Rating: 
Summary: One of the best war movies of the last ten years
Review: EATG was in and out of movie theatres here within a week, so my first chance to see it was on DVD.
As a self-confessed WW II buff (for reasons that should be obvious from my byline), I found the movie to be about as historically accurate as they come, with an unusual attention to detail (from authentical tanks down to the rags wrapped around rifles to keep one's hands from freezing to the metal). The opening, depicting the Soviet leadership's attempt to get a grip on the desperate situation by callously force-feeding untrained recruits into the maul (and having them shot by political commissars when retreating for "Edification") is as
gripping as it is sadly historical.
The protagonist, Chief Master Sergeant Vassili Grigorievich Zaitsev (a.k.a. Vasily Zaitzeff, depending on the transliteration system used), was in real live the Red Army's most famous sniper, although not its top scorer. His "pupils" indeed included the Jewish girl Tania
Chernova, who became famous in her own right, and a love affair
did exist between the two. (...)
Cinematography does a great job of showing the grisliness and unglorious side of war in general and this type of urban warfare in particular, and the actors put in good to excellent performances. I am told that the ladies fall for Jude Law; I was greatly charmed by Rachel Weisz but have the excuse that she resembles my real-life spouse :-)
But the best performance I saw was that of Ed Harris, playing the antagonist, depicted in some historical accounts (and in the movie) as a German army major named Koenig or Koenigs (head of the sniper school at Zossen in former East Germany), and in other accounts as an SS-colonel named Thorvald. (...)The R-rating is justified: this is no movie for children, or even for faint-hearted adults. For accompanying reading, try David Robbins' "War of the rats" or Anthony Beevor's "Stalingrad".
Rating: 
Summary: Hollywood takes an overdue look at the Eastern Front
Review: After many major Hollywood epics about the war on the Western Front (THE LONGEST DAY, PATTON, A BRIDGE TOO FAR, BATTLE OF THE BULGE, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN), it is long overdue that ENEMY AT THE GATES, centered on the pivotal battle for Stalingrad, should play to audiences ... particularly American audiences. The core of the plot is the personal duel between two expert snipers, the Red Army's Vasily Zaitsev (Jude Law) and the German Wehrmacht major, Koenig (Ed Harris), the latter brought into the Stalingrad cauldron to kill the former before he totally destroys the morale of the German troops trying to capture the city. It's a cat and mouse confrontation depicted with startling realism, though, in this case, the mouse is just as deadly as the cat. The rest of the film is just window dressing, especially the sappy love triangle between Zaitsev, political commissar Danilov (Joseph Fiennes), and a female Red Army sniper, Tania, played by Rachel Weisz. The film, set among the rubble and destroyed factories of Stalin's city, is visually stunning. The performances of Law, Harris and Fiennes are excellent, as is that by Bob Hoskins, who plays Joe Stalin's political representative on the scene, Nikita Krushchev. My complaints center on the accents of the main characters, which don't sound Russian by any stretch of the imagination, the previously-mentioned and totally superfluous love story, and the fact that the Krushchev is given way too much screen time at the expense of the Russian general, Chuikov, who doesn't even appear, even though he was the Red Army's military commander whose gritty defense of the city ultimately prevailed. This story of the duel between Zaitsev and his German nemesis is based in fact, though a better telling of the tale is the work of book fiction, WAR OF THE RATS, by David Robbins. If you're interested in this footnote to the Stalingrad struggle, the book is a "must", and the film will serve as excellent visual reinforcement.
Rating:
Summary: Enemy at the Gates- A fine war film, despite some flaws
Review: Enemy at the Gates is a fine war film, despite a few critical flaws which could've made a bit better. Director Jean-Jacques Annuad creates an elaborate and perfect atmosphere for this film, which takes place during World War II. The film is based on a unique true story.
It's 1942, World War II rages on, the fate of the world is being decided in a city on the Volga River, Stalingrad. Jude Law plays Vasseli Zeitsev, a very skilled Russian sniper. Jospeh Fiennes plays his friend, and is a Russian journalist who writes stories of Vasseli's victories and makes him more known to the public. Ed Harris plays Major Konig, a German sniper who is sent to kill Vasseli and save Hilter from more humiliation. Rachel Weisz plays the love interest of Law's character, for there's also a little love story involved in this war epic. The film works better as a suspense thriller than a war film, but it indeed is great for its intensity. Of course Saving Private Ryan remains the best or one of the best war films still and probably will continue to be.
Enemy at the Gates performed decently at the box-office for some critics really did bash it. They said there more than enough inaccuracies especially with the accents, which I have to say is true, the Russians have British accents, while the Germans or atleast Ed Harris's character has an Ameerican accent.
Enemy at the Gates is rated R for Strong Graphic War Violence and Some Sexuality. The violence is reasonably bloody, after all it's a war film and deals with sharpshooters.
The violence includes battle sequences and substantial gun violence, most of which is bloody. There is hardly any profanity. As for the sexual content, there's an explict sex scence which was really quite gratuitous and some other sexual innuendo. No nudity.
Gates is good, but it still seems to be lacking and it certainly could've had some improvements to make it a great deal better.
Rating: 
Summary: Insultingly bad and contrived
Review: Enemy at the Gates ia a great book about the Staligrad campaign. However, it is a bad movie. The film is filled with inacuracies that misslead the audiance about what actually happened. It is also plagued by being anti-communist propaganda, rather than good story telling. Where they got it wrong.
1. Vasily Zeitzev arrived at Stalingrad as a fully trained sniper.
2. Tania Chernova was a partisan and later a sniper, not a translator. Let her be the woman she was not a week female, but rather an expert sniper in her own right. She personally killed 81 germans before being wounded.
3. Tania was Vasily's lover, but they did not get back together after the war, because both believed that the other was dead.
4. Ron Pearlman's character lived through the war.
5. Vasily shot Keonig without leaving his hiding place.
Danolov was wounded when he tried to point out Koenig's position to Vasily, not killed.
The Russians were not idiots, they knew how to fight and made the Germans bleed at Stalingrad.
5. The Stalingrad campaign involved millions of soldiers and did not hinge on the fate a duel between two.
There is a great story in the tale of this sniper duel. It did not need to be falsified to keep women in their place or to show that the Russians were fools... If you want a riviting story read the book.
If you want good history read the book.
Skip the movie. :(
Rating: 
Summary: An unsatisfactory war film.
Review: Based on surface look alone, Enemy at the Gates is an impressive production with excellent visuals and a high-caliber cast and crew. Unfortunately, despite the hefty pricetag and technical merit, the film is mostly a mediocre accomplishment, and really, almost all the main cast and crew are at fault. Gates does begin in a very promising fashion. After the flashback pre-credits opening scene, we're thrust into the mayhem of the battle of Stalingrad, and in this seven-minute setpiece, director Jean-Jacques Annaud captures the chaos, the terror, and the outright horror of the fighting, stumbling only when he decides to let James Horner's score drown out every other sound (why is it directors these days feel the need to employ this method?) (worse yet, Horner's score in this scene sounds far too similar to John Williams' work in Schindler's List). From there, the film narrows its focus to two central characters, the sniper Vassili Zaitsev (Jude Law) and his opponent, Major Konig (Ed Harris). The rest of the film is a game of cat-and-mouse, as well as a tacked on love story that occasionally plays in between the sniper sequences. As far as war films go, Enemy at the Gates fails to deliver. Once again, another film that seems to promise to show the graphic horrors and epic scale of the battle of Stalingrad merely uses it as a backdrop (the other film would be Stalingrad). True, the sniper hunts are fairly riveting in a visceral manner, but never truly engaging because you don't feel for the protagonist. This is mostly the script's fault, which doesn't give Jude Law the opportunity to develop into a full-fledged, three-dimensional character. All we really learn about this guy is his lack of self-confidence, and even though he might be scared, the suspense is confined to a minimum because the outcome of the situation is never in doubt. Ed Harris, unsurprisingly, fares much better as the villain of the picture. Actually, despite playing the obvious bad guy, he creates a rather complex character who isn't as unfeeling and inhumane as he may initially seem. Unfortunately, director Annaud must have been afraid we would have sympathized with him too much so he turns him into a typical monster by the end, definitely the worst move the film makes. The love story honestly isn't of much interest. Law and Rachel Weisz have zero romantic chemistry and every scene that focuses on these two is a complete bore. Joseph Fiennes is on hand to be the third wheel of this supposed love triangle, but nobody else in the film seems to want him around, so why bother? Gates is marred by all sorts of little problems. The editing and pacing is off; for instance, one scene features a Russian sniper briefly leaving his post, then the next, he's suddenly in German hands. We never see him get caught, we're just told so. The sudden move from one place to another occurs often among the characters; it's rather jarring and not necessarily believable considering the snipers that are lying in wait to pick off trespassers. The film never works as an anti-war stance, in spite of the grim tone and the bloody violence, it fails as a romance, and as a game of cat-and-mouse, you never feel the stakes to be as high as they should and you find yourself rooting for the villain because he feels more human and believable (for the majority of the running time, at least) than our so-called hero. For all the elements I listed above, you can find more effective films that employ them with more precision and entertainment value. Enemy at the Gates is really just a forgettable war film.
** 1/2 out of *****
Rating:
Summary: The most dangerous game . . .
Review: Based loosely on actual events, this gripping film depicts a war within a war: a deadly game of cat and mouse between two expert snipers in urban ruins, amidst the greater conflict of the German invasion of Russia during World War II. The main actors (Law and Harris) are superb, nailing each scene with stone-firm hands and steel-blue eyes. Supporting performances by Ron Perlman and the lovely Rachel Weisz are also well done. Joseph Fiennes is adequate, though (as in _Shakespeare in Love_) he comes across as "puppyish", as if he's trying too hard to play a good actor playing his character. The war footage is indeed stark and violent. The score is subtly wonderful, the themes lending emotion to the alternatively violent, tense and tender scenes. In short, this is a gripping, solid film, whose minor weaknesses are perhaps a touch of predictability and (initially) the fact that the Russians are all speaking with British accents. Not on par with Schindler's List as WW-II period movies go, but recommended nonetheless. Four stars.
Rating:
Summary: the long hard war
Review: It's amazing how you can see a full-production, serious Hollywood film about World War II and not have it be about pain, nationalism, classism, xenophobia, primitive regression, freedom, social control-you know, the things war is about-but instead have it just be about a guy getting laid, his friend's envy over the fact, and the near (naturally near) loss of his betrothed to circumstances beyond his control. WWII...American high school...is this a disturbing mix up, or is it just me? (I'm not sure of the reasons for the conflation, but I suspect it might be because audiences really don't want a film about complicated issues and that film makers, with deadlines in one pile and bills in another, know this. It's a well oiled war machine, the film industry. But now I conflate!) Jude Law plays super sniper and Soviet national hero Vassili Zaitsev and is amazing as always. Somehow I can loath a movie with Law in it and still like him and his character. In EATG, Zaitsev's relationships with others unfortunately become purely device driven: it's the stock Romantic Interest / Best Buddy / Arch Nemesis trio. Joseph Fiennes (Best Buddy) is Commisar Danilov, an erratic propaganda writer who becomes Vassili's biographer for the Soviet papers. As you'd half expect ahead of time, Danilov betrays his friend in the final act. But as if his motivations were never worth our time, Danilov then sacrifices his life so that Vassili can win his struggle with stone faced Ed Harris, who plays König (Arch Nemesis), a German Major sent by the furor to snipe the sniper. The subplot of Rachel Weisz as Tania Chernova (Romantic Interest), aside from a surprising, well acted public sex and probable deflowering scene, is so superficially presented it's hardly worth analysis. I don't know. When I see a war flick like this-one that follows a single individual around-I always feel like I'm watching a movie about the concept of luck, and how interesting a theme can luck really make, even in a war picture? So even though (and because) it's trite to tears, it's fitting that Fiennes' final lines-just before by far the most stylized "shot" of many bullets to the head in this film-argue there're basic flaws in the communist dream: "some will always be lucky...lucky in life, lucky in love." Wow. War really makes you think, doesn't it? It's impossible for me to give this movie any dramatic weight or credibility after a disappointing scene like that, even considering the (light) treatment of issues of intellectualism and war throughout: the refraining metaphor of the bullet to the brain; the underground library stocked with both Marx and Göethe; ever relevant questions of media, truth, and propaganda. (Most frustrating, the deconstructive fact that the obviously over embellished story is based on Soviet war literature to begin with makes the film makers seem oblivious to their own subject matter.) All this must have felt like representing the heavy tomes of 1940s Eurasian bloodshed over conquest and racism with a tangible moment for script writers Alain Godard and Jean-Jacques Annaud. But when the political struggle of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie gets cast as little more than a booty call, the effect only seems unintentionally comedic.
Rating: 
Summary: Has its Good and Bad Points
Review: Producers and screenwriters of historical films always like to twist the truth a bit to make this type of film more dramatic. True, there are times when totally accurate history is not entertaining, but dramatization at times takes the reality away from something that really happened. In Jean-Jacques Annaud's "Enemy at the Gates", once again, the largest war ever seen on Earth is the backdrop for a sniper duel between the German noble Major Koenig, and Hero of the Soviet Union, sniper Vasilli Zaitsev. Many people compare "Enemy" to "Saving Private Ryan". There is no comparison as "Saving Private Ryan" lets the realization of war sink in with D-Day and a plot still rooted in the war going around them. "Enemy", centered in Stalingrad, quickly turns from a battle for the city to a battle between two snipers. Jude Law stars as Vasilli, a boy from the Urals who is gratified as a hero by Commisar Danilov, played by the overrated Joseph Fiennes. Nikita Krushchev, played by Bob Hoskins, oversees all the operations while Tania Chernova (Rachael Wiesz) stays close to Vasilli as he fights Koenig, played by Ed Harris. The opening scene was interesting, crossing the river under fire from the Luftwaffe, but could have been less graphic. Whoever coordinated the blood spattering must have liked the neck, because we see many neck wounds, and as the boats cross, we see a boat full of blood. Isn't that a little cliched from "Saving Private Ryan"? The one thing that got me a little dissapointed is the lack of accents. Bob Hoskins seems to be the only one to attempt Russian, while the three lead actors are all British. You hear more of their home accent then you do Russian. And Ed Harris, as the respected actor he is, does not even show a glint of German. It was very sad to see professional actors not even have it down. Where was the dialect coach? As the movie progresses, there are moments of suspense, but nothing completely special. The movie does manage to convey the need for companionship and unity in those dark times, but in my opinion, "Enemy at the Gates" is not as special as a WWII film as everyone makes it out to be. The performances could have been much better, while the special effects are just right. Horner's score is the bright spot of the film, with a great suite repeated throughout.
Rating:
Summary: a very well-balanced film
Review: This is a movie that has a little something for everyone in it. There are moments of realist horror, but also moments of suspense, drama, intrigue, love, sex, humor, you name it. The movie starts off on a bad note, displaying a map of Europe with a Nazi presence gobbling it up complemented by a narrator's voice; something straight out of old propoganda films, but oh well, it only lasts a few seconds. Ed Harris does a great job as the German sniper, but the real star of this film should have been Bob Hoskins, whose colorful portrayal of Kruschev probably comes very close to the real man himself. Production and set design is excellent; the sequence involving the factory duel where the glass plays a prominent role simply didn't get the press it deserved. Also, there is a gorgeous musical theme at the end of the film. And I was going to refrain from mentioning this, but I can't help it: this film contains the most mature and tasteful sex scene I've seen in a long, long time. Guess you'll just have to get the movie to see what I mean!
Rating:
Summary: War was truly hell
Review: This is a gritty look at Stalingrad as best the wimpy, limp wristed liberals in the American public can stomach it. Russia was winning a war against Nazi aggression in eastern Europe long before America and England were anywhere but in Arab states who would adopt Hitler's philosophy of governmental murder after we departed.
The suffering, treachery and hellish life of a Russian soldier is well captured in this bleak and often depressing movie. The good guy fights for the bad guys, who are beating the montrously Satanic guys. Look if you dare. And thank a Russian later.
|
