Rating: 
Summary: KRIEG: Ahnung und Wissen
Review: Forgotten history is usual the most interesting. 'Enemy at the Gate' catches a rare glimpse of this forgotten history. Captured is part of the tremendous suffering due to war during the battle of Stalingrad. A reminder, that the 20th Century is by far the bloodiest in history.
The characters are rich and full. However the movie's greatest appeal is stepping into the mind of a sniper. The sniper, a solider drunk with his sniper rifle, is also a 20th centuries invention. This makes the film a good but solemn and even at times gruesome watch. A message of tremendous suffering is a bitter pill. However, this gruesomeness ends up being the movie's biggest downside. Excessive killing towards the end, damps the overall quality of the story.
Enjoy 'Enemy at the Gate' and if your interest is sparked, read about history. Educate yourself about the centuries' wars. Grasp for the wisdom, which once collectively gained, may prevent the 21 century being even more bloodier.
Rating: 
Summary: Confused war-based thriller and love story
Review: It is difficult to know exactly what the producers of this film intended it to be. Is this portrayal of the dreadful stalemate that was the battle for Stalingrad meant to demonstrate that the communist dictatorship of Stalin was every bit as evil as the fascist dictatorship of Hitler, not least in its total disregard for the value of human life? Is it a gritty thriller about the individual bravery and personal cunning of two evenly matched national heroes, each striving for a symbolic victory over their enemy? Is it a tragedy centred on the impossible love triangle involving a young woman of the Russian intelligentsia, a naive shepherd boy from the Urals and his new-found friend, a political officer within the Red Army? Is it merely another large-budget gore-fest, intended to leave one awe-struck at modern graphic technology? Sadly - I suspect through trying to be all of the above to some degree - "Enemy at the Gates" fails to come across as anything of any real note.Certainly, the special effects are gut-churningly realistic. Unfortunately, for me, they sum up one of this film's great failings: they are so detailed and overblown that it is impossible to take them in. And while this may go some way towards conveying the terrifying and bewildering conditions in which warfare is generally conducted, it also goes a long way towards losing the focus of the audience's attention at crucial stages of the drama. As a result, the film's message, if indeed it has one, becomes lost amongst the myriad messages screaming for our attention. We stop involving ourselves in the drama and start instead almost to admire it as spectacle, which although sickening is never what it really should be - frightening and involving. (For that, you need to watch "Band of Brothers".) The same complaints are true of the flow of the film as a whole. Of the story's numerous sub-plots - Vassili's childhood circumstances; König's and Koulikov's personal backgrounds; Sacha's activities in the enemy's camp; Tania's vacillation between the Sniper Corps and a safe intelligence job; or even, indeed, Danilov's feelings for Tania - none are really explored to any degree. Few are ever explained or even, in fact, allowed to play out effectively. It is thus hard to become absorbed in any of the film's various elements for long. The film is worth watching for some powerful performances by the principals - especially Bob Hoskins in the role of Nikita Khrushchev - and, if you need that sort of thing, for its graphic portrayals of man's inhumanity to man. Unfortunately, though, the film's often-cumbersome dialogue, coupled with rather directionless editing, makes for an overly long, somewhat confusing and ultimately unsatisfying drama. This DVD production is nothing very special, either. The anamorphic widescreen picture quality is superb, of course. Also included is almost 40 minutes of background material, as well as a good 10 minutes-worth of out-takes. Sadly, though, there is no way to view the movie with the out-takes reinserted at the appropriate places, which is a great shame, given that the decision to cut these scenes was obviously taken at a late post-production stage and they are in no way unfinished. Although their reinstatement would make the film even longer, I can't help feeling that this would, in fact, help illuminate other scenes and make sense of some of the action. It would at least be nice to have the opportunity to try it that way. One way and another, then, I have to say that this is an altogether disappointing production.
Rating:
Summary: Law and Harris inc.
Review: (...) It's hard to tell what you're going to get when you find yourself watching a Jean-Jacques Annaud film. Some of his output deserves instant classic status; some should never have seen the light of day. Enemy at the Gates balances on the thin line between the two, but does eventually manage to fall on the side of the former. Annaud teams up with Alain Godard (as in most of his truly fine efforts) to offer up a screenplay about two snipers, Vassili Zaitsev (Jude Law) and Major Konig (Ed Harris) during the 1942/43 siege of Stalingrad. The two are backed by a solid cast of minor characters, including the off-kilter-genius casting of Bob Hoskins as Krushchev. And while Annaud and Godard use the story of Zaitsev to examine the pros and cons of propaganda, they thankfully never lose focus on the real story-- two guys trying to kill each other while a war rages around them. It doesn't sound all that interesting when stripped down, and there are certainly a few places where the film drags, but overall it works much better than one would expect it to. Jude Law is, as always, a pleasure to watch onscreen, and Ed Harris gives one of his better performances (though he can't seem to decide if he's supposed to be speaking in a German accent or not). Worth a rental. *** 1/2
Rating: 
Summary: Chickflick alert
Review: Judging from the trailer, I thought this was going to be another film in the mould of Saving Private Ryan, except with the action taking place on the eastern front in Stalingrad. I should have known better. With heart-throb duo, Jude Law and Joseph Fiennes heading up the cast with their dreamy looks, Enemy at the Gates is not really war movie at all but a far-fetched, wafer-thin romantic "chickflick" with a few battle scenes thrown in to provide the historical setting. They shouldn't have bothered. I was bitterly disappointed. It starts promisingly enough but after about half an hour leaves you fumbling for the vom bucket. I hope Pearl Harbour isn't as bad as this, which is the kind of thing that makes you want to watch the entire Sam Pekinpah back-catalogue in one sitting.
Rating: 
Summary: Alarming wartime enactment
Review: Enemy at the Gates contained some of the most authentic and horrific wartime footage since Spielberg's masterpiece, "Saving Private Ryan". The attack by Nazi fighter planes on Russian soldiers crossing the Volga river by boat was particularly disturbing in it's effectiveness. The wartime settings depicting war time Stalingrad was first rate. The story revolves around the pitting of the top Nazi sniper, played by Ed Harris against the propagandized top Soviet sniper played by Jude Law. The battle of wits between the 2 is played out very nicely. There is also a love triangle played out between Law, Soviet political officer Joseph Fiennes (excellent as usual) and Soviet soldier Rachel Weisz. This proves to be too syrupy for my own taste. As is usual with contemporary films, this one runs about 20 minutes too long. Incidently, Bob Hoskins is chillingly effective as Nikita Khruschev.
Rating: 
Summary: Hokey, Hokey, Hokey
Review: I had heard fair-to-good opinions from non-military minded people that had seen this movie. Everyone (5 or 6 people) thought the love-story aspect really detracted from the movie. When I saw it I thought it was the Hokiest movie I have seen in years. There are maybe 15 minutes (out of a 2 hour movie) of good sniper action and suspense. The two snipers were well cast and did fine jobs of acting. The young commissar did a credable job, but the girl soldier/translator was terrible (though I loved her in The Mummy). Worst of all was the Hokey love story that competed with(and often overshadowed) the military story line. Some of the graphics, especially some of the air attacks, were just hilarious, they looked like something in a cartoon. There were a lot of little historical inaccuracies that could be overlooked easily enough. Wartime footage shows the sun actually shining some during the Stalingrad campaign, though most of the action was set at night. There are advantages to daytime sniping, and that would have helped the overall drearyness of the movie. Even though I really liked the Russian sniper, the movie leads one to favor the German sniper and his side in general. I rented it, watched it three times, and am glad I didn't buy it.
Rating:
Summary: Different movie war
Review: This film is different to other in the same class,because the environment in unique, the actors has mystic, the photographs are amazing and the history give us surprise and emotion every minute. This DVd have a very good "behind de scene", because show the real scenario (Germany and Poland) where the film was made. The interviews with the actor is good, because this movie has GOOD actors, real actors. I enjoyment in cinema, and now i enjoy in my house.
Rating:
Summary: Great War Movie
Review: To make this short and sweet I thought that Enemy at the Gates was a great war flic. it had great acting and great cinematography. i enjoyed every second of it and i recommend it to just about everybody
Rating:
Summary: The romance is half-baked, but the movie sizzles
Review: I had a fairly good idea of what to expect when I went to see 'Enemy at the Gates', and the movie fulfilled my expectations amply - there was cold, blood and sweat, and some nice acting. There were also a few effective quips (like Khruschev's (Bob Hoskins) 'advice' to a failed commander of Soviet forces at Stalingrad), as well as some preposterously high-minded balderdash straight out of the Inept Writer's Handbook on Historical Speech (take for example the philosophical voice-over opening the film, which is straight out of the mouth of an illiterate shepherd and reeks of the 'leopard-with-springs' monologue from 'Gallipoli'). However, there were also some less desirable elements, the most prominent being the forced, obligatory love triangle between super-sharpshooter Vasily (Jude Law), political animal Danilov (Joseph Fiennes) and lady sharpshooter Tanya (Rachel Weisz). I kept hoping we would get past this customary plot hindrance and get on with the war once the equally obligatory love scene - which caused more titters than groans in the audience - was over, but noooo! Then we must also have a bonding scene, where the lovers keep their clothes on but reveal their souls or something along these lines. At least director Jean-Jacques Annaud had enough sense to cut this wholly inappropriate display with a chilling scene that amply made up for the emotional desert created by two people drawn together by threat of imminent death rather than anything else. Don't get me wrong - the triangle-subplot aside, this was a thoroughly engrossing war spectacle, the battle sequence opening it was the most breathtaking, fascinating scene since the swordfight on top of a bamboo forest in 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon', and the actors did a fine job with what they were given, which is not a whole lot. It seems to be a trademark of war movies to display characters as parts of the bigger scheme rather than actual people. Nevertheless, Jude Law and Joseph Fiennes (who very successfully plays agains type) develop a tangible, complex relationship as two disparate men who learn to care about each other. As I was sitting at the cinema, a thought passed my mind that would probably disrupt the whole canon of the war-movie making: Why couldn't we just lose the girl and have a nice love story between the two men? At least one begins to care for them, which is more than I can say for Weisz, whose limited acting range comes down to a girl-next-door smile and an over-exaggerated display of physical pleasure. Bob Hoskins lends (gruesome) comic relief as the determined Khruschev, Ed Harris is cool and sinister as Vasily's German nemesis, Major Koning, and young Gabriel Marshall-Thomas is both endearing and convincing as a young Russian boy who takes on the risky role of undercover counterintelligence agent. All in all, 'Enemy at the Gates' works fine in the visual department and manages to convey the emotional conflict in most of its characters, but when it comes to 'intimate relations', it fails miserably on the army blanket where it succeeds on the battlefield.
Rating:
Summary: Very under rated
Review: I belive this is one of the few war movies I actually enjoyed. Everyone is complaining that it had to much of a love story, but considering the plot is about a love story, that is kinda fitting. Sure, it isn't as action packed as Saving Private Ryan, but it is definately an enjoyable film in it's own right. It's beautifully directed, I mean the visual style of the whole film is awe inspiring. I like the french-style directing used, reminicent of Luc Besson, although he is still the best French director. The acting is superb, even if they do have English accents, who cares? This is less of an all out war film than Private ryan, but I enjoyed it's subdued, almost mellow pace. The action scenes between the snipers are cleverly done and quite hair raising. I reccomend this to anyone who enjoys movies like Shakepeare in Love, and war aficianados may enjoy it as well.
|
