A pragmatic U.S. Marine observes the dehumanizing effects the Vietnam War has on his fellow Marine recruits from their brutal boot camp training to the bloody street fighting set in 1968 in Hue, Vietnam.
France, 1942, during the occupation. Philippe Gerbier, a civil engineer, is one of the French Resistance's chiefs. Given away by a traitor, he is interned in a camp. He manages to escape, ... See full summary »
I can believe this movie will be a serious disappointment for a person, who is used to and likes to watch Hollywood war movies. Four reasons: 1. It's made in a world, where movie makers tries to have some personality. If you think 'When We Were Soldiers'... well, there are hundreds of directors who you can imagine making a similar war movie with personality and values of a hamburger.
2. Screenplay has a different structure. There's no shocking opening scene like in 'Saving Private Ryan'. This movie starts slowly in a very nice place and ends slowly in a very bad place, without hope or feeling that the characters have achieved something by their heroic actions.
3. It is first a movie about lost causes in the world of war, and only secondly a war movie which takes place in Stalingrad.
4. War scenes portray the horror, insecurity and confusion of a battle, instead of how cool, heroic and exciting fighting looks like. In this sense, this movie is closer to reality than most of the war movies you will ever see. 'Thin Red Line' also had similar "I would probably crap in my pants in that situation"-feeling.
Stalingrad, whether you think it as a movie or a war movie has so many good things in it... like honesty. Even the ordinary German soldiers were dreaming about farms in Russia when they were advancing. What a disappointment they must have had in Stalingrad! If you like to watch war movies, meaning also other war movies than When We Were Soldiers or Saving Private Ryan, you should see this one. (9/10)
133 of 149 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?