Hey there! Yep, I'm aware it's the NKVD and not the NKVW. Truly a slip of the tongue. I'm not reading a script when I do these, and I'm a human capable of misspeaking. Thanks for keeping me on my toes! 😊 - Jared
Hello great video.. I was watching a movie called To Young the Hero. It’s on Netflix but it’s based on a WW2 12yr old who volunteered in the Navy, I think it could be a good video. But I would like some more information if you know anything about it
In the early 2000s I was dating a Russian woman (now my wife) here in the States, and I took her to see this film. She said very little when we were watching it, and when it was over I asked her what she thought of it. I admitted to her that there were some "Hollywood" elements to it, but I was still unprepared for her answer. She said she absolutely hated it because all we saw was just western actors dressing up in Russian costumes and playing at being Russians without any idea of the way real Russians -- her people -- would have reacted. She compared the movie to the Soviet film "Come and See" and that's something you should see for yourselves. I can't really describe it.
What did she expect? That Hollywood would go and find enough English speaking Russian actors with actual Hollywood level talent to be in a big budget film? 😂
@@LeviBulger no as a Russian the entire film is insulting. To even the legend Vasily. It is a Hollywood love triangle novel. With propaganda of the Soviets are bad at war. The Russian accents are so bad that Arnolds lines are better. The movie is absolutely insulting. It's even more insulting Americans think it is a good movie. Go watch both Stalingrad films. Battle of Sevastopol, I can name a dozen better movies.
@@LeviBulger Well, ya know, The Sopranos was showing at the same time, and there were really good Eastern European actors in it. There was plenty of ex-Soviet acting talent in America at the time to choose from. They just decided to do a Hollywood war romance in Russian costume, as @Robert53area notes.
The neck Iron cross is actually a knight's cross. A higher rank medal that was issued on WWII, but not in WWI (back then, they had the Pour le Mérite medal, AKA, the blue max, so no oops here). About the "most important battle of WWII", I think the german defeat at Moscow the previous year was more important.
Both losses were devastating. It's hard to say which was worse strategically, they both were. The Germans came very close to winning. What if they hadn't allowed the British army to escape at Dunkirk or had they invaded the Soviet Union in spring of 42 when they had higher quality tanks. Lots of ifs. Personally I think they should have gone for Ukraine and the oil fields first then go for Moscow and Leningrad in the 2nd year. We'll never know, it's all speculation at this point.
As a former British Army soldier, I found most of the the sniper scenes quite ridiculous. Casually picking up a bolt-action rifle that isn't zeroed and scoring head shots on various enemies? Shooting a target leaping between buildings based on exactly what understanding of the target's range and angle of jump? A good piece of cinema but pretty fantastical otherwise.
The power of Stalin directed those shots. Seriously they're very bad, I've used PU Mosin before at the range and not zeroing the thing in leads to embarrassing misses.
I guess in this case these two guys are essentially meant to be the two best snipers in the world, so we can suspend disbelief for the moment 🤷 A gap between two broken parts of a building seems like an odd spot to get perfectly zeroed in like that.
Regarding the intro where there were not enough rifles, the inverse was real. According to books on Stalingrad by Antony Beevor, David Glantz, and William Craig, there were actually a shortage at that moment for sub machine guns for some divisions. The 13th Guards Rifle Division in particular was forced to go into battle with more rifles and less sub machine guns than desired due to a shortage and lack of time to wait (as the division was desperately required to hold back the German advance). The Guardsmen of 13th Guards Rifle Division were forced to cross the Volga with more Mosins than they wanted and fought until around a battalion of around 400 were all that's left of 13'000 men.
An old friend dug up paperwork that evidently cited only 120 automatic questions of any kind in the division. And that they were 1000 rifles short during the crossing, but were re armed as soon as they had crossed.
Russia not having enough guns to go around was something that happened in World War 1 actually according to some books I read, the Czar's Army was so under equipped and plagued with corruption and logistical issues that there would be times they had more men then rifles and the conscripts not given rifles were just given swords instead. Weird for them to take that fact and put it in an entirely different war though.
@@trenteaston3515 The misconception might also come from the end of 1941/early 1942 when factories were being relocated and equipment (and men) were being lost by the tens or hundreds of thousands on a monthly basis. With masses of men and tanks being hurled at the Germans in desperate delaying actions, of course there would be an impression formed of untrained and unarmed meat for the grinder. And German officers were able to mold the perception of the Eastern Front from 1946 to ~2000; misconceptions are still being regurgitated now.
@@trenteaston3515 The only time the Red Army was short of rifles was during the early weeks of 1941 as the Nazis overran the border armies along with their stockpiles. It was less of "we don't have rifles" it's more "we don't have enough rifles in the field, kindly wait as we take more from our stockpiles and distribute it to the troop". Besides, what they lacked was SVTs, the newer semi-auto rifles.. but Mosins? they got plenty of those. But that was 1941... Stalingrad is 1942 - the Red Army is lacking many things but rifles ain't one of those.
@@ericbouchard7547 It's funny when reality is far from that image. The Germans in Ukraine got delayed by weeks as the Germans bash its head against the Red Army. around Smolensk, the German forward divisions got decimated down to less than 40% strength by constant Soviet counter attacks - counter attacks with goddamned TANKS. Even when soviet troops were really lacking in equipment, they still managed to put up an actual fight like how the battered divisions in and around Tula 1941 managed to halt and even obliterate Guderian's panzers, with cavalry divisions armed with old machine guns, rifles, and very little artillery managed to push back Guderian's panzer army. The truth is, the Red Army is far better than what is depicted in western media. Sure, they aren't top notch nor the best.. but they aren't these "red hordes that only won by sheer number"... heck, the Germans outnumbered the Soviets in 1941.. practically, one of the only reasons they won that much in 1941 - numbers, surprise, and the Germany army is battle-hardened by that point. by 1942 when the Red Army is near parity in numbers and equipment, plus with battle-hardened soldiers and officers managed to achieve a complete surprise that overwhelmed the Germans to the point that they can't even fathom that it's possible suffer a defeat that bad. It's 2024 and Nazis still can't move on from 1942 LMAO.
The closed boxcar always bothered me more than anything else in this movie. These people are living and will see/saw all the atrocities that the axis are causing in their homeland. They were motivated and thirsty for revenge, but here they are portrated like cattle being forced into the train against they will. Imagine after Pearl Harbor happened they depicted all American soldiers being treated like they do in this movie...
I love your videos, Jared. Between you and History Buffs, I have ended up learning a lot about history and can even pick stuff out myself now when I watch new stuff set in the same period. I wish I had you two as my professors back in the day.
Great film, but it does write into the "We were innocent victims too" narrative that Germany has been creating post-war. Military historians diving into the subject these days are... critical of that.
I think a much better movie depicting Russia during World War II is "The Last Stand." The story of a corps of cadets from two of Russia's military academies as a front line unit meant to halt the 1941 German advance is pretty well done in that movie.
12:19 My favourite scene of his in the movie is I think a deleted one, where he's on the phone complaining to someone loudly about how they are hanging on, but they'd stand more of a chance if they get more reinforcements and ammunition and instead of German planes in the sky, they saw some of their own - only to realise the phone's been handed to Stalin and he's just been yelling at "the boss"
I would dearly love to see a reaction video to the film “The Great Raid,” in which Joseph Fiennes also appeared. It depicts Army Rangers’ effort to rescue POW’s from the Japanese camp at Cabanatuan during the Philippine campaign.
So you said about Vasily name not appearing in US newspapers till the 90s I got a quote for a Vietnam era scout sniper who said the only people who heard of Vasily and the finnish guy Simo before then were other snipers
Love triangle war movies are ridiculous. Pick either a war movie or a love movie, mixing the 2 ends in trash. Pearl Harbor was completely unwatchable for that reason. I hated the chick in the movie more than the Japanese.
Man, you have no idea how hard Ive been waiting for this. You know how long Ive been waiting, but Ive been waiting hard. Tanya (Elizabeth Weiss) was an... awakening for me as a teenage boy. But beyond her, this film doesn't get the attention it deserves for how silly it is.
Sorry to correct you but the actress who played Tanya was Rachel Weisz (of The Mummy and The Mummy Returns fame). Elizabeth Weiss is an American anthropologist (according to Wikipedia). I do agree with you this is an outstanding movie.
You missed the whole point of Stalingrad which is not the obsession with the city named after Stalin but it's the River Volga is the main Russian supply route for Russia other than Murmansk. Cutting it would cut oil and other supplies to all fronts. In any case the German forces tasked with taking it were severely depleted to attack the oil fields further east.
When I was playing 40K Ork/Grots when this film came out, I was quoting, in my best Ork Nob Boss voice, "The first grot shoots! When the first grot dies, the next grot picks up the blaster and shoots!".
While not a fan of 40K, I do appreciate the sentiment. Do you play Bolt Action also? It's my understanding that in the new edition there is a rule that if a Soviet squad fails its activation role and a Commissar is within 6 inches, he shoots one of the squad and you reroll. How could I not loving playing the Russians!
The scene of the soldiers getting out of boxcars and immediately being rushed across the Volga, and the chaos, are effective at suggesting the brutality (and, often, chaos) of the battle, but in reality most reinforcement was with organized units. The "blocking detachments" of the NKVD did exist, but AFAIK the NKVD units in Stalingrad fairly quickly became regular infantry, as the situation grew desperate. And most deserters were dealt with across the river, where they fled. The Wehrmacht also used blocking detachments and also lavishly applied the ultimate penalty to deserters on the eastern front. As for snipers, there is an interesting account (Sniper on the Eastern Front, Sepp Allerberger) that describes how he became a "sniper" by dint of his marksmanship, an ad hoc arrangement in the field, using mostly captured Mosin-Nagants. Eventually he is recalled for sniper training, in Austria - after already being an accomplished combat sniper.
What "Enemy of the Gates" excels at: casting Ed Harris. it is criminal that we never got a Rommel film starring Harris. It also makes me wish we had gotten Sergio Leone's "Leningrad." Even if it would likely not have been historically accurate, the epic scale of it would have been undeniable.
Fortunately, I'm not watching the film to get a history lesson, rather to be entertained by one of the best war films made. If people don't know that movies are fictional, that might explain why we have such bad governments.
Sure, and this one can be filed under similar entertainment to “Inglorious Basterds” but the difference is in that movie everyone understands that Hitler wasn’t shot with an MP40 and then blown up. This movie is close enough to our reality that people believe it is reflective of how things were.
Good review of the most expensive movie ever made in Europe, at the time. If nothing else, this movie depicted the absolute carnage and killing on the Eastern Front. My dad was in the US 99th Infantry Division that was located in the northern shoulder of the Ardennes forest when the Battle of the Bulge broke out. That division was in almost continuous combat from mid-December until the end of the war. As much fighting as the Allied forces on the Western Front encountered, it pales in to comparison to the fighting between the Russians and Germans on the Eastern Front. There literally was no quarter given. POWs between Russia and Germany also suffered the most of any captured combatants in Europe. Good points about Bob Hoskins. You’re too young to remember his character in “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”. It must have been hard acting opposite a X-rated cartoon character!
Honestly, I appreciate I watched this movie when I was young, made me want to learn about that period of time (alongside Saving Pvt Ryan) and after finding out there was a lot of inaccuracies, ended up appreciating the 1993 Stalingrad a lot more when I finally got around to see it.
Ah, yes, the Braveheart (Freeeeeeeeeddddddoooooommmmmm!!!!!) of Ze Ostfront. It gets two things right. 1) There was a Battle of Stalingrad. 2) Vasily Zaitsev existed. The rest is bad propaganda based on the worst pages of a good Stalingrad book. Verdict: This movie warrants a Gulag ticket.
I agree. That's why i love to watch the WW2 short films made by German directors and featured on youtube. Many of them are very well made and give you a sense of how the German nation views the war in hindsight and some of the struggles they went through serving in the Wehrmacht.
You should check out Battle for Sevestapol. It follows the famous Russian sniper Lyudmila Pavlichenko. Russia has some great WWII movies if you don't mind subtitles.
@@NielsenDK-1 There are quite a few with English overdubs as well but I get your point. I tried watching Generation War with a buddy, but he gave up after 20 minutes.
There were instances where Soviet soldiers were sent forward without enough ammunition. They might have 10 or 20 rounds instead of 50 and we're told to pick up from the dead and wounded. There were also penal battalions where there are absolutely were machine guns set up. There were also penal battalions where men were taken out of gulags and thrown into the front line with very little training to do things like clear minefields or other suicidal acts. They absolutely had machine guns set up behind them. In fact, one of the officers in charge of a penal battalion was Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin, father of the current president of Russia.
From what I read about the Battle of Stalingrad I think it would've been better if the movie was about the 13th Guards Rifle Division rather than Zaisev. Though given the infancy of the internet at this time the same inaccuracies for the portrayal of the Soviet strategies during the battle would've probably still been there, especially since William Criag's book came out before Russian President Boris Yeltsin opened the Soviet archive. Another book about Stalingrad I would recommend is Stalingrad by David M. granted & Jonathan M. House, it's very matter of fact so it could be exhausting at times but his series about Stalingrad does a good job at showing the strategy from both sides and dispelling the myths.
Hey Mr Frederick ,i immediately looked up the 1993 German movie, Stalingrad. I agree with you that enemy at the gates only redeeming quality is that it was different from typical American movies in that it depicted the Russian experience in ww2.
Some context for the '13.000' executed by the Soviets is needed. This was the number for the entire 'Stalingrad Front' and the vast majority would have been soldiers fighting outside of the actual city. The reason for this can actually be seen in the movie scene with the ferries who took conscripts over the Volga river, it was very hard to cross the river and the men who survived it was far to valuable to be thrown away needlessly in suicide charges or even worse being executed for cowardice. The vast majority of those Red Army conscripts who showed cowardice during the battle and tried to escape it would simply be made to return to their old units after a stern lecture on how important their sacrifice was to the Motherland. It's true that life was cheap in the Red Army but in this particular battle soldiers where always in short supply for Chuikovs defenders.
Great look at the film Jared thank you. Re Bob Hoskins to many Brits he is most well known for the film the long good Friday made circa 1979/80 where he plays a London gangland boss who is plunged into a world he doesn’t understand involving the IRA. Also starring in it are a young Helen Mirren and Pierce Brosnan in one of his very first film roles. Well worth watching if you haven’t seen it 👍
My introduction to Stalingrad was by way of a table top war game called Perfect General. That scenario is brutal. All you have is infantry units to take on German tanks. It's winnable if you are careful bt it got me interested in the history.
16:16 maybe not? I’ve read a few things about the WW1 sniper training schools that crafted the next generation of Wehrmacht Jaeger troops. Perhaps teaching at one of those schools was considered Staff duty over being a combatant ? Particularly as his Iron Cross indicates that he did serve in the Great War.
About your comment at 2', you could have pointed out that Switzerland was not occupied by the Axis powers either. Speaking of maps, look at one of Russia. Stalingrad is not at all the gateway to the Caucasus. Pushing in the direction of Stalingrad was a way for the Germans to protect the flank of the advance towards the Caucasus.
If there is some question as whether Major Konig was a real figure, it follows that every scene he is in is of questionable authenticity. Changing topics, if one wants to read about the fighting on the Eastern Front from the German perspective, I direct you to The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer. His descriptions of the cold are truly chilling (forgive the pun).
Hollywood doing history is a bit like Swedish pizza; it might be tasty and sure the basic semblance of a "real" pizza is there as are the basic ingredients (dough, cheese, marinara sauce), but an Italian would NOT call most Swedish pizzas (like the one with peanuts, sliced banana and curry powder or the one with kebab meat, and the white and red sauce) a pizza. 😁 Oh and DEFINITELY read Anthony Beevor's Stalingrad, it's amazing.
Still love this movie, despite the historical inaccuracies. Also please make a video on the Siege of Jadotville and The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, they are awesome
I enjoyed this movie when it came out but I recognized at the time that it probably was not very historically accurate. I felt like this was trying to be Saving Private Ryan at times but there was too much melodrama injected, as you pointed out, with the romance and subplot with the younger Sasha. The portrayal of Russian leadership also seemed almost comically over the top. I did know that it was very loosely based on a real person and I knew a little about the battle for Stalingrad. It was an entertaining movie but it was hard to take it very seriously unlike Private Ryan, etc…
I adore Bob Hoskins's performance in this on an entertainment level, but I think he would've been a phenomenal choice to play Lavrentiy Beria instead of Khrushchev. Simon Russell Beale's portrayal of Beria in "The Death of Stalin" is a marvel and worthy of all acclaim, but imagine Hoskins in a serious and grounded film about that monstrous man.
"… it's almost impossible for me to separate Bob Hoskins from his role as…" Harold Shand in The Long Good Friday? Eddie Valiant in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Oh, gawd, no.
Almost positive those were supposed to be Heinkle He-111's not Ju-88's. Ju-88's could dive bomb. The crashed plane used later is a He-111. But I could be wrong. Haven't seen in a long time.
I have a theory that post-Saving Private Ryan and post-Band of Brothers film producers sought to give audiences a handful of less historically accurate but otherwise edge-of-our-seats entertaining endeavors. Enemy at the Gates and U-571 immediately come to mind. Honorable mentions are also due to “A Very Long Engagement”, “Enigma” “Atonement” and “Flyboys” all imminently watchable without getting too bogged down in accuracy.
26:37 We must keep in mind that most Gen X-ers and many Baby Boomers didn’t speak on the phone “long distance” until the very late 1970’s or early 80’s. There was a time before the Bell monopoly was abolished when one minute of a long distance phone conversation cost 1/3rd of what the hourly minimum wage was at the time. It was crazy expensive. Some reading this might remember standing around as a family while mom or dad (or maybe a grandparent) held the phone receiver in the air and everyone kinda threw out a brief salutation to a loved one who was overseas? Long distance phone calls were so rare in the 1970’s that overhearing an adult say “I spoke to so and so last night, long distance. We were on for ten minutes. It’s gonna be a fortune” was common. It was like ordering the appetizer at a restaurant. If we even went to a restaurant where they offered appetizers
I enjoy this movie for it's entertainment and look at the Eastern Front. Forgotten Weapons did an episode on the guns in the movie, including both sniper setups.
Krushkchev was the political leader put there by Stalin as his man on the ground whereas the generals were appointed by the Stavka headed by Stalin for the military operation. Khrushchev as a direct link with Stalin was the major power in the sector on the political level with direct access to Stalin. His survival of the post Stalin succesion tells you all you need to know.
You do realize that you can show full screen clips of the movie with the dialogue. *History Buffs* (great channel) has been doing so for years with no issues from UA-cam.
This is quite a fantasy movie, although quite enjoyable. After read several Stalingrad books by Glantz, Beevor, Jason d marks and few others is hard to say people who never read anything that this is historically bad.
Ok at 17:59 you state “Junkers 88 bombers” where in fact those were clearly Heinkel HE 111 H bombers. The front “greenhouse” style nose is a dead giveaway plus the overall shape of the fuselage.
The Ju 88 was a high level bomber, could also be adapted as a dive bomber although not in the same league as a Ju 87 or a Val. Was also used as a night fighter.
its the NKVD not the NKVW.. According to many sources, Erwin König is "an an apocryphal Wehrmacht sniper allegedly killed by the Soviet sniper Vasily Zaytsev during the Battle of Stalingrad." However, König was not the sniper's real name. There are other names attributed to the sniper including Heinz Thorwald. its pronounced susha and 2 others were hung not hanged....
While looking at the Russian system of this time, look a bit in the future setting of "The Death of Stalin", from 2017. It had Jason Isaacs as Zhukov and Steve Buscemi as Khrushchev. How much was factual and as humorous?
The name of the movie is actually a subtle foreshadowing that the director added for Red Army reenactors who will forever more have to deal with their own enemy at the gate in the form of stupid people at events referencing the movie as fact to them.
I'd read the book, way before the movie adaption came out. I've always thought that the movie version sucked (almost as bad as the movie Pearl Harbor), especially compared to the book. Although I do believe that Koenig never actually existed, the book was quite good. I thought that the movie was little more than a goofy love story, set in a war environment. i would read the book again, but I would NEVER watch the movie again. I've always considered it to be a garbage film.
I enjoyed this movie at the time and my wife liked the love story. The movie producers have to add this in to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. All the big hit movies, Gladiator, Titanic need the love story. The true extent of the suffering can only be conveyed in print and imagined by the reader. I don't think it would be allowed to be shown on film.
And yet, as I understand it -- in the new version of "Bolt Action" (WW2 historical miniature wargame) if a Soviet squad fails its activation role and there is a Commissar within 6 inches, he will shoot a member of the squad and a re-roll is taken. If that isn't historically accurate, I don't care.
In the 70's. Thames British television put out the 26 part of the World at. They got a lot of coordination from the Soviet government to make this documentary. They were really angry that a bulk of the documentary wasn't about the war in Russia. About the mid 70's. The Soviet government had done their own documentary the Uknown War. With Actor Burt Lancaster. That is where I learned a lot about the Great Patriotic war. Most people didn't know or understand hoe big that part of WWII was. So the movie makers pretty much had a clean slate to work with. I do think the romance could have been left out. Just it should have been left out of Oppenheimer.
The German film As Far As My Feet Will Carry Me about a German soldier taken prisoner by Soviets and escaping Gulag to navigate Siberia is a far more accurate depiction of the time. American directors could ruin a wet dream.
My dad served in Europe and heard captured German soldiers (i think at wars end, he didnt speak a lot about WW2, msybe twice in my life time, except about military aircraft, he could name plane from any country and talk about details that most wouldn't know, even with a degree of knowledge) saying invading Russia will seal Germanys fate as the Russians will fight to the very last Russian alive...also stalin put many soldiers (Russian) in absolutely awful hell hole prisons as they were criminals before the war, ie: not a follower of the communist state ideals etc, and they had a very hard time, as Russian gangs in prison were anti communist and hated stalin, so serving in the war was sern as traitorship to Russia under such an evil leader and ideology... Those boys didnt go back to a hero's welcome like in America etc, they went back after all the hell of war to even more hell ....
something that angers me a little is that nobody talks about the valiant defense of the seeds reserve, scientist with little to no battle experience fight to the death to prevent the germans to take the seeds reserve, no seed was missing, not a single one, but people glasses over them when speaking about the battle of Stalingrad
This is absolutely a story that needs a proper telling, however the seed bank was in St. Petersburg/Leningrad. It's all the more poignant that the scientists were starving due to the siege, yet never once considered consuming any of the edible plants under their care.
Haviing written 15k words for S+T this movie has always been off interest to me. But iit was not so much we lived in a bubble but we didnt hear much about the battes till the 90's because the Soviets werent sharing much info. After the fall of the soviet union thats when we in the west got access to the Russian archives and started learning another side of history.
Hey there! Yep, I'm aware it's the NKVD and not the NKVW. Truly a slip of the tongue. I'm not reading a script when I do these, and I'm a human capable of misspeaking. Thanks for keeping me on my toes! 😊
- Jared
Netflix is making a series about Stalingrad. Vasily is played by Beyonce.
Hello great video.. I was watching a movie called To Young the Hero. It’s on Netflix but it’s based on a WW2 12yr old who volunteered in the Navy, I think it could be a good video. But I would like some more information if you know anything about it
In the early 2000s I was dating a Russian woman (now my wife) here in the States, and I took her to see this film. She said very little when we were watching it, and when it was over I asked her what she thought of it. I admitted to her that there were some "Hollywood" elements to it, but I was still unprepared for her answer. She said she absolutely hated it because all we saw was just western actors dressing up in Russian costumes and playing at being Russians without any idea of the way real Russians -- her people -- would have reacted. She compared the movie to the Soviet film "Come and See" and that's something you should see for yourselves. I can't really describe it.
Come and See gives you PTSD by proxy.
What did she expect? That Hollywood would go and find enough English speaking Russian actors with actual Hollywood level talent to be in a big budget film? 😂
@@LeviBulger no as a Russian the entire film is insulting. To even the legend Vasily. It is a Hollywood love triangle novel. With propaganda of the Soviets are bad at war. The Russian accents are so bad that Arnolds lines are better.
The movie is absolutely insulting. It's even more insulting Americans think it is a good movie.
Go watch both Stalingrad films. Battle of Sevastopol, I can name a dozen better movies.
Come and See is not for the weak.
@@LeviBulger Well, ya know, The Sopranos was showing at the same time, and there were really good Eastern European actors in it. There was plenty of ex-Soviet acting talent in America at the time to choose from. They just decided to do a Hollywood war romance in Russian costume, as @Robert53area notes.
The neck Iron cross is actually a knight's cross. A higher rank medal that was issued on WWII, but not in WWI (back then, they had the Pour le Mérite medal, AKA, the blue max, so no oops here). About the "most important battle of WWII", I think the german defeat at Moscow the previous year was more important.
Both losses were devastating. It's hard to say which was worse strategically, they both were. The Germans came very close to winning. What if they hadn't allowed the British army to escape at Dunkirk or had they invaded the Soviet Union in spring of 42 when they had higher quality tanks. Lots of ifs. Personally I think they should have gone for Ukraine and the oil fields first then go for Moscow and Leningrad in the 2nd year. We'll never know, it's all speculation at this point.
As a former British Army soldier, I found most of the the sniper scenes quite ridiculous. Casually picking up a bolt-action rifle that isn't zeroed and scoring head shots on various enemies? Shooting a target leaping between buildings based on exactly what understanding of the target's range and angle of jump? A good piece of cinema but pretty fantastical otherwise.
There were 4 other shots before that, and the distance was about 30 yards only, so should be doable if you keep track of each shot
The power of Stalin directed those shots. Seriously they're very bad, I've used PU Mosin before at the range and not zeroing the thing in leads to embarrassing misses.
I guess in this case these two guys are essentially meant to be the two best snipers in the world, so we can suspend disbelief for the moment 🤷 A gap between two broken parts of a building seems like an odd spot to get perfectly zeroed in like that.
Sometimes Hollywood doesn't portray history accurately.
@@rembrandt972ify Are you telling me someone else destroyed the Death Star?
Regarding the intro where there were not enough rifles, the inverse was real.
According to books on Stalingrad by Antony Beevor, David Glantz, and William Craig, there were actually a shortage at that moment for sub machine guns for some divisions. The 13th Guards Rifle Division in particular was forced to go into battle with more rifles and less sub machine guns than desired due to a shortage and lack of time to wait (as the division was desperately required to hold back the German advance). The Guardsmen of 13th Guards Rifle Division were forced to cross the Volga with more Mosins than they wanted and fought until around a battalion of around 400 were all that's left of 13'000 men.
An old friend dug up paperwork that evidently cited only 120 automatic questions of any kind in the division. And that they were 1000 rifles short during the crossing, but were re armed as soon as they had crossed.
Russia not having enough guns to go around was something that happened in World War 1 actually according to some books I read, the Czar's Army was so under equipped and plagued with corruption and logistical issues that there would be times they had more men then rifles and the conscripts not given rifles were just given swords instead. Weird for them to take that fact and put it in an entirely different war though.
@@trenteaston3515 The misconception might also come from the end of 1941/early 1942 when factories were being relocated and equipment (and men) were being lost by the tens or hundreds of thousands on a monthly basis.
With masses of men and tanks being hurled at the Germans in desperate delaying actions, of course there would be an impression formed of untrained and unarmed meat for the grinder. And German officers were able to mold the perception of the Eastern Front from 1946 to ~2000; misconceptions are still being regurgitated now.
@@trenteaston3515 The only time the Red Army was short of rifles was during the early weeks of 1941 as the Nazis overran the border armies along with their stockpiles. It was less of "we don't have rifles" it's more "we don't have enough rifles in the field, kindly wait as we take more from our stockpiles and distribute it to the troop".
Besides, what they lacked was SVTs, the newer semi-auto rifles.. but Mosins? they got plenty of those. But that was 1941... Stalingrad is 1942 - the Red Army is lacking many things but rifles ain't one of those.
@@ericbouchard7547 It's funny when reality is far from that image. The Germans in Ukraine got delayed by weeks as the Germans bash its head against the Red Army. around Smolensk, the German forward divisions got decimated down to less than 40% strength by constant Soviet counter attacks - counter attacks with goddamned TANKS. Even when soviet troops were really lacking in equipment, they still managed to put up an actual fight like how the battered divisions in and around Tula 1941 managed to halt and even obliterate Guderian's panzers, with cavalry divisions armed with old machine guns, rifles, and very little artillery managed to push back Guderian's panzer army.
The truth is, the Red Army is far better than what is depicted in western media. Sure, they aren't top notch nor the best.. but they aren't these "red hordes that only won by sheer number"... heck, the Germans outnumbered the Soviets in 1941.. practically, one of the only reasons they won that much in 1941 - numbers, surprise, and the Germany army is battle-hardened by that point. by 1942 when the Red Army is near parity in numbers and equipment, plus with battle-hardened soldiers and officers managed to achieve a complete surprise that overwhelmed the Germans to the point that they can't even fathom that it's possible suffer a defeat that bad.
It's 2024 and Nazis still can't move on from 1942 LMAO.
The closed boxcar always bothered me more than anything else in this movie. These people are living and will see/saw all the atrocities that the axis are causing in their homeland. They were motivated and thirsty for revenge, but here they are portrated like cattle being forced into the train against they will.
Imagine after Pearl Harbor happened they depicted all American soldiers being treated like they do in this movie...
That's a Knight's Cross, not an Iron Cross. Those are Heinkels, not Junkers.
The movie that inspired the call of duty missions.
Vendetta, yeah, probably the best COD mission of the WW2 CODs.
I love your videos, Jared. Between you and History Buffs, I have ended up learning a lot about history and can even pick stuff out myself now when I watch new stuff set in the same period. I wish I had you two as my professors back in the day.
Thanks for watching!
Never saw this movie but I enjoy watching your commentary on things like this.
Thanks for watching!
@@ReelHistory still waiting for the Patton review you said was in the pipeline! 😅 Keep up the good work! 👍🏻
@@ReelHistory Its NKVD not NKVW
Entertaining movie, some really nice visuals, pretty good acting but "historically" it's pretty much trash.
If you want a better depiction of the battle, check out the 1993 German movie Stalingrad.
Great movie. Watched it for the first time last week. And I don’t even understand German or Russian. Can read subtitles fast helps
Stalingrad (1993) is a disturbingly good film. You can almost feel the hunger, fear and hopelessness in Joseph Vilsmaier's direction.
Also great if you want to feel super depressed! Bonus!
Great film, but it does write into the "We were innocent victims too" narrative that Germany has been creating post-war. Military historians diving into the subject these days are... critical of that.
@@PalleRasmussen True.
I think a much better movie depicting Russia during World War II is "The Last Stand." The story of a corps of cadets from two of Russia's military academies as a front line unit meant to halt the 1941 German advance is pretty well done in that movie.
I agree 100% that movies like this, although somewhat inaccurate, bring light to some important battles. NICE review.
No they don't, movie us slander
Thanks for watching!
12:19 My favourite scene of his in the movie is I think a deleted one, where he's on the phone complaining to someone loudly about how they are hanging on, but they'd stand more of a chance if they get more reinforcements and ammunition and instead of German planes in the sky, they saw some of their own - only to realise the phone's been handed to Stalin and he's just been yelling at "the boss"
This video is about to be fire!
Those were Heinkel H111s not JU88s. They're totally different.
Stalag 17 and Great Escape would be some good ones to look at
I would dearly love to see a reaction video to the film “The Great Raid,” in which Joseph Fiennes also appeared. It depicts Army Rangers’ effort to rescue POW’s from the Japanese camp at Cabanatuan during the Philippine campaign.
The only thing I remember out of that movie is the rip off Saving Private Ryan scene where the US and Japanese soldiers end up in a knife scuffle.
@@johnbeauvais3159 All I remember is being so bored I don't remember anything.
So you said about Vasily name not appearing in US newspapers till the 90s I got a quote for a Vietnam era scout sniper who said the only people who heard of Vasily and the finnish guy Simo before then were other snipers
Great video really enjoyed it. Stalingrad or Cross of Iron next please!
Glad you enjoyed! Thanks for watching.
@@ReelHistory Cross of Iron totally yes, even though its very fiction it has great eastern front vibe in it
All things aside, the musical score in this is 🔥. Also the performances by the actors are very good.
Enemy at the Gates might go down as one of the greatest disappointments I’ve ever experienced in a movie theater. And I went and saw Napoleon too.
Ouch.
It was definitely a disappointment. Then again, so was Masters of the Air.
Love triangle war movies are ridiculous. Pick either a war movie or a love movie, mixing the 2 ends in trash. Pearl Harbor was completely unwatchable for that reason. I hated the chick in the movie more than the Japanese.
@@JayTide - On the other hand: Casablanca.
Man, you have no idea how hard Ive been waiting for this. You know how long Ive been waiting, but Ive been waiting hard.
Tanya (Elizabeth Weiss) was an... awakening for me as a teenage boy. But beyond her, this film doesn't get the attention it deserves for how silly it is.
Yes, she was very attractive in this movie.
Sorry to correct you but the actress who played Tanya was Rachel Weisz (of The Mummy and The Mummy Returns fame). Elizabeth Weiss is an American anthropologist (according to Wikipedia). I do agree with you this is an outstanding movie.
You missed the whole point of Stalingrad which is not the obsession with the city named after Stalin but it's the River Volga is the main Russian supply route for Russia other than Murmansk. Cutting it would cut oil and other supplies to all fronts. In any case the German forces tasked with taking it were severely depleted to attack the oil fields further east.
This was mentioned in the episode I think.
@@gettysburgguy No it wasn't. The focus was as per my first sentence.
And stalingrad at Case blue start wasnt even objective at first
When I was playing 40K Ork/Grots when this film came out, I was quoting, in my best Ork Nob Boss voice, "The first grot shoots! When the first grot dies, the next grot picks up the blaster and shoots!".
While not a fan of 40K, I do appreciate the sentiment. Do you play Bolt Action also? It's my understanding that in the new edition there is a rule that if a Soviet squad fails its activation role and a Commissar is within 6 inches, he shoots one of the squad and you reroll. How could I not loving playing the Russians!
@@dougearnest7590 No, haven't played it. But I am tempted to pick up this new edition.
The level of disorganization …as troops thrown into battle,” while not realistic for Stalingrad, seems like reality of current Ukraine war.
Not even Ukrainian military is this wasteful
The scene of the soldiers getting out of boxcars and immediately being rushed across the Volga, and the chaos, are effective at suggesting the brutality (and, often, chaos) of the battle, but in reality most reinforcement was with organized units. The "blocking detachments" of the NKVD did exist, but AFAIK the NKVD units in Stalingrad fairly quickly became regular infantry, as the situation grew desperate. And most deserters were dealt with across the river, where they fled. The Wehrmacht also used blocking detachments and also lavishly applied the ultimate penalty to deserters on the eastern front.
As for snipers, there is an interesting account (Sniper on the Eastern Front, Sepp Allerberger) that describes how he became a "sniper" by dint of his marksmanship, an ad hoc arrangement in the field, using mostly captured Mosin-Nagants. Eventually he is recalled for sniper training, in Austria - after already being an accomplished combat sniper.
What "Enemy of the Gates" excels at: casting Ed Harris. it is criminal that we never got a Rommel film starring Harris.
It also makes me wish we had gotten Sergio Leone's "Leningrad." Even if it would likely not have been historically accurate, the epic scale of it would have been undeniable.
I would like to see what you make of the 1993 ? German version of Stalingrad.
Same. An excellent movie.
Another great video! Thanks for all the work you put in!
1:39 Germany also never invaded Switzerland and yet it too turns grey on the map.
This history guy made a few mistakes but not as many as the movie did.
Fortunately, I'm not watching the film to get a history lesson, rather to be entertained by one of the best war films made.
If people don't know that movies are fictional, that might explain why we have such bad governments.
Sure, and this one can be filed under similar entertainment to “Inglorious Basterds” but the difference is in that movie everyone understands that Hitler wasn’t shot with an MP40 and then blown up. This movie is close enough to our reality that people believe it is reflective of how things were.
Film is propaganda trash, and you would rage if your side was slandered like this.
@@misterpinkandyellow74 have you not seen American war movies? Lol. Hollywood doesn't care who they do dirty
Good review of the most expensive movie ever made in Europe, at the time.
If nothing else, this movie depicted the absolute carnage and killing on the Eastern Front. My dad was in the US 99th Infantry Division that was located in the northern shoulder of the Ardennes forest when the Battle of the Bulge broke out. That division was in almost continuous combat from mid-December until the end of the war. As much fighting as the Allied forces on the Western Front encountered, it pales in to comparison to the fighting between the Russians and Germans on the Eastern Front. There literally was no quarter given.
POWs between Russia and Germany also suffered the most of any captured combatants in Europe.
Good points about Bob Hoskins. You’re too young to remember his character in “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”. It must have been hard acting opposite a X-rated cartoon character!
Honestly, I appreciate I watched this movie when I was young, made me want to learn about that period of time (alongside Saving Pvt Ryan) and after finding out there was a lot of inaccuracies, ended up appreciating the 1993 Stalingrad a lot more when I finally got around to see it.
Ah, yes, the Braveheart (Freeeeeeeeeddddddoooooommmmmm!!!!!) of Ze Ostfront. It gets two things right.
1) There was a Battle of Stalingrad.
2) Vasily Zaitsev existed.
The rest is bad propaganda based on the worst pages of a good Stalingrad book. Verdict: This movie warrants a Gulag ticket.
I agree. That's why i love to watch the WW2 short films made by German directors and featured on youtube. Many of them are very well made and give you a sense of how the German nation views the war in hindsight and some of the struggles they went through serving in the Wehrmacht.
You should check out Battle for Sevestapol. It follows the famous Russian sniper Lyudmila Pavlichenko. Russia has some great WWII movies if you don't mind subtitles.
The English-speaking part of the world finds it very difficult to watch anything other than English-language films.
Awesome film
@@NielsenDK-1 There are quite a few with English overdubs as well but I get your point. I tried watching Generation War with a buddy, but he gave up after 20 minutes.
@NielsenDK-1 : I've been trying to get Finnish films (Talvisota, Tali-Ihantala, The Unknown Soldier), but they're hard to find in America.
@@Lonovavir It is in a 5 episode tv-show, also. And blue-ray, too😃
There were instances where Soviet soldiers were sent forward without enough ammunition. They might have 10 or 20 rounds instead of 50 and we're told to pick up from the dead and wounded.
There were also penal battalions where there are absolutely were machine guns set up. There were also penal battalions where men were taken out of gulags and thrown into the front line with very little training to do things like clear minefields or other suicidal acts. They absolutely had machine guns set up behind them. In fact, one of the officers in charge of a penal battalion was Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin, father of the current president of Russia.
This is not what penal battalions were nor how they functioned. And an attempt to tie it up to current thing™ is just pathetic.
LOL Bob Hoskins in Hook? You're younger then me. I remember him as Eddie Valiant in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
Never really thought about that attempt to get the Saving Private Ryan thing at the beginning.. Clever, never caught that..
From what I read about the Battle of Stalingrad I think it would've been better if the movie was about the 13th Guards Rifle Division rather than Zaisev.
Though given the infancy of the internet at this time the same inaccuracies for the portrayal of the Soviet strategies during the battle would've probably still been there, especially since William Criag's book came out before Russian President Boris Yeltsin opened the Soviet archive.
Another book about Stalingrad I would recommend is Stalingrad by David M. granted & Jonathan M. House, it's very matter of fact so it could be exhausting at times but his series about Stalingrad does a good job at showing the strategy from both sides and dispelling the myths.
Rifle marksmanship contests were common in Russian young before the war, so they had a ready supply of snipers for the war.
Well at least they got that there was a battle at Stalingrad correct.
Hey Mr Frederick ,i immediately looked up the 1993 German movie, Stalingrad. I agree with you that enemy at the gates only redeeming quality is that it was different from typical American movies in that it depicted the Russian experience in ww2.
Some context for the '13.000' executed by the Soviets is needed. This was the number for the entire 'Stalingrad Front' and the vast majority would have been soldiers fighting outside of the actual city. The reason for this can actually be seen in the movie scene with the ferries who took conscripts over the Volga river, it was very hard to cross the river and the men who survived it was far to valuable to be thrown away needlessly in suicide charges or even worse being executed for cowardice.
The vast majority of those Red Army conscripts who showed cowardice during the battle and tried to escape it would simply be made to return to their old units after a stern lecture on how important their sacrifice was to the Motherland. It's true that life was cheap in the Red Army but in this particular battle soldiers where always in short supply for Chuikovs defenders.
The number of bodies that were lying all over the place I thought was very good detail.
Great look at the film Jared thank you.
Re Bob Hoskins to many Brits he is most well known for the film the long good Friday made circa 1979/80 where he plays a London gangland boss who is plunged into a world he doesn’t understand involving the IRA. Also starring in it are a young Helen Mirren and Pierce Brosnan in one of his very first film roles. Well worth watching if you haven’t seen it 👍
Fantastic video, cheers Professor Fredrick!!
Thanks for watching!
This movie inspired one of the best, if not the best, Call of Duty missions: Vendetta.
My introduction to Stalingrad was by way of a table top war game called Perfect General. That scenario is brutal. All you have is infantry units to take on German tanks. It's winnable if you are careful bt it got me interested in the history.
16:16 maybe not? I’ve read a few things about the WW1 sniper training schools that crafted the next generation of Wehrmacht Jaeger troops. Perhaps teaching at one of those schools was considered Staff duty over being a combatant ? Particularly as his Iron Cross indicates that he did serve in the Great War.
Love your videos 😊
About your comment at 2', you could have pointed out that Switzerland was not occupied by the Axis powers either. Speaking of maps, look at one of Russia. Stalingrad is not at all the gateway to the Caucasus. Pushing in the direction of Stalingrad was a way for the Germans to protect the flank of the advance towards the Caucasus.
If there is some question as whether Major Konig was a real figure, it follows that every scene he is in is of questionable authenticity. Changing topics, if one wants to read about the fighting on the Eastern Front from the German perspective, I direct you to The Forgotten Soldier by Guy Sajer. His descriptions of the cold are truly chilling (forgive the pun).
Hollywood doing history is a bit like Swedish pizza; it might be tasty and sure the basic semblance of a "real" pizza is there as are the basic ingredients (dough, cheese, marinara sauce), but an Italian would NOT call most Swedish pizzas (like the one with peanuts, sliced banana and curry powder or the one with kebab meat, and the white and red sauce) a pizza. 😁
Oh and DEFINITELY read Anthony Beevor's Stalingrad, it's amazing.
A video regarding the movie Operation Mincemeat would be very interesting. Thanks for the video.
Still love this movie, despite the historical inaccuracies. Also please make a video on the Siege of Jadotville and The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, they are awesome
Jared I would love to see you do a breakdown of HBOs the pacific!! That would be amazing
I enjoyed this movie when it came out but I recognized at the time that it probably was not very historically accurate. I felt like this was trying to be Saving Private Ryan at times but there was too much melodrama injected, as you pointed out, with the romance and subplot with the younger Sasha. The portrayal of Russian leadership also seemed almost comically over the top. I did know that it was very loosely based on a real person and I knew a little about the battle for Stalingrad. It was an entertaining movie but it was hard to take it very seriously unlike Private Ryan, etc…
I’ve been waiting for this one
I adore Bob Hoskins's performance in this on an entertainment level, but I think he would've been a phenomenal choice to play Lavrentiy Beria instead of Khrushchev. Simon Russell Beale's portrayal of Beria in "The Death of Stalin" is a marvel and worthy of all acclaim, but imagine Hoskins in a serious and grounded film about that monstrous man.
Another movie to consider is "Come and See." It is very hard to watch. Maybe you could review that one at some time.
"… it's almost impossible for me to separate Bob Hoskins from his role as…" Harold Shand in The Long Good Friday?
Eddie Valiant in Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
Oh, gawd, no.
Almost positive those were supposed to be Heinkle He-111's not Ju-88's. Ju-88's could dive bomb. The crashed plane used later is a He-111. But I could be wrong. Haven't seen in a long time.
Good one Jared!
Thanks for watching!
The book “Enemy at the Gates” is amazing. Not sure how this movie went askew
They took a small portion of the book and made an American war movie out of it.
I have a theory that post-Saving Private Ryan and post-Band of Brothers film producers sought to give audiences a handful of less historically accurate but otherwise edge-of-our-seats entertaining endeavors. Enemy at the Gates and U-571 immediately come to mind. Honorable mentions are also due to “A Very Long Engagement”, “Enigma” “Atonement” and “Flyboys” all imminently watchable without getting too bogged down in accuracy.
26:37 We must keep in mind that most Gen X-ers and many Baby Boomers didn’t speak on the phone “long distance” until the very late 1970’s or early 80’s. There was a time before the Bell monopoly was abolished when one minute of a long distance phone conversation cost 1/3rd of what the hourly minimum wage was at the time. It was crazy expensive. Some reading this might remember standing around as a family while mom or dad (or maybe a grandparent) held the phone receiver in the air and everyone kinda threw out a brief salutation to a loved one who was overseas? Long distance phone calls were so rare in the 1970’s that overhearing an adult say “I spoke to so and so last night, long distance. We were on for ten minutes. It’s gonna be a fortune” was common. It was like ordering the appetizer at a restaurant. If we even went to a restaurant where they offered appetizers
Up next; *The Great War* w/Ron Pearlman
I enjoy this movie for it's entertainment and look at the Eastern Front. Forgotten Weapons did an episode on the guns in the movie, including both sniper setups.
Krushkchev was the political leader put there by Stalin as his man on the ground whereas the generals were appointed by the Stavka headed by Stalin for the military operation. Khrushchev as a direct link with Stalin was the major power in the sector on the political level with direct access to Stalin. His survival of the post Stalin succesion tells you all you need to know.
Obligatory request for the film When Trumpets Fade!
I don't think you'll have to wait as long as you think
You do realize that you can show full screen clips of the movie with the dialogue. *History Buffs* (great channel) has been doing so for years with no issues from UA-cam.
Bigger channels can get away with it more.
@@gettysburgguy Fail to see the logic in that.
This is quite a fantasy movie, although quite enjoyable. After read several Stalingrad books by Glantz, Beevor, Jason d marks and few others is hard to say people who never read anything that this is historically bad.
Is it accurate? No. Do I love it anyways? Yes
Ok at 17:59 you state “Junkers 88 bombers” where in fact those were clearly Heinkel HE 111 H bombers. The front “greenhouse” style nose is a dead giveaway plus the overall shape of the fuselage.
The Danish film April 9 (German invasion of Denmark) and The Kings Choice (German invasion of Norway) Based on real events.
The Ju 88 was a high level bomber, could also be adapted as a dive bomber although not in the same league as a Ju 87 or a Val. Was also used as a night fighter.
Those weren’t JU 88s though…They were clearly Heinkel HE111H bombers
@@ralphdougherty1844He said they were Ju88s I just said whatv t hey were capable of.
its the NKVD not the NKVW.. According to many sources, Erwin König is "an an apocryphal Wehrmacht sniper allegedly killed by the Soviet sniper Vasily Zaytsev during the Battle of Stalingrad." However, König was not the sniper's real name. There are other names attributed to the sniper including Heinz Thorwald. its pronounced susha and 2 others were hung not hanged....
Legend says the Russian people don't actually talk with a British accent
The movie is based more on the novel War of the Rats than on Craig's books
The movie may not be accurate, but I remember enjoying it. I saw it a few times.
The movie was inspirational for the first Call of Duty game.
While looking at the Russian system of this time, look a bit in the future setting of "The Death of Stalin", from 2017. It had Jason Isaacs as Zhukov and Steve Buscemi as Khrushchev. How much was factual and as humorous?
The name of the movie is actually a subtle foreshadowing that the director added for Red Army reenactors who will forever more have to deal with their own enemy at the gate in the form of stupid people at events referencing the movie as fact to them.
Just keep saying to yourself "the movie got them to the reenactment - the movie got them to the reenactment"
I'd read the book, way before the movie adaption came out. I've always thought that the movie version sucked (almost as bad as the movie Pearl Harbor), especially compared to the book. Although I do believe that Koenig never actually existed, the book was quite good. I thought that the movie was little more than a goofy love story, set in a war environment. i would read the book again, but I would NEVER watch the movie again. I've always considered it to be a garbage film.
...the love story is in the book :)
I enjoyed this movie at the time and my wife liked the love story. The movie producers have to add this in to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. All the big hit movies, Gladiator, Titanic need the love story. The true extent of the suffering can only be conveyed in print and imagined by the reader. I don't think it would be allowed to be shown on film.
Say what you want about the historical accuracy, but that movie sold a ton of Mosin Nagant rifles.
And yet, as I understand it -- in the new version of "Bolt Action" (WW2 historical miniature wargame) if a Soviet squad fails its activation role and there is a Commissar within 6 inches, he will shoot a member of the squad and a re-roll is taken. If that isn't historically accurate, I don't care.
In the 70's. Thames British television put out the 26 part of the World at. They got a lot of coordination from the Soviet government to make this documentary. They were really angry that a bulk of the documentary wasn't about the war in Russia.
About the mid 70's. The Soviet government had done their own documentary the Uknown War. With Actor Burt Lancaster. That is where I learned a lot about the Great Patriotic war.
Most people didn't know or understand hoe big that part of WWII was. So the movie makers pretty much had a clean slate to work with. I do think the romance could have been left out. Just it should have been left out of Oppenheimer.
The German film As Far As My Feet Will Carry Me about a German soldier taken prisoner by Soviets and escaping Gulag to navigate Siberia is a far more accurate depiction of the time. American directors could ruin a wet dream.
loved this, would be interested in you taking a look at The Death of Stalin if you want to keep things Russian
If you want something maybe a bit more realistic, try the movie: Stalingrad
My dad served in Europe and heard captured German soldiers (i think at wars end, he didnt speak a lot about WW2, msybe twice in my life time, except about military aircraft, he could name plane from any country and talk about details that most wouldn't know, even with a degree of knowledge) saying invading Russia will seal Germanys fate as the Russians will fight to the very last Russian alive...also stalin put many soldiers (Russian) in absolutely awful hell hole prisons as they were criminals before the war, ie: not a follower of the communist state ideals etc, and they had a very hard time, as Russian gangs in prison were anti communist and hated stalin, so serving in the war was sern as traitorship to Russia under such an evil leader and ideology... Those boys didnt go back to a hero's welcome like in America etc, they went back after all the hell of war to even more hell ....
Any recommendations of books on the battle of berlin or Stalingrad?
I feel like this movie really helped cement a lot of the myths about how the red army fought during WW2.
something that angers me a little is that nobody talks about the valiant defense of the seeds reserve, scientist with little to no battle experience fight to the death to prevent the germans to take the seeds reserve, no seed was missing, not a single one, but people glasses over them when speaking about the battle of Stalingrad
This is absolutely a story that needs a proper telling, however the seed bank was in St. Petersburg/Leningrad. It's all the more poignant that the scientists were starving due to the siege, yet never once considered consuming any of the edible plants under their care.
Haviing written 15k words for S+T this movie has always been off interest to me. But iit was not so much we lived in a bubble but we didnt hear much about the battes till the 90's because the Soviets werent sharing much info. After the fall of the soviet union thats when we in the west got access to the Russian archives and started learning another side of history.
Tanya was 10 miles away, and said to be lesbian. Danalov was a General along the Don River during the Summer.