Rating: 
Summary: Pace of Film is Destroyed
Review: This could have been an excellent film. It should have focused entirely on the cat and mouse tactics employed by the German Major Konig (Ed Harris) and Soviet Vassily Zaitzev (Jude Law), both snipers trying to bring the other out into the open. However, the film constantly shifts focus between the Soviet propaganda officer (Joseph Fiennes) and female Soviet soldier (Rachel Weisz) in a ridiculous love triangle. This totally destroys the pace of the film and detracts from its main subject. By the time of the denouement there is no emotion felt. The characters, the two protagonists, are never given any real depth to lend meaning to their actions and motivations. The only emotion felt, is delivered by James Horner's score during the scenes when the two men actually do confront each other. This film is an example of a lost opportunity.
Rating: 
Summary: A communist hero????????
Review: This is a well acted movie with Jude Law and Ed Harris. The odd thing is that how many movies protray a nonamerican hero...let a lone a communist hero. This movie tells the stroy of Vassily Zaitzev(Jude Law) amd how his keeps on snipering many Nazi's but German Major Konig (Ed Haris)is sent to kill Vassily. Great movie a must own.
Rating: 
Summary: Nothing Special
Review: The movie wasn't really what I thought it would be, because it makes the two main characters, Zeitsev and Koenigs, have a personal vendetta that took the focus off what actually happened. The film didn't show how the duel was affecting other people, and it didn't show how Zeitsev represented the Allies and Koenigs represented the Nazis. To show how the situation really happened, the director needed to add these things to show people how much the victory of their side's sniper mattered to them. After Zeitsev killed Koenigs, the Allies showed that they werent going to give up, and ultimately won the Battle of Stalingrad. I also think that at the end when Koenigs was killed at close range took away from the fact that they were both expert snipers, and Zeitsev had shown that he could beat the enemy in the area they thought they had the least trouble in.
Rating: 
Summary: A great movie about the most terrible battle of all times
Review: When I read "Enemy at the Gates" in 1982 I though about the wonderful thing that would be to see a movie about the battle of Stalingrad which I have been thoroughly studying for more than a decade. A pleasant surprise came with "Enemy at the Gates" directed by the French director Jean-Jacques Annaud. Even though I was a bit disappointed because of the single perspective of the movie (the movie only focuses in the duel between a German officer former hunter from the Black Forest and a Russian -Siberian- sniper). Conversely Craig's book tells many terrible - however fascinating- personal stories from Russians, Italians and Germans survivors of the battle who were still alive at the time of its first edition (the book was written in the early sixties after five years of research). I would have liked to see these personal accounts recreated in the movie.My critic also goes in a similar way to that I made to "Saving Private Ryan". With the exception of the time devoted to Ed Harris -the german sniper- this is more or less a one-sided view of the battle and here Annaud losses a great opportunity. Anyway this is a film that I strongly recommend not only to those who like me have beed interested in the battle of Stalingrad during a life but specially to the young people. They must know about this madness and realize that without two dictators (Hitler and Stalin), this tragedy would never happened.
Rating:
Summary: Enemy at the gates a great movie
Review: Enemy at the gates is a great movie that was really done and i cant wait til it comes to dvd cause its one that i will definitely buy.bill from international falls,mn
Rating:
Summary: Non-stop tension & suspense, and gritty battle atmosphere!!!
Review: Here is an aspect of WWII that I have never seen portrayed before. This movie really does a great job of capturing the confusion and futility felt by the Russian foot soldiers, who were likely to meet their deaths within minutes of being yanked off the train at the Battle for Stalingrad, (which is the turning point in WWII, after which the Nazis would continue to retreat until their defeat, two years later). This film shows the inhuman callousness of Stalin, who runs his ill-trained army of forced-recruits by pushing them into battle at gunpoint; fight or be shot by your own countrymen, NOW! This movie really gives the feeling of being there, in the rubble and dank ruins, with no safe place to survive. This film focuses on a tiny portion of the 1973 book of the same title, "Enemy at the Gates," by William Craig; over a competition between a German sniper legend and a Russian sniper war hero. A weak element of this film is the Clint Eastwood style of impossible shooting skill displayed; but from reading the book, they actually were this accurate and deadly in real life, just not as quick on the draw. They would actually wait hours for the single deadly shot. So believe it or not, (and only the most hardcore WWII buffs will not), this film is based on true characters and events that really did happen! Another weak aspect is the gratuitous love scene, but this also is based on the true life love affair of these two Russian soldiers, who really did fight and fall in love at the Battle for Stalingrad! Despite its imperfections, there is much to find enthralling. Well, golly, Jude Law is perfectly cast as the likeable, humble, yet deadly sniper whose published exploits raise the morale of the Soviet army. He would go on to 242 confirmed kills, from this one man, a true story! The female lead, played by Rachel Weisz, is charming and beautiful, in a battlefield sort of way. Their relationship is the microcosm that emotionally hooks the audience to the weight and severity of the horrible violence all around. The audience can cheer for these two during love and war. Ed Harris is terrific as a stone cold, career sniper, villain. This movie has inspired me to become very interested in researching more about WWII and the Battle of Stalingrad, and it is the most entertaining film that I have seen in quite some time! I'm hooked on it!
Rating:
Summary: Some theatrical licence taken, but still worth getting.
Review: Although the movie appears to take a fair amount of theatrical licence with the story line, it still manages to capture much of the essance of the battle of Stalingrad. Besides there aren't 2 books out there that agree on a lot of the details either so who knows......... I would have liked to have seen the ending of the sniper battle done a little more historically and the love triangle plot line detracted more than added to the story but over all it is a great movie. The other thing going for this movie is that it helps to show the American audience that there was more to WWII than the US vs Ger. or the US vs Japan. If you like war movies, or action movies, or suspense movies, You will not go wrong buying this movie.
Rating:
Summary: overall a great movie
Review: About a year ago I had to do a school project on a book of my choosing, and I read the book "Enemy at the Gates", about the battle of Stalingrad from 1942 to 1943. I found this book to be enthralling and would have rated it 5 out of 5. I was absolutely thrilled to find out that it was being made into a movie, but from the beginning I knew there would be trouble. First of all, the story: Enemy at the Gates (the book) is about the battle of Stalingrad during the winter of 1942-43 when Adolf Hitler turned his attention toward the city of Stalingrad in the Caucasus on the southern steppes of Russia. The war between Russia and Germany by this time had lasted for 1 year. Although the city of Stalingrad held no strategic importance, if Joseph Stalin lost the city which held his name, he, along with the rest of Russia, would be devastated. Adolf Hitler assigned General Paulus' 6th army to take the city, and in August of 1942 the 6th army attacked. By October they had cleared the whole city, save the Northern factory district, off all resistance. It seemed the battle was over, all the Germans had to do was clear that district and the day was theirs. But the Northern Factory District was on the West bank of the Volga river, across that river there were no Germans, only Russians, and so the Russians ferried across entire armies straight into battle. Autumn wore on into Winter, the thing the Germans had learned to dread from the appalling losses at the battle for Moscow in the winter of 1941. German equipment wasnt meant to take the brutal cold of "General Winter", engines froze up, guns jammed, men died. On the other hand, the Russian tanks were designed to operate in sub-zero conditions, Red Army soldiers were equpped with Winter clothing. The tide turned. Slowly the Russians pushed out of the factory district and forced the Germans back. Russian armies reach around and encircle the 6th army on the steppe by early December 1942. On Christmas day the Russian bear attacks the beleaguered men of the 6th army, by late January 1943 the 6th army is virtually destroyed, in early February Field Marshal Paulus and his staff surrender, the battle is over. The difference between the book and the movie is that the book focuses on the entire battle, while the movies focus is on the duel between the two top snipers, the Russian Vassili Zaitsev and the German Major Koenig. This angered me slightly because there were so many classic movie shots which could have been achieved in the book. I also noticed two mistakes in the movie. First of all, Major Koenig wasn't killed in the open, he was shot while still under the scrap metal. This I think was the biggest sacrifice for movie moments over historical accuracy. Also, in a few scenes you see Russian tanks which appear to be either T-34/85s, KV-85s, or JS-2s, yet these tanks were not developed until late '43 or '44. But these flaws were redeemed by the fantastic action sequences and amazing sounds and computer imaging. I found the movie thrilling and wonderful and, out of 10, I would give it a 9.5. Great job Annaud.
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece Compared to Pearl Harbor
Review: All I have to say it this: This movie makes Pearl Harbor look like Battlefield Earth. If you are looking for a REAL war movie along the lines of Saving Private Ryan and some of the older classics, see this movie. Unlike others, it is worth the time-investment.
Rating:
Summary: oops they did it again
Review: well another movie that believes in wartime romance being more important than wartime facts.if you want to watch a more interesting foreign movie about stalingrad see the german made, subtitiled movie "Stalingrad" by the same people that brought us "Das Boot". it is a much more compelling movie that shows the utter waste, pain, and randomness of war, and doesn't sugar coat or glamorize either side. while the look of "enemy" is good, some of the cgi is unrealistic looking, especially the bombing by the german Ju 88's. i was looking forward to a movie that showed the great patriotic war {as it was known by the russians} i was dissapointed in the genericness of this film {Saving private sniper}. little of the ruthlessness of the nkvd and the commisars was dealt with after the opening of the movie, the fact is russians knew that they were most likely to die one way or the other, either at the hands of the germans or their own security people. to protect their famillies {who were also at risk from motherland} it was the fate of common as well as officers of the red army to fight without thought of their own well being. we in the west cannot begin to imagine the ultimate between the rock and the hard place these poor people were in. hopefully someone will make a movie about the real thing and have it in a language we can understand.
|
