAD to portrait the basically evil nature of the Nazi regime, so creating a bit of a mess. But even then I find it much better than Enemy..[/i]

Fridolin · Post by **Fridolin** » Thu Oct 03, 2002 3:08 pm

Oopps! Sorry, I sent the posting twice...