What a disappointment .... This SHOULD have been a great film, with such a topic, it should have been a great epic. Instead , we get a rather formulaic and simple minded romance story, so devoid of feeling for the historical complexity of this vast tragedy, that it comes across as an insult to the memory of all those millions who suffered and died here. The story of a stranded British war correspondent (Sorvino) and her lover (Byrne), which apparently is based on true events, would have worked as a subtext; a sideline to the larger human events transpiring, but, Hollywood-style, it takes front and centre, while the Russian People are largely relegated to roles as stereotyped KGB bad guys or masses of faceless ragamuffins dragging coffin-laden sledges along windy alleyways. None of the great players are fleshed out in this mess ... Zhdanov, whose heroic efforts saved so many, is shown only in passing, while Stalin, whose bad decisions led to the siege of Leningrad, is not even mentioned.Sorvino, who, even when looking withered and starved, still has the cutest smiles in film history, tries desperately to bring some life to this, but is defeated by her desperate attempt to affect a British accent, amid the generally poor direction. The other big-name actors don't even try, as they are handed only bit parts.After this, and "The Barber of Siberia", I'm coming to the conclusion that any Russian film with western actors should be avoided like the plague. A Pity. If you want to see a great Russian film about WW2, see Tarkovski's early film, "The Childhood of Ivan", or Elem Klimov's "Come and See". If you want to know something about the siege of Leningrad read Harrison Salisbury's harrowing epic, "The 900 Days". The movie's not a total bomb, It may be worth watching if you're a Russian film buff like myself, or might be enjoyable, if you know nothing about the siege of Leningrad ... It's just an immense disappointment, compared to what it should have been.

With a larger budget 'Leningrad' would have been great.All ingredients are there. Above all, one of the most horrible scenes in history of mankind: the Nazi-siege + deliberate starvation of Leningrad, nowadays St. Petersburg. Russia's second city, renowned for its magnificent architecture. This siege from 1941-'44 caused a few million casualties, and an unending amount of human suffering.'Leningrad' deserves praise for its research: the wartime Soviet-society from Stalin's days is well reflected. The film also is adequately in touch with the harshness of the North Russian winter. And the almost unparallelled tragedy of this siege comes out beyond doubt.After this we arrive at 'Leningrad's weak points: its acting is barely adequate, and its shooting no more than mediocre. A severe tragedy like this surely deserves a lot more dignity and respect than shown here.

The heroic defense of the city of Leningrad and the superhuman endurance of its citizens during one of the worst sieges in history, is beautifully depicted in the stunning, heartbreaking film "Leningrad", written and directed by Alexandr Buravsky.I have been teaching a Film History course at Indiana State University for over 25 years and happened to be in London on the day the film was screened. What luck! Kate is a foreign journalist who misses her plane and is forced to survive in the besieged city. She's both an outsider (English) and an insider (of Russian descent). Caught between the Soviet apparatchiks who refuse to give up Leningrad matter the cost and the Germans who are hell-bent on conquering it, Kate, for the first time in her life is faced with a choice – survive or die. She chooses the latter, helping others survive in the process. The transformation she goes through and the final choice that she makes, will make even the strongest among us cry. Yet the film is fiercely, stubbornly unsentimental, which is one of its great strengths. It's not just a film about what the Russian people had to endure during the almost nine hundred-day siege; it's an honest, authentic testament to the triumph of the soul in the face of unspeakable adversities.My only regret is that "Leningrad" is not playing in the U.S theaters. I sincerely hope that North American distributors get a chance to view this powerful movie and appreciate it not only for its emotional gravity and entertainment value, but for its commercial possibilities as well. This may be the year of "Avatar", but for all its technical brilliance, Cameron's film couldn't hold a candle to Buravsky's.

A very bad film, an amalgam of clichés and historical inaccuracies. A few examples: in an early scene Soviet infantry are attacked by the Germans; instead of staying in their trenches to shoot at them, they advance into open ground to fight them,contrary to all infantry tactics; Kate, one of the central characters, is supposedly the daughter of a White Russian and obsessed with her Russianness, yet she does not speak Russian; a guilt-stricken German airman attacks an anti-aircraft gun- the gun, however, does not fire shrapnel shells but scores a direct hit on his 'plane, which doesn't look much like a German 'plane of WWII. In fairness, when they could escape the preposterous plot and the consequent absurdities there are some genuinely powerful moments- the depiction of people slowly starving to death is convincingly done and moving, but these only show up the rest of it even more. A film to be avoided.