WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

SimonJack "Days of Glory" is a story about a Russian resistance group on the Eastern Front in World War II. This was one of a few pro-Soviet films Hollywood made during the war. All were propaganda films to reassure Americans of the role Russia was playing in helping defeat Nazi Germany. But, with very little true information at that time about the Russian resistance and military battles, Hollywood could only romanticize the Russians' roles and characters. And, it did so much as it did with some of the movies it made about our own fighting and heroes. The acting here is OK, and the movie is fair. It's a simple plot that looks at what might be routine days in a small resistance group hideout. Of course, it throws in the usual Hollywood romance. It seems that most Hollywood studios made a film to show and build support for the Soviet Union as an ally in the war. The Hollywood nod to the Russians began in May 1943, with a Warner Brothers' film, "Mission to Moscow." Others that followed were "The North Star" in 1943 by RKO, "Three Russian Girls" in 1943 by United Artists, "The Boy from Stalingrad" in 1943 by Columbia, "The Song of Russia" in 1944 by MGM, and "Counter-Attack" in 1945 by Columbia. Only Universal and 20th Century Fox seem not to have done a film about our Soviet ally. None of these films stand out or show much of the reality of the Russian efforts in WWII. Not until 2001 in "Enemy at the Gates," do we have an American film that shows some of the horror of the war in Russia, and the sacrifices of the Russian people. Since the fall of the Soviet Union other very good Russian and eastern European films have been made about the war on the Eastern Front.What I find curious about "Days of Glory," is its June 16, 1944 release date. This was less than a year before the end of the war in Europe. The movie covers a time of the resistance forces up until the major Soviet counter-attack. But that began after the Soviet defeat of the Germans in the Battle of Stalingrad in February 1943 – almost a year and a half earlier. And, the release of this film came 10 days after D-Day and the Allied landings in Normandy. Why would it be so necessary or helpful at this late date to build American support for Russia in the war? Indeed, was it wise to do any more trumpeting of the Russians with what we already knew then about the Soviet Union – unless there were some other reasons?It's true that the American intelligence effort was relatively new and not yet very well-grounded at the time. But, the American and other western news media were very aggressive and thorough in their reporting of the war as they had been for several years before the war. So, here we have the U.S. government and Hollywood interested in building up the image of the Soviet Union as our ally in fighting the Germans – not before the war, but well into it when the Allies in the West were attacking on all fronts. One must wonder how much the U.S. and Hollywood knew about the atrocities of Joseph Stalin who had been in power for more than a decade by this time. He had ordered the Great Purge in 1936 to 1938. He had ordered the murder and imprisonment of half a million of his own leaders. He had invaded Finland in 1939 and Poland with Germany in 1940. He had annexed the Balkan states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia in 1940. All of these things had been reported, and yet the U.S. and Hollywood were still putting out propaganda films in support of Russia late in the war.

Alex da Silva Vladimir (Gregory Peck) leads a group of guerrillas against the Nazi invaders in the forests of Russia. His small group is waiting for the order to attack. It finally comes with the message "The snow will fall".The film is well acted with tense moments, eg, when the German soldier makes his escape with only Nina (Tamara Toumanova) in the hideout to defend herself alone against him. The group dynamics are well portrayed within this troupe of rebels and there is a very human element to the story. There are poignant scenes including Nina's silence when Mitya (Glenn Vernon) is taken by the Germans and the film has a memorable ending. It's patriotic but it's still a good film.

theasp The first and one of the best war movies I ever saw. Was it pro-Russian propaganda? Yes. Was it fair and accurate? Yes. Was Russia our ally in World War II? Yes. It was also our ally during the American Civil War and World War I. Without Russia we could not have won World War II.The Soviet regime was evil but Russia is one of America's oldest and most effective allies in good times. I have attended post Cold War Conferences in which we have tried to heap our ills on the Russians while praising fair weather friends like Britain, Turkey and Israel. The latter two have never fought on our side but our recipients of much of our aid. Britain has fought for and against us but most of the third world wars we fought were because British colonialism created the conditions for those wars. This is not necessarily about the movie "Days of Glory" but it should remind people that we need to know more about our history. The movie does that very well.

davidholmesfr The Russian German war was the greatest battle ever fought and strangely has been ignored by Hollywood. This film, made when the Russians had yet to reach Berlin, was probably a propaganda piece of its time and suffers from some sugary Hollywood treatment. The appearance of a Moscow ballet dancer, and her inevitable love affair with the local guerilla leader, glamourises what was, in reality, a dirty hard war. Whilst we can respect this well-directed movie we can also ask why Hollywood has yet to record its tribute to the amazing determination of the Russian people who were not particularly well led yet overcame such enormous odds. Never mind "Saving Private Ryan" - what about Ivan's story, Mr Spielberg? The Cold War is over, the archives are open, the film is there to be made!