Heißer Schnee

Searchanddestroy-1 and Aylmer and Theo Robertson and OzMovieWatcher, you are completely wrong because you don't know anything at all, firstly, the detachments in the film is good for its time and despite problems with sound during gun recoil and plywood of some tanks, the film is very the battle scenes are well staged, the sound, editing and decoration, the fact that the film shows heroically detachments, there is nothing wrong with that, they often participated in battles and showed themselves worthy there, although the film embellishes them from a pro-Soviet position, but evenly also, some enemy at the gate, on the contrary, falsely demonizes them, presenting an anti-Soviet position, and although the film really has little dramaturgy compared to other Soviet films, it is still present, although the film itself probably was not intended so, it is also incorrect to compare it with the film Stalingrad, it came out in 93 after the collapse of the USSR, and even after that you can remember some kind of enemy at the gates of 2002 and how Soviet soldiers are falsely shown there, and Frank Wisbar's HUNDE, WOLT IHR EWIG LEBEN, of course, is not so anti-Soviet like a doctor from Stalingrad in 1958, but in general, in terms of showing the enemy, he is no different from a Goryachiy sneg and finally, empathy is possible and necessary, since they did not have any superiority, both qualitative and quantitative, and there was no actual small saturn operation at the beginning of the German counteroffensive , the action of which takes place in the film, initially at the beginning of 1943 a large-scale operation Saturn was planned, but due to the start of the German counteroffensive it had to be canceled and then it was redone into Operation Small Saturn and was started after the events of the film and in general the story should not be based on films study.

It's an unfortunate fate of history that people in the West think of the Second World War being won souly by the combined efforts of Britain and America . It says a lot about Western ignorance when the British Prime Minister David Cameron once stated that " We [ The UK ] were Junior partners in the [ Angol-American ] alliance in 1940 " when in fact the USA were still neutral at this point in the Second World War . In reality it was the Soviet Union who made the biggest contribution to the defeat of Nazi Germany inflicting over 80% of all German casualties while suffering 30 million war dead . This is something that has been unfortunately forgotten . Perhaps it's down to the fact that it's not so much the victors who rewrite history but patriotic Hollywood producers

HOT SNOW very much resembles a Hollywood production . It's a flag waver but instead of the stars and stripes it's waving a red flag celebrating the Red Army . Nothing wrong with that and it does show the hellish conditions the Soviet fighting man had to endure , not only from the weather and the fascist invaders but also their own side . Unfortunately it does somewhat sugar coat the sometimes brutal methods dished out by the political commissars . For example a tank commander faces summary court martial then for no explanation the commissar changes his mind and allows the commander to redeem himself in battle . Despite its flaws ENEMY AT THE GATES is a much better film for showing the pressure the Soviet army was under from its own side

Despite its simplicity and its lack of character development the battle scenes of HOT SNOW are certainly impressive as artillery crews try to stem a German spearhead thrust in to Stalingrad . In some ways you feel the director has been heavily influenced by the battle scenes of Masaki Kobayashi's THE HUMAN CONDITION as the Tiger tanks cut their way through the Soviet lines . As a testimony of the fighting spirit of the Soviet Union it succeeds in its function but you're left feeling that its only function

Hi !

This film title means "Burning snow" and this is a story of Soviet artillery soldiers who broke German tank divisions' rescue operation for besieged German army in Stalingrad, on account of their own lives.

This is a rare purely combat-focused Soviet film where Stalin and top red army generals are never appeared. Even the commanding red army general on the spot is not named.

In such a sense, this film is a bit closer to American war film which always focused on ordinary individual soldiers. Also camera work on this film is excellent and piling up the scenes to the climax of battle.

Also actor Boris Tokarev showed his excellent play on his roll of Lieutenant Kuznezov and he symbolized feeling of sadness of war without such words from his mouth.

I believe that Boris Tokarev was one of the most favourite soviet actor specially by young females during 1970s.

The acting is so poor. It seemed like there was some Soap Opera backing the war plot. Many scenes were obviously done in a sound stage. While the battle scenes appear very authentic, the acting was a let down as was the authenticity of those nice tidy c;lean uniforms worn in heavy warfare. However, several times I could see the supposed metal armor of the field guns flex when a Russian soldier would lean on it or take hold of it. Obviously plywood. When the guns fired, there was no recoil. Apart from that, battle scenes appeared authentic. The sounds of battle were repetitive and obviously the same acoustic recording played over and over. Explosive sounds were not in sync with the explosions seen.

This movie had a lot more potential and is at the lower end of Russian war movies.

A good epic film about young artillerymen, who got into the heat of battle.