I loved the previous film of the trilogy, but not this one. Not film making speaking, butthe story itself. The fortress attack is laughable in the negative way. And this mine filed, where mines are not even undergroud but put down on the grass....Once more, as in so many Russian war movies, german soldiers are shown as idiots. Oh my God,keep away fromit.
Add a Review
-
searchanddestroy-121 October 2019
-
the_wolf_imdb11 June 2012What to say... this is not an ordinary war movie, nor generic Russian war movie (loads of nonsense plus even more loads of nonsense patriotism). This is rather "experience" movie, more or less a clutter of incomprehensible scenes that do not have much of a sense. It does not have any sense at all if you have not watched the "first part" directly before this movie. Even if you watched it, it is still very incomplete story that does not even have proper ending (fate of all the characters are somehow open, potentially allowing the next movie).
Incoherent story really makes this movie a mess. The CGI effects are totally out of place - the scene where "the Stukas" do attack the cars are so completely wrong in so many ways - the planes fly way too low, they are observably smaller than they should be and the effects of bombs are nonexistent. The scene with the "attack of the citadel" belongs to the horror comedy - seriously it looks like some scene of the "Final Destination". It might be somewhat fun as a parody but it simply does not belong to the more serious movie. Combat scenes are generally very poor.
This movie is basically incomprehensible for anyone who is not Russian. It is a pile of Russian emotions that somewhat prevents the heroes from behaving in any logical manner. If you are interested in Russian mentality and its unique mix of sentiment, brutality, warmth and ruthlessness it might be interesting to you. It might be of value for some Russian TV channel but as a general movie in the world context it sucks horribly. I'm really really really disappointed by it. -
harryplinkett1418 August 2018Nikita has gone insane, and someone should have had the guts to tell him this was pure rubbish. Everything about this film is fake and indulgent. It annoys the audience and delivers nothing in terms of emotional or intellectual gratification. Those of us who enjoyed the original film are baffled. There is simply no story here, and nothing worth watching. I don't care for these characters, and I can't take anything in this film seriously.
-
It reminds me of Apocalypse Now. Both Kutz and Kotov live through the horror of war. Yet Kutz succumbs to it, turns into an animal and has to die. The beauty of this film is in the character of Kotov, who in spite of the "burns" remains a human being. Just like in Part 1 "Exodus", here the pictures, the scenes and characters are wonderful. This is not a historical drama nor is it an action film. In those categories film does not rate. But as an art of cinematography this is a masterpiece. For me part one "Exodus" as well as "Apocalypse Now" is a study of how we the humans face and make inhumane action of war. Part Two "Citadel" is about how we the humans win the war by remaining human.
-
roskaposti-811326 August 2015The movie starts with a promise. High budget war movie with seemingly interesting characters. Then the movie messes all up, turns up a boring crapfest of everything gone wrong in film making. No wonder it turned out such a flop at box offices.
After the first pretty unnecessary slaughter scene two main characters survive without any decent explanation and turn out to be having a fun cruise at the countryside with their jeep. Then there is some drama I just forget, because all the ranting has 0 value or interest.
After that we move to totally different characters, and lose total interest to what is happening. There is a scene where stukas bomb some trucks at 5 meter height (at that height the bombs blast waves would destroy the stukas too), and we see how a truck survives even though it has bomb crates right next to it. Sheeesh, at that range a bomb would toss the truck 20 meters into the air... And the inaccuracy of the stukas is something you'll be watching in awe. Talking about historical mistakes.
And the final attack at the fortress just made me grin with total disbelief for total idiotism by the film makers. Watch the scene and you understand.
Don't watch this crapfest of a film, even if you think your life is too short and you want to waste it on poor films. Some poor films can make you laugh. This is so bad you'll just end up shaking your head and reach for the remote to skip all the boring scenes that make no sense. -
I don't understand why Mikhalkov's own people are being so unfair with this "celovekh". They want to smash not only his fingers but also his lifetime work which is impossible.
This final chapter is brilliant. All the pieces are put together by a master painter. The light in the dacha contrasting with the light in the same "dacha" from the first movie, the torment suffered by the characters, the joy and the sadness of the people touched or mutilated by the war and finally the immense Russian light blue sky...all contribute to an amazing picture.
I don't judge this movie historically even if I have read over a hundred books about the terrible war on the Eastern Front. I love the very soul of this movie. Mikhalkov does not created another sequel, he managed to create another movie which cannot be measured in IMDb stars...
So ignore the rating and enjoy the ride...on the back of Kotov's horse. -
skorpion-20083 August 2011The film is great, great special effects not so much the relationship of people on the screen. Continue and complete its series of three films, Mikhalkov is taking another step towards success, it is incredibly beautiful ending epic. I liked this movie, I thought, without any I put him to the highest score. I know that many claims there are those who, frankly, the movie did not like or simply ugly. Therefore I want to remind these esteemed ladies and gentlemen of the fact that each film is designed for its audience and if you want to see a replay of the foreign action-movie with lots of explosions and "the main words," that before his death, said one of the key characters, I have to disappoint you - this you will not see here. Everything you see here - it's a great game actors attached to each frame of film and the incredible interest in the developments taking place in the picture. Incredible to those who have lost faith in the national cinema, and himself without realizing it, bowing to a greater extent, to foreign cinema. I think it's never too late to admit to himself in this "love." Also like to remind everyone that this film is not historical, but based on the actions of the war, so do not look for it the historical realities, even though a large part horrific and seemingly impossible realities of war in its present.
It is worth noting that, without doubt, Mikhalkov as a director and as an actor, I think it got rather big experience. I will not try to assume how much time was spent shooting, but I will say that every shot, every scene has been perfected to the smallest detail, worked out at the highest level. Frankly, I do not expect such a plot twist that was in the movie and it surprised me that on the right only to me a pleasant feeling. I thank you for this wonderful Mikhalkov's epic! I watched the film with his father and cousin. They both liked it too, and my dad, after watching, I said a very wise phrase: "If you like the movie very much, then you should not pay attention to minor rankings." And, you know, I am now myself so I think that the rating is not important, more importantly, how you took this movie. -
After the massive disappointment of the second installment, Mikhalkov manages to give a decent conclusion for his ill-conceived project; still miles away from the engaging original but still more coherent than the previous one.
I'm quite sure that the overwhelming negative response to Predstoyanie's bizarre mixture of naturalism, pathos, slapstick and religious overtones forced some changes in the editing of Tsitadel and the film it's all the better for it.
In the end, I remain most intrigued by this strange, monumental movie, a Heaven's Gate-like fiasco that nevertheless has some memorable passages. In fact, I will certainly check Mikhalkov's longer cut (intended as TV series) when it gets available.
As for the mighty Nikita Mikhalkov, maybe he failed, but his body of work remains outstanding nevertheless! -
v_savin20008 May 2011Just from the theater... Wow! i'm so grateful for Mr.Mikhalkov that he has completed one of his best works. "Burnt by the sun" consists of three parts and you should watch from the first part to understand the whole story in details. each scene of the sequel is a small movie in the movie and these different scenes form a very detailed sensational EXPERIENCE of the Stalin's tyranny and the Great Patriotic War for the Soviet people. Like i said before, there is no sense to look for documentary strictness in this _fictional_ war story but what an amazing intrinsic truth of the war and the tyranny in this movie! This picture shows to a viewer what a man is and how easy to break and manipulate anybody with fear. or, for example,if you want an answer to a question: "why, in the the end, the Soviets won that war?" watch the final scene with a Russian old woman defending a mind-sick German soldier... however its better to watch the whole "Burnt by the sun" from the beginning to the end in one take for yourself.
-
commissarmanul27 September 2011Well, where should I start? Burnt by the Sun: Fortress is definitely better then Burnt by the Sun: Exodus, which was total insanity. I found myself interested in the storyline involving Kotov finding and coming to peace with his family. The acting is not always over-the-top and much more subtle, though we get a lot of ham. There are still a lot of unintentionally funny and rather impossible scenes: for example, the whole take-the-fortress-subplot is pretty silly, cause it is built like a medieval castle etc. Overall, it's an improvement, if you cut out all the wacky scenes, or re-shoot them in a more believable way, you'll get a good movie. Not yet, Nikita, better luck next time.