Utomlennye solntsem 2

It is difficult to imagine, but! If anyone of the Cannes-2010 Jury read this, please, do not give any prize to this trash with "great movie" label. Do not defame my country.

So, the "masterpiece"... Every film starts with its slogan nowadays. This time it was "The Great movie about the Great war". Let's even forget Mikhalkov is not overly modest. But, if you dare to touch such important subject before the 65th anniversary of the Great Victory and declare your product "Great", it must be great.

And what we see? All the movie is full of stupidity, Mikhalkov's fantasy and himself. Several separate novels (bad plots). About what? Who knows! There are good Nazi military men and bad soviet civil men and women. Stupid soviet people force Nazis to bomb Russian Red Cross ship, or, for variety's sake, burn 100 or 500 peasants. Nazies even cry when they are forced to do so! And only Mikhalkov's Kotov does the right things. He is everywhere. He - but not any sense. There is no need for the voluminous review to summarize, Utomlyonnye solntsem 2 are: nazi ass, trying to defecate down from 400 km/h plan, and "show me your tits". Great...

BTW, "burnt" may sound better for English-speakers, but the right translation is "Tired by the sun" - not "Burnt...". And you are really tired after watching this movie...

It's not a secret that Mr. Putin and Mr. Medvedev continue anti-Russian, anti-soviet, anti-historic and certainly anti-Stalin propaganda. Their puppets gave about $55 million from state budget to Mr. Mikhalkov for another peace of crap. So, don't trust that scandal campaign in Cannes. They cut about 1 hour because the movie is so miserable that there is nothing to watch for film-maker or usual viewer. Thanks to Mr. Mikhalkov our heroes, our veterans who had smashed fascist Gitler had been so foully slandered in commemoration of the 65th anniversary of Victory in Great Patriotic War. BTW, Berlin was captured by soviet atheistic people. So, Mihkalkov's pseudo-Christian scenes looks just idiotic.

It's amazing, it's astounding, it's unbelievable - it's trash beyond any usual definition of trash! Some compare it with the "Inglorious basterds" and indeed it's just as insane and irreverent to historical truth but the madcap feats of daring and a plethora of lively and memorable characters that made IG such an affable flick are not there, replaced by a (s)crappy sequence of sketches performed by a coven of morons, traitors, cowards and assholes. "Sun-burned 2" is a live adaptation of "Happy Tree Friends" with the plot of every episode following the same pattern: enters Michalkov(a), enters everybody else, everybody else dies horribly, Michalkov(a) leaves, viewer doesn't give a damn.

As everyone already knows this is the most expensive movie made in Russia. So I was expecting some good story and visual effects. But what we got was something awful. There is no story in the movie, it's more like "let's show them that scene, now let's show them this scene" and the connection between scenes is really unnatural. This movie is anti-historical. There were no "shtrafbat" in 1941, there were no German tanks under sails, Stalin was not looking like a zombie etc etc. And another thing is, that Red Army did fight against Germans, but for some reason Nikita Mikhalkov is showing us that Soviet Army is a bunch of scared and unorganized people. if things were like that Germans would have taken over Moscow in 41. Some of the scenes of this movie are so ridiculous that I do not even want to talk about them. For example, the scene where German shooter wants to s**t right out of a flying plane. That is impossible and you can't move your plot by creating impossible situations.

So, in conclusion, I would like to say that it is unpatriotic, stupid, anti-historical movie with very poor visual effects. Do not watch

Granted, Burnt By the Sun 2 is not as good as the original, but as an anti-war film it is still watchable. I think rating it one star out of ten is excessively and unjustifiably harsh on the film and director Mikhalkov.

I have no way of gauging the historic accuracy of the film, so I will avoid looking at it from that angle. As a war film, expensively done - some scenes of destruction are stunning - and at 3 hours, I enjoyed watching it. The jumping back-and-forth within a period of 3-4 years was not done properly, nor was it necessary in my opinion. This makes the story a bit hard to follow for viewers like me. The blood and gore in battle scenes did not turn me off, and it did to some, and I have no issue of Mikhalkov taking an extra step in depicting the horror of war and the physical damage done to human bodies. War had never been pleasant.

Keep and open mind and watch this film. Brush aside its shortcomings. One can still find a decent film in BYTS2.