Enemy at the gates.

[Neville]

Yesterday I re-watched this jewel. I had already seen it in a local cinema when it was released, and I thought it had potential, but I noticed a couple of plot holes and I felt slightly bored by the love story.

Amazing what a more relaxed viewing can do, but yesterday I thought it was an incredible movie. It explains the story of the Leningrad siege (WWII) thrugh the eyes of Vasili (Jude Law), a russian sniper so skilfull that germans send their best man (Koenig: Ed Harris) to hunt him down. Through the movie, we see how Vasili and Koenig taunt themselves and are involved in a series of masterfully filmed duels, while both sides watch incredully, as if the fate of the city depended (it somehow does) on the result of this microscopic battle.

Yep, I felt as well the love story ran too long, but I really enjoyed the whole thing this time. Both Law and Harris are nothing short but fantastic. Even if the fame of those actors was based only on their works here, I wouldn't find it exagerated at all. Law depicts with naturality the contradictions of his character, a young uneducated shepperd transformed by the circumstances and the soviet propaganda into a national hero, while Harris' gestures and body language (while he listens to his superior blame Hitler for their situation or when he talks to a young russian child) tells us as much about his characters as his dialogue.

Overall, a different war movie.

Oh, about the plot holes: they are still there, but the DVD had a deleted scenes section and everything is clarified there, plus a nice extra: some scenes that add much depth to Nikita Krushev's character (Bob Hopkins).

[Flangepart]

Not a bad bit of work, this. The horrors of war, and horrid goverments, both Stalin's and Hitler's, are preserved. The human qualites of the stars make the tense hunts meaningfull. A  Germin flick i'd recomend is "Stalingrad". About the battle as seen from the point of view of a German Platoon. A tragic epic, i thought.

[Neville]

"Stalingrad"? Yes, I have heard of it, but haven't seen it. However, I'd recommend anybody "The cross of iron", a similarly conceived warfilm from the late Sam Peckinpah. Not set on Stalingrad, though, but great movie.

BTW, How can I add a signature to my posts?

[Flangepart]

Another good one. Intresting, how in "Stalingrad" and "Cross of Iron", the director chose to make the German Soldiers, and their Squad Leaders, espchualy, more Humain then one would honestly expact. Did that have to be, to allow the audience to feel for the soldiers, do you think? I do. True, the average Wermarch trooper was not a big a Bastard as an S.S. man, but they did believe in the cause. The tradgity is how such courage, could be wasted on such monsterous evil. But, thats human history........................................................................................................

[yaddo42]

STALINGRAD is excellent but definitely not one to watch if you are already in a funk. You want to feel sympathy for the characters and all the hell they go through, but the whole time you remember, they're commanders are the Nazis. So you don't want them to actually win the war. Great filmmaking. And talk about jaded, IIRC, the only time a character says "Heil Hitler," is just before he blows his brains out.

CROSS OF IRON has it's fans (here and elsewhere)but to me it's one more film in the sad alcohol-soaked slide of Sam Peckinpah's later career. Not nearly as bad as CONVOY or the garbled mess that is THE OSTERMANN WEEKEND (a curse on you AMC for airing this turd again) but worlds away from his great work like THE WILD BUNCH, STRAW DOGS, THE BALLAD OF CABLE HOGUE, JUNIOR BONNER, and RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY. But I highly recommend the original book CROSS OF IRON, it's so gritty and blunt about violence and warfare, you'll have to dust yourself off when you finish reading it.

ENEMY AT THE GATES had it's moments, and I loved that a big budget American picture focused on the Russian Front, but the jumbled love triangle and the waste Joseph Fiennes character got on my nerves. Great action sequences, especially when we first see the grown Vasili in battle and the desperation of the evacuation near the end. Ed Harris is great, p**s on Costner and his ilk, this guy should be a superstar. I just wish the "godless pinko Commies" in Hollywood would make more war movies about the Eastern Front. There has to be a good movie that could be made about the Night Witches.

[durbster]

Actually Enemy at the Gates wasn't an American film at all.  If I remember correctly it was entirely funded in Europe.  Plus if it was a Hollywood production the US army would have appeared at the end and liberated Stalingrad ;)

I really enjoyed it but there really was no need for the love story - it was pointless and I felt it interrupted the flow of the film.  The first battle and the bombing raid are moments that really stood out for me.

Incidentally, how did the US audience feel about the actors using their own accents, despite playing characters from Russia and Germany?

Is the DVD worth getting?

[Susan]

I hated this movie. Wasn't jude law russian but speaking in an english accent? I remember there was some kind of "accent" issue that really sent me over the edge. Frankly when i saw it in theaters the audience was bored to tears until the sex scene came on. As I looked around at some of the audience i realized that a few of them probably paid to see this movie a few times prior just for that scene.

[Flangepart]

 <--->Accents.
A well handled accent is a prize to me, as i enjoy the variaty of pronuncations available for the spoken word.
....I like Russian, Scots and Irish, the english dialects (Other wise, i'd never understand Dave lister in Red Dwarf). Aussie, German, Latinos, what ever is approprite to the local and characters. But, if you can't understand the diologue, and the accent sound forced or just "Off", then it becomes a problim.
....Therefor, maby not attempting an accent is a good idea, if the actor realises his limitations. As the audience should be aware that the Russian characters in "Enemy at the Gates" are Russian, they should expect that, as they are "Hearing a translation" anyway, they should just go with it, and concintrate on the tale being told, get involved with the human situation of the characters, and let the details of time and place work them selves out.

[Fearless Freep]

> Therefor, maby not attempting an accent is a good idea, if the actor realises his limitations.

George Clooney talked about that being the reason he didn't use an accent in "The Perfect Storm"; he thought it would distract rather than add any benefit

[Susan]

I disagree about the accents, whether you do it well or not it should be manditory.
;-)
It helps you fall into the story..speaking in an accent other than what you are is distracting as hell. I couldn't figure out if jude law was a defected englishman living in russia or what.  Mainly because you see other people speaking in that language or with that accent, then others weren't.Then I think that ed harris had no accent, yet in the background everyone around him was talking in accents and in german. It was all too annoying and became the biggest distraction of the film for me.

[Neville]

Durbster said: "Is the DVD worth getting?"

I'm gonna quote myself, just for once ;-)

Neville said: "Oh, about the plot holes: they are still there, but the DVD had a deleted scenes section and everything is clarified there, plus a nice extra: some scenes that add much depth to Nikita Krushev's character (Bob Hopkins)."

Add to that a nice transfer, a "Making of..." and interviews and decide by yourself. You can even get it at Amazon.

[durbster]

Well I'd say it's better than having to listen to Mel Gibson covering every accent in Scotland in one sentence ;)  Now that's distracting.

[Flangepart]

Ah, but that was my point Lady and gent. An accent done well! That includes all actors in the film keeping consistant with the accents. All the Russian and German actors should have been getting it right, or to attempting it at all. But, thats just me.

[jmc]

Agreed with most of the points made earlier...some people have criticized the film for not being brutal enough, since Stalingrad was one of the most horrible battles of the entire war.  It's made me want to read more about the subject.

Personally, I like when filmmakers show the war as viewed from the opposing side--it takes a lot more skill to make people care about those characters than it does to make something like SAVING PRIVATE RYAN.  But of course, it's easier to empathize with German soliders in 2002.  I can't imagine what would happen if someone made a movie today from the point of view of terrorists....