Rating: 
Summary: Empty at the gates.
Review: Curiously unaffecting story involving the Battle of Stalingrad as a backdrop. In the forefront, there are two super-snipers gunning for each other: Vassily, a Russian serf marksman played by Jude Law, and a Nazi aristocrat played by Ed Harris. Apparently the filmmakers believe this plotline suffices as a symbol for the entire Battle (they are mistaken), and they assume such a plotline is inherently interesting (they are mistaken). The Battle of Stalingrad is a mind-boggingly complicated period during the War, and as such would suit a mini-series better than a 2 1/2-hour movie. In the meantime, the oversimplifications of *Enemy at the Gates* should probably insult a smart viewer's intelligence. Which is not to say that there's nothing worthwhile here: Bob Hoskins is funny as then-Party ...Nikita Khrushchev. The opening invasion, though less gut-wrenching than *Saving Private Ryan*'s examination of D-Day, is from a purely visual standpoint more stunning and comprehensive -- a truly great bit of moviemaking. Also, the shootouts between the two snipers are often staged brilliantly. Director Jean-Jacques Annaud clearly has a fine eye and feel for action. But shouldn't a movie about a subject as important as this be more than just another action picture featuring hot, young, marketable stars? Finally, Annaud might also have overcome his fondness for obscuring the photography with camera filters: the movie fairly swims in a blue-gray murk.
Rating: 
Summary: GREAT WAR MOVIE
Review: This movie is a great, suspense movie. The Moive has two snipers who are hunting eachother. If you know anything about snipers the one thing they fear the most is a another SNIPER. It takes place in WWII and has great actions sceens and GREAT affects in the movie. I would recommend this movie to anybody who likes war movies, or great action movies. This movie will keep you on your toes, and it also has one sumwhat of a love sceen in it!! The one thing i like it the detail in the movie, and how good the affects are, I watched this movie on a surround sound, and when the snipers took there shots it was like you were there with them as there spoters! THIS IS A GREAT MOVIE!!
Rating:
Summary: Another Angle
Review: This film will undoubtedly make you think. Perhaps if you have yet to see it, you're thinking "well jeez, this is a movie about a bunch of Russians and I'm supossed to be on THEIR side?" But believe me, you will be. As is known, soldiers of war are fighting the same battle no matter which country they happen to be from. A book keeper from London could be shooting at a journalist from Berlin and, not knowing, the two would still think the other as a life long enemy. This movie explains that...along with exceptional filming skills. Jude Law plays Vassili - just a soldier from Russia who happens to be a sniper to perfection. He is new to war, but is ready to fight for what he believes in. Even when events such as only every other soldier in a line obtaining a rifle while the other odd men get the bullits and are told "WHEN the soldier with the rifle dies, pick it up and continue fighting." He eventually meets up with journalist Danilov (Shakespere in Love) who builds up Vassili into a Russian hero in order to provide hope to the people of their country. Along the way, they meet up with Tania (The Mummy) and both fall in love with her, yet it seems she falls hardest for Vassili. All thw while, Nazi Sniper (Ed Harris) is given orders to stop this "hero" from Russia in order for them to win the war. He uses the likes of a child to get to him and it'll make you sick enough to want to kill Ed Harris, despite the amazing man he is in real life - that's how good he plays this character. All in all, this movie is overwhelming over-look in Hollywood and should most definitely be given its recognition at the Oscars next year. War movie fans - this one is for you.
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent, but not great, WWII film
Review: I just came from viewing this movie at the theatre last night. On the plus side, the director did an excellent job of capturing the essence of the hell on Earth that was Stalingrad. The acting, for the most part, is very good (although I thought Ed Harris was a little wooden as the German marksman Maj. Konig), and the special effects were outstanding. Having read the book before seeing the movie, I was impressed by how realistic the sets were, even if, to make the story more interesting, some liberty was taken with the historical facts, a la "Braveheart". (For example, the young informant Sasha is hung by Maj. Konig in the movie when, in reality, the boy was hung by the Germans near the end of the battle, months after Konig's death. Also, in reality, Zaitzev's love interest, Tanya, was herself an accomplished sniper, killing over 70 Germans.) On the downside, the script incorporates a wholly non-essential "Love triangle" that, I thought, detracted from the film and made it somewhat slow in places, much like "Pearl Harbor". But all in all, "Enemy At The Gates" is a gripping, well-made film about a pivotal moment in history. I plan to add it to my DVD collection as soon as it is available.
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie
Review: A great movie, not without it's faults, but they are minor and don't detract from the overall experience of the film. Awesome action, cool battle scenes, heads getting blown off, this is cool at it's best. I am buying his fo sho.
Rating:
Summary: Gripping
Review: Fantastic movie. Gripping from beggining to end!!
Rating: 
Summary: Could have been so much better.
Review: Some historical details were spot-on. Such as the waves of untrained troops (cannon fodder) being rushed to the front with either ammo or a rifle, but not both. The shoooting (execution) of retreating soldiers happenned too. And that love story got in the way. The single biggest reason I will NEVER watch this again is the abrupt and totally false ending that had Nothing at all to do with the truth! I would have left then but the credits were rolling.. I gave this 3 stars for the set, uniforms, equipment and Ed Harris -o0o-
Rating:
Summary: good WW 2 Flick
Review: the movie starts alittle slow ,and the pace begins to pick up. you are never sure until the end who is going to be killed.
Rating:
Summary: Hollywood takes on Stalingrad in a wrong direction
Review: Finally, we have a Hollywood produced film with a story based on a major battle on the Eastern Front of WWII. However, please note that this is a film based on fiction only. Though Vasily Zaitsev was a real person and a formidable Russian sniper at Stalingrad, there is no existing documentary proof that any German sniper was specially assigned and sent from Berlin to annihilate him (you may call that "legendary" German sniper Wehrmacht Major Konig or Konings or SS Colonel Thorwald or whatever name he was given) and that the duel between him and that German specialist sniper had ever taken place. That story behind the duel was based entirely on Soviet propaganda which glorified the superhuman prowess of the Red Army. The battle of Stalingrad was a catastrophe for the Germans caused by Hitler's blunder. However, it was not the turning point of WWII in Europe as such. The true turning point was the battle of Moscow after which it was no longer militarily possible for Germany to defeat the Soviet Union and the only chance of winning the war for Germany had been thrown away. How could or would you expect the Soviet Union or Stalin "to save the world" by holding on at Stalingrad and defeating the Germans there when the Soviet Union was as evil an empire as the Third Reich? Stalin was no better if not much worse than Hitler in the treatment of his own citizens and his ambition to propagate Communism throughout the world. (Please refer to the famine in Ukraine in the 1930s, the Nazi Soviet Pact in 1939, the Soviet annexation of the 3 Baltic states and the invasion of Finland in 1940). The film was well made with great special effects and the scene of the transferring of troops across the Volga river was spectacular. The setting of the film resembled very much the true battlefield of Stalingrad. That was very impressive. However, more emphasis should have been placed on the battlefield on a grand scale and the fighting spirits and sufferings of soldiers of both sides instead of the duel itself. Snipers per sec do not and cannot win a war. The ordinary foot soldiers should deserve the credit. That is particular true for the battle of Stalingrad.
Rating:
Summary: The Enemy at this Gate is "Hollywood"
Review: The opening battle scene is very well done and throughout the movie there are some very interesting scenes but, as with so many movies, its potential was not realized to make the movie more inviting to as wide an audience base as possible. There was too much emphasis placed on the "love interest" part of the story and not enough on the actual battle itself. The duel between the snipers was good but because we have to sit through all the "love interest" parts the duel becomes overly long and towards the end you just want one of them to get shot so it will be over. Finally, when we do get to the climax of the duel it is heavily dipped in Hollywood instead of ending it the way it is written in the histories. As with so many war movies the director, even if the intention is to honor those who fought and died, seem to be saying,"Thanks for all your sacrifice, but wouldn't it have been better and more exciting if it had happened this way?"
|
