Ponderous doesn't equate with deep.

Rating: Null/10 (25 March 2001)

I guess the critical invocations of "Saving Pvt. Ryan" did a disservice to this film. I totally bought the first ten minutes, which was pretty powerful stuff, captured well the confusion and terror of raw recruits used as cannon fodder, and drove home the appalling cruelty of both sides on the Eastern front. But I felt the film went downhill fast from there. I couldn't accept a basic hook for the story: that the entire battle for Stalingrad--maybe the war itself--hinged on a mano-a-mano duel between two snipers. The acting seemed spotty to me. Ed Harris is always worth seeing, and was here, capturing a steely relentlesness under a polished facade. Bob Hoskins was good as well. But others fell short of that mark, however hard they worked at their roles. Maybe the writing failed them. Jude Law was earnest but there was a hollowness about the characterization, and the same could be said for Fiennes and Weisz, I felt. I did like Ron Perlman and SPOILER AHEAD FOR YOU WHO HAVEN;T SEEN THE FILM) regretted his quick demise--he was one of the more intriguing characters. (SPOILER ENDS) Annaud seems to work hard at giving his films a quality of depth that I usually don't find. This one, too, uses a slow pace and terminally ugly backdrops to create a feeling of meaningfulness that, in the absence of character depth and satisfying plot, is, finally. spurious. In comparison to great war movies like "Paths of Glory," "Grand Illusion," and, in large part, "Saving Private Ryan," this one is not anywhere near that class.