Rating: 
Summary: Not a great war movie
Review: I long waited to watch this film. Since Saving Private Ryan, I'm waiting to see a REALLY GOOD movie. Saving Private Ryan is the pinacle of the cinema. With Enemy At The Gates I thought I would delete that blank. And I was very disappointed. After the first 15 minutes it gets really boring. Don't need to mention that the actors choice couldn't be more wrong. Joseph Fiennes is a fine actor, but Jude Law is much less than a mediocre actor, big time screw up. You couldn't ever tell when he's happy or when he's unhappy. By the way, we already saw this in Artificial Inteligence and Mr. Rippley. Jude Law is one of the worst things ever appeared in Hollywood. Everything in this movie is a big foul up. There's no such thing as sequence in this movie. Everything happens all of a sudden, but not in the good way.
Three stars are only because of the realistic scenario and shooting.
Rating: 
Summary: A let down
Review: I waited for this movie to come out when I first heard about it, and even bought the book. The movie turned out to be mostly fluff. Effeminate characters and a fabricated love story subplot pretty much ruined it for me.
Rating: 
Summary: Save Your Money
Review: Great scenery but the acting, whewwww! Who wrote the dialoge?... I do give the actors their due, they did the best with what they were given. And the action sequences, did't they have anyone who has every heard a gun fire. Sniper rifles don't go pop, they ROAR when you fire them. And tanks give a report that rips the air, not a puff! I did not mind the British accents but the plot and script were so mushy I couln't keep my mind focused on the movie. Sorry to write a bad review but I wish I could get my money back
Rating: 
Summary: Absorbing and Rewarding War Movie
Review: How to tell the story of the seige of Stalingrad during World War II (doesn't that sound like a movie sequel?) - one of the bloodiest and hardest fought battles of all time? German organisation, technology and ideology against Russian desperation and determination.The approach in this film is to build the story around the rivalry between two sharp-shooters. Jude Law for the Soviets as a devastatingly accurate sniper against the "cool as steel" Ed Harris brought in by his Nazi superiors to neutralise him. Joseph Fiennes contributes as the KGB Intelligence Officer who sees in Law the perfect raw material to create a "hero of the revolution" for Stalin's propaganda machine. In this approach the film succeed well and it is a genuinely absorbing and interesting experience. The film succeeds in bringing home the awfulness and despair of Stalingrad and the tenousness of life in such times. There is an interesting lack of moralising in this film and the Russians regime comes off barely better than the Nazis. The performances are all appropriate to the ambience of the film and the production underlines the awfulness of war - as if we needed a reminder. Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: A different war movie - must see.
Review: WWII, from a very non-standard perspective from Hollywood. Focusses on Russia and its involvement. Gives insight to the fact there was the occasional woman caught up in the action. Shows another facet of the war - snipers. And yikes, a very hot (though short :) love scene! I wouldn't say this is one of the best movies I've seen, but it's definitely good. It's a movie I can't get out of my mind.
Rating: 
Summary: The Russian "experience" of WWII....
Review: This is a great movie. I would venture to say that this is the Russian "experience" of WWII. The cinematography and special effects are commendable. My favorite scene is when Vasily gets to the battlefront... amazing takes of the German attacks, specially the "Stukas" diving in.
Rating:
Summary: It entertains even if historical accuracy is a must.
Review: We all know about what happened to the Germans at the Battle of Stalingrad but the battle of the Stanligrad snipers is new. Will the movie show us how slain heroes inspire their comrades to success, or is it a David and Goliath outcome that pits a Soviet shepherd against a WWI German sharp shooter? Within this uncertainty of the sniper duel is an accurate description of the Battle of Stalingrad. Fighting takes place from building to building, death and casualties are numerous, rifles are in short supply, entire families contribute to the war effort, and everyone struggles for maintenance of morale in the trenches. The battle is probably the most important conflict for the Soviets during WWII and was very important to the success of all nations fighting Fascism. Stalingrad was the most costly of efforts to the Third Reich, and Soviet casualties were also very high. Why the Germans thought they could win where Napoleon had failed (Russian winter) is beyond my understanding. However, my understanding may be limited by my own Cold War assumptions. Within the old Soviet anthem (online everywhere) there are references to "strong in our friendship tried by fire" and "long may our crimson flag inspire" and, "we fought for the future, destroyed the invader". Maybe the Battle of Stalingrad was the fight where Russians, Ukrainians and many others in the south fused into Soviets. The song also, almost prophetically, includes this line: "our glory will live in the memory of nations". Stalingrad is a glory of our WWII ally that's worth remembering, and Enemy at the Gates tells the story anew.
Rating:
Summary: Not bad
Review: I rented this movie almost cringing, thinking that I would be seeing Saving Private Ryan all over again. The introduction to the movie echoed Private Ryan but it branched off far into its own category of wonderment as the story progressed. Ed Harris was a refreshing bad man in this movie and while he does some dispicible things, I would have rather seen him in this movie than someone like John Goodman or Jeff Goldblum or someone like them. Harris is a good actor. I enjoyed the tale of Vassily and his "girl" Rachel Weisz (a plesant surprise because I didn't associate the name with the Mummy). It was full of tense apprehension and a well developed story line.
Rating:
Summary: very good ......but shame about the accents!
Review: I found this movie to be visually exciting,certainly in the opening scenes anyway,but the thing that let the movie down a bit was the fact that the actors didnt use russian and german accents,im sure that jude law and ed harris (who i think looks a bit like james caan)and the rest of the cast would have been more than able to speak in foreign tones.Still its a good movie that all war buffs should enjoy....OH! and it wasnt untill the end of the film,that i realized that the little russian boy who runs between jude law and ed harris,is the same boy thats in a comedy sitcom over here in england called my familly...amazing how different they can make you look in a movie.
Rating:
Summary: A very good, very different WW II epic
Review: There are a number of things to love about this movie. The subject alone makes it highly unusual. By any measure, the bulk of the fighting of WW II took place on the German Eastern front. More troops were involved, more very large battles and offensives took place, and more casualties were caused on the German-Russian front than any other arena in the war. In large part because of the Cold War, Europe and the United States persistently failed to recognize the Soviet contribution to the War, and this was reflected in a complete lack of Hollywood films displaying any Soviet involvement in WW II. For most non-students of WW II, the Soviet part of the war is perceived as a rather minor part of the conflict. This movie helps correct some of that misapprehension by focusing on the major front of WW II. The story itself is not a terribly compelling one, but nearly everything else in the film sparkles. The performances are all excellent, the sets--which were all constructed especially for this film--were just extraordinary, the visuals were all stunning, and the battle sequences were both exhilirating and horrific. The only weakpoint in the film is the loosness of the script. While nearly every scene is memorable, the film functions best as a collection of great individual bits, rather than a marvelous, unified whole. Nonetheless, I feel comfortable rating this five stars because of the first rate performances, the amazingly vivid battle sequences, and the amazing sets.
| 
