The Siege of Leningrad 1941-1944

Prit Buttar, writes about ww2 Hitler and Stalin battles. Russia is at that time pastoral, so roads and rail roads are the main military transportation. Hitler has no idea how large Stalin's army is. Nepolian's weather problems, had not changed. Leningrad was at the very end of the supply channel. Prit Buttar writes a good history. The Russian village names are tough. He writes about different battles all across ww2 Russia. I have 5 of his books, I was interested what happened. Read more

This video covers the invasion of the German North Army Group into Russia, their siege of Leningrad, and their retreat. I thought it was well written, though the beginning was curiously abrupt in its transition between topics, as if it were not well edited or something. But this is a solid documentary, and I recommend it. Fans of the Battlefield series (among whom I count myself) will not be disappointed! An earlier reviewer, "mooch" from Norway, wrote a lengthy review claiming that the documentary sympathizes with the Nazi invaders. Having now seen the documentary myself, I don't see any ground for his claim. The video is about a horrible episode in a horrible war, and it focuses on the military side of the story without neglecting the awful suffering of the civilian inhabitants of Leningrad. At one point it describes the ongoing psychological effects on Leningrad's children, and it is just heart-breaking. It is true that it describes the suffering of the German soldiers around Leningrad, but this is required if one is to explain why and how the German army failed to capture Leningrad. The suffering of the German troops, the casualties caused by the Russian weather, and the Northern Army Group's relative neglect by the German High Command are all cited as factors in the failure of the siege. (There are more factors, too: I recommend this video for its analysis of the campaign.) Hitler's intent to starve Leningrad into submission was one of a lot of terrible things that guy did to a lot of people. The horror of starvation is brought home in the video, and the inhumanity of Hitler's intent is pretty well matched by the inhumanity of the Russian regime, both at the top levels and within starving Leningrad. There were no good guys in the war between Hitler and Stalin. Read more

I learned a lot about the Russian response to the German invasion. How the Russian's set time delayed booby-traps to go off long after the Russians had "abandoned" a house and the German commanders moved in, and were blown up. I also learned about the extreme difficulties of the Russians and the Germans in the winters. I think this Battlefield series is better than the Battlefield series of decades ago. I think there is more historical accuracy now. The narrator is still the same as the old Battlefield series, which is very good. Read more

i think this is not as good as other battleground series..but definitely better than most on offer. i rate it a B + Read more

This is a highly biased film. The poor Germans suffered from hunger and cold. AW! 1.25 million Leningraders died of starvation. If you showed this film in Germany you would be arrested for pro Nazi propaganda. Read more

This is a travesty of a documentary. It shines through - like glass - that the narrator obviously sympathize with the Nazi invaders/murderers. First: This is not, repeat: NOT! a documentary of the besieged city of Leningrad, and the horrors inflicted on its civilians. If that's what you're after, it's not here. Second: Don't let the 'BATTLEFIELD'-series-tag fool you to believe that military tactics, strategy or front line operations is being scrutinized here, because there is simply no mentioning whatsoever of German precision-bombing of Leningrad's food supplies, power stations or (children's) hospitals. And because this is a 'documentary' that almost solely focuses on the oh-so poor tortured German soldiers that was so-led-astray, it wouldn't benefit the Nazi-supporting producers (Personal message to those; You've been made!) of this 'documentary' to mention such compromising things. The narrator pathetically tries to suggest that the Wehrmacht in the end was left no alternative but to siege Leningrad instead of occupying it, though in reality it is beyond well-documented that besiegeing and utter starvation of the city - and eradication of its people - was in fact carefully planned by the German High-Command, and executed as such. (And I do think you knew that, Piggott-Smith. Insignificant details easily missed, perhaps?). A surrender of the city was never to be accepted. By the Germans, that is. As mentioned above, there was absolutely no mentioning WHATSOEVER that the Nazis intended to and succeeded in destroying the city's food supplies, in order to accelerate the cowardly and murderous annihilation-process of the city's inhabitants. Oh no, it was more important to notify the viewer that the people of Estonia and Latvia welcomed the Nazi invaders as liberators (!), and simply ignore the fact that that was soon to change. Furthermore, as implied above, the narrator tries to picture the Nazi soldiers as victims. Yes, you read correctly, this is no joke, mind you! If you don't know history forehand, you'll get the impression that the Nazi occupiers were victims. Of what? Circumstances? Hitler? Victims of a defensive assault from the Soviet people? The harsh russian winter that no-one in Germany knew would come? One can only wonder what the producers had in mind... A Russian civilian is quoted as saying "we had to choose between two dictators. We chose the one who spoke Russian". (This is still no joke, dear reader). Where else but here would one find such comment? HINT: It has never been said. Not by any other than the narrator himself. Testament to that, is that the Soviet people at that time, much due to massive and successful propaganda, didn't see Stalin as a dictator at all. (HERE'S A FACTUAL AND WELL-DOCUMENTED QUOTE; "If only Comrade Stalin knew what was going on here..." people frequently said about their 'misled' leader, when the Soviet authorities failed to defend and rescue Leningrad, and 'lied' to Stalin about it). CHALLENGE: Does anyone in their right minds -or anybody at all, for that matter!- truly believe that during the siege of Leningrad it would benefit the simple-minded Hitler if he could speak more than one language? If one fails to see the biased history lesson (Nazi propaganda?) given here, one is either 1) ignorant, or 2) a Nazi-sympathizer. Both conditions, sadly, are perfectly legal. To make matters worse, towards the end of the film, we're actually supposed to feel sorry for the defeated german soldiers, not the brave people of Leningrad or the Soviet Red Army. I am truly downright offended beyond my wildest dreams by this crap-o-rama. How dare they?! Final suggestion; Avoid this crap at all costs, read a book, say, Michael Jones's 'Leningrad: State of Siege', then you may take a look at this film wherever you can find it (but don't pay for it!). Believe me, it will be as if this DVD never was anything else than what it truly is; A cruel joke. Thank you for reading! Read more