Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Entertaining from beginning to end, it maintains the spirit of the franchise while establishing it's own seal with a fun cast

Blistering performances.

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

To say this movie has no idea what it's doing is an understatement. This film is baffling. I understand it's not a Hollywood movie. I understand it's not bound by those norms. But by god. This movie jumps around more than my most unstable relationship. At no point did I realize who the main characters were, what anyone's goals were, who we were supposed to be rooting for and why this movie was so shoddy! I mean, start at bad audio dubbing, finish with the most random cuts happening every two seconds! I'm not joking this movie gets laughable. 1.5 million people died. How do you make that funny. I'll tell you how, you have: -obvious stage lights -horrific acting and accents -no sort of consideration or placement of scenes -bad dubbing -no build up -no plot or theme focus -ridiculous scenes, such as one where what we think (we don't know) is the main character walking after someone in despair, and they literally just walk into a mound of ice and pretend to trip... Oh and the siege of Leningrad, yeah that's about 30 people who slowly run towards each other.And, the only reason we know this famine is getting worse is because we see the town's announcer every few minutes and every time we see him he's coughing a little more and he's wearing an extra item of clothing!OK, so maybe it did get the costumes and the sets right, sure, but that's the thing! Most people will just give this movie a pass because its set in World War Two! It's just a bit insulting that some Russian filmmakers will go and try their hand at history and a Hollywood war movie now they've got a budget and just fail so badly filmmaking-wise!Please, if you watch this don't expect it to be some interesting foreign period piece.

"Is it true that the Fuhrer's new plan is not to take Leningrad, but to wipe it from the face of the Earth?" During WWII the Nazis planned to take Leningrad on their march to take over Russia and the world. They are met with resistance and the battle begins. Kate Davis (Sorvino) is a foreign journalist and is on her way to be evacuated with everyone else when she is hit. Thinking she is dead the plane leaves without her. This movie opens with a spectacular war scene that while not that graphic it is still very powerful and memorable. Then the movie shifts to the dramatic side and follows Kate from her life of safety to struggling to stay alive. This movie shows the power of the human spirit and how in times of need you find who and what you need to make it through. A pretty movie true story. The main problem is that it tends to drag in a few parts and is a little too long. I don't mind long movies but if there are parts that are not needed they can be taken out to make the movie's pace a little better. Other then that I recommend this movie. Overall, a good yet slow account of Kate's struggle for life in a country ravaged by war. Much like the movie "Winter In Wartime". Which I though was better then this one. I give it a B-.Would I watch again? - I don't think so.*Also try - Enemy At The Gates & Winter In Wartime

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.

This movie has wasted it's title "Leningrad".Very disappointing movie, can't compare to German movie Stalingrad (1993) I had high hope for this movie. After I've watched Stalingrad (1993), I think it would be very interesting to check out the similar warfare from Russians' perspective, but I was utterly disappointed, so bad that I have to fast-forward some scenes to get by (almost quite in the middle of it).First all, if you want to see the fierce battle scene, then you can avoid this movie altogether, because it only lasts 5 minutes in the beginning. When the bomb does fall, some scene just so lack of common sense it is ridiculous - at the scene when the British journalist encounters an air raid, the bomb just falling off around her, I highly doubt that's what German pilots would do, waste tons of bomb on one person one truck.Second, I am all support to view the war from a different angle - city dwellers instead of soldiers at the killing field. But this movie's plot line is illogical, loss, jumping all over the places, from a conscience-stricken German pilot to the persecution of any reminder White Army relatives, from the special treatment to foreign journalists and Russian's own elite societies to the bonding of the two female characters... It's severely weakened the grim, bleak, desperate and crude suffering atmosphere when a city was under siege for 882 days with 1.5 million people perished.Third, when the plot line is scattered, script is weak, the one last thing can save the movie from a total disaster is the acting, however, it fails miserably here too! I like actor Gabriel Byrne a lot, but see him in this movie make me wondering what he was thinking? The Russian woman solider is way over the top annoying, she seems can be anywhere, do anything with full energy while others were at the verge of starving to death hanging on their finger nails. The English journalist is even more plain and phony. None the characters is likable, well acted, be able to command the screen and memorable.I like this movie just for the cinematographic which convincingly presents the destructed city and it's suffering people.And finally, I do have my utter respect to Russian people who has survived the siege, who fought and won the impossible fight and set off the turning point of WWII.