Enemy at the Gates Review

[Forever Babra]

Ah, who can forget that oscar-level fake English accent of Kevin Costner...

I'm glad they didn't bother with that nonsense. Personally, I'd rather it be in Russian and German with subtitles. That would really beef up the immersion. But since they wanted English-speaking actors, better they don't try and pretend they're speaking something else.

I really should check these posts before I hit the submit button...

[This message has been edited by Forever Babra (edited 03-17-2001).]

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by David Aitken:

Andrew Hedges wrote:

Yup, male bonding. The centre of all the current controversy about female infantry.

Actually, I thought EATG made an excellent case against women and men fighting side by side. Lack of male bonding is the minor problem. The big problem is that the men fight over the women, as the males in most mammal species have been doing for thousands of years.

[Smack]

Just saw the movie, thought it was well done. I think I liked it because I thought that it was a story that was believable. Unlike the west, Russians had women in thier front line as combat soldiers. It is possible that a love story could have happened. Have an imagination. I personally thought that SPR was a joke, it had, other than the first half hour NO STORY at all. This movie was a drama set in a war.

The sniper duel was beetwen two men, but it was symbolic. The primitve Russian man, born and raised in the rural areas. Against a man with honer and with high social status...

It was a good drama. You were supposed to interpret cetain things, the charachters for one thing. I think that some of you guys are to busy looking at the weapons and the action instead of the meaning...what some of you want is a documentary, not a movie with a story...

[Panzer Leader]

Well, I saw it and I liked it. It was not quite as 'epic' as I would have hoped, but it was a good movie nonetheless. Go see it, its good.

[109 Gustav]

Just saw it an hour ago. Not bad at all. I would have preferred a few more battle scenes instead of just sniping though.

------------------

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

The Last Defense- Free hosting for your CM pictures!

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by David Aitken:

2) It was an extension of the issue of male and female soldiers fighting together. If Weisz's character had been a civilian it would have been unnecessary, but as she was a Russian soldier it seems quite appropriate.

David,

I think you are dead on with this point. Its the first war movie I've seen where the love interest didn't bother me. It seemed perfectly natural.

BTW, my opinion is that Enemy is a damned good movie... much better than SPR

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by TeAcH:

I saw this today and I was disappointed. Why did they have to include the love story in this movie?

the love interest worked for me. You don't seriously think that wouldn't be part of life in a mixed force like that?

I also had a hard time getting past the english accents on the Russian soldiers. Why cant they fake them or find actors that can?

Just saw an interview with the actors... the all believed that had they done Russian accetts, they would have come accross as James Bond villains. THe accents didn't bother me at all... of course, I had no problem with Sean Connery as a Russian either

[This message has been edited by Berlichtingen (edited 03-18-2001).]

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by TeAcH:

C'mon gang, remember Platoon and Patton? I know the CM'ers liked those films among many other good war movies that did not have the love saga. I just think it detracted from the bigger story and too too much time was spent on it.

I guess I'm a CM'er... and I hated Patton and Platoon was pure crap

[von Lucke]

Originally posted by Mirage2k:

"Patton" was supposed to be a almost-biographical look at a particular person. It would be a little hard to inject a battlefield romance into that movie (can anyone here even imagine Patton hitting on a woman?

Since you aren't the only one to find this "unbelievable", I'll be the one to burst your bubble: George S. Patton had a continuing affair with his niece Jean Gordon (a woman some 30 yrs his junior) from some time in 1939 to right before his death. Matter of fact, she joined up as a volunteer nurse just to be close to him in Europe, and he had a liason with her in England only a few months before he died.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by CavScout:

As opposed to your pointless complaints?

You know, you just are not very bright it seems, since this rather simple discussion is obviously way over your head. Why don't you just go watch a nice US propaganda movie, maybe with Ronnie Reagan in it? Should be right up your street.

------------------

Andreas

Der Kessel

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.

[Guest MantaRay]

Actually there was a part 2 of Patton that I saw on TV a long time ago. They had her in it, and I havent looked for it. Basically about his time being Governor of Germany and his flashbacks of WWI (The Last days of Patton). Now I must locate it to add to my collection of flicks that Berli doesn't like.

Originally posted by von Lucke:

Since you aren't the only one to find this "unbelievable", I'll be the one to burst your bubble: George S. Patton had a continuing affair with his niece Jean Gordon (a woman some 30 yrs his junior) from some time in 1939 to right before his death. Matter of fact, she joined up as a volunteer nurse just to be close to him in Europe, and he had a liason with her in England only a few months before he died.

Truth is stranger than fiction.

------------------

When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one."

Click now for shelter from the Peng thread

New Site of the PLA:Rugged Defense Group Ladder

The Red Army Mirror

[This message has been edited by MantaRay (edited 03-18-2001).]

[coralsaw]

Overall, not a bad 2 hours.

I liked (and felt sad about) the human wave tactics of the Russians. The two scenes, one where each Soviet soldier gets either a gun or bullets, and the other in the children statues fountain amongst others, were good scenes. Good actors, great photography.

What destroyed the whole movie for me though was the profanely out-of-character scene of the noble German soldier (Knight's Cross) where he uses the child as a bait. I can only presume that this was to satisfy a certain US-centric audience sentiment of anti-Nazism. The German Major (Colonel) had lost his own son in the war and I find it hard to believe he would ever act like he was supposed to have done. A real pity.

Horable mention to Bob Hoskins for an incredible performance as Nikita Khrustsev (sp).

------------------

My squads are regular, must be the fibre in the musli...

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by MantaRay:

Actually there was a part 2 of Patton that I saw on TV a long time ago. They had her in it, and I havent looked for it. Basically about his time being Governor of Germany and his flashbacks of WWI (The Last days of Patton). Now I must locate it to add to my collection of flicks that Berli doesn't like.

Ummm - that would be his wife Bea Patton.

Farago doesn't seem to mention it, but one of the Patton's other biographers does touch on his alleged philandering overseas during WW II.

[coralsaw]

Double post. Apologies.

[This message has been edited by coralsaw (edited 03-19-2001).]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by coralsaw:

Overall, not a bad 2 hours.

What destroyed the whole movie for me though was the profanely out-of-character scene of the noble German soldier (Knight's Cross) where he uses the child as a bait.

I don't suppose you got the Knight's Cross for dressing well; a lot of accounts of German soldiers during the war talk about their brutality (they were not the only ones - it was a brutal war!)

By definition, a sniper is brutal. I think Mowat mentions a German sniper who shot mules apparently for fun - to wound, not kill. Perhaps his aim was to have the animals writhe and make noise and unnerve any Allied troops nearby, or get them to expose themselves by coming out to kill the animal, making them an easier target.

A sniper is ruthless by nature; his scope brings his prey that much closer to him and he can see clearly who he is killing. I'm not so sure its unrealistic to expect a man such as this to worry about using a kid as bait. If he did have qualms about such things, he would be in the wrong line of work.

As for the irony involved - well, Germans do have an odd sense of humour at times. When the South Alberta Regiment liberated Bergen Op Zoom, they were astonished by the German anti-tank gunner located some distance away, who made it a practice to fire a solid shot projectile at the belfry of the town's church - and ring the bell every hour on the hour!

[John Erickson]

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:

the love interest worked for me. You don't seriously think that wouldn't be part of life in a mixed force like that?

[This message has been edited by Berlichtingen (edited 03-18-2001).]

From the book "Enemy at the Gates" copyright 1973

Sgt. Tania Chernova. For many years after the war she belived that Vassili Zaitsev, her lover, had died of grievous wounds. Only in 1969, did she learn that he had recovered and married someone else. The news stunned her for she still loved him.

That's why the love story was in the film. It was there in the war.

John

[This message has been edited by John Erickson (edited 03-18-2001).]

[Los]

M.Bates said...

"Having just seen the film, I am happy to have British accents for the Russians. If the actors had been told to do Russian accents then they would have, it is hardly their fault. The alternative was Russian actors speaking English. In any case it's better to have British actors trying their best than some hot-headed American actor spitting and yelling his pro-Stalin lines across the screen."

So Brit actors will do what the director tells them but not American actors? What about Ed Harris?

Los

[David Aitken]

coralsaw wrote:

> What destroyed the whole movie for me though was the profanely out-of-character scene of the noble German soldier (Knight's Cross) where he uses the child as a bait.

Remember the kid had been selling him out. Was he just going to say "You're a naughty boy for trying to get me killed, now run along!"? If Sacha had just been a bystander then it would have been strange, but he was actively trying to have König seen to.

[Lindan]

I really liked König. A shame that he was fated to die...

the movie was ok, some cliches on both sides

(sometimes LOTS of them) but interesting to see. money well spent.

And about the accents: can't really say, they all spoke German

------------------

-----------------------

Croda: "You hang out with a guy named "Warphead?"

"Nuts!" "

visit lindan.panzershark.com

www.jagdtiger.de

[Bimmer]

While I seem to be in the minority here, I felt this movie was, to use a technical movie-reviewer term, a steaming pile of melodramatic crap. The people responsible took 131 minutes of my life, and I want them back.

[David Aitken]

No-one forced you to go. =P

[Guy w/gun]

I said it once and I'll say it again, I'm glad the people on this forum don't make movies.

EATG was a ,get this, MOVIE!!!!!!!!. I say this to distinguish it from a documentary.

Ever seen the painting "Guernica" by Pablo Picasso? It's about the bombing of the city of Guernica during the Spanish civil war. There is not one bomb or gun in thr painting. Yet *gasp* Picasso has the balls to say it's about the Spanish Civil War????!!!!

The civil war is merely a back drop for Picasso to express the fear and terror of the innocent people involved. His painting is supposed to provoke empathy, not satisfy historians with it's accurate representation of warfare.

As mentioned before the battle at Stalingrad is a backdrop for the points the writers tried to make in the movie. You'd be very surprised to find out that some artists express themselves/make statements using historical settings. And if the artist is truly serious about his or her expression/statement, they may change a few things to aid them.

I truly hope that the people on this forum can seperate their grog side and art viewing side. In other words try to get over the accents, the stray T-34/84, and all other inaccuracies and try to view EATG as a movie about things other than warfare.

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 03-18-2001).]

[The Commissar]

Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

I said it once and I'll say it again, I'm glad the people on this forum don't make movies.

EATG was a ,get this, MOVIE!!!!!!!!. I say this to distinguish it from a documentary.

Ever seen the painting "Guernica" by Pablo Picasso? It's about the bombing of the city of Guernica during the Spanish civil war. There is not one bomb or gun in thr painting. Yet *gasp* Picasso has the balls to say it's about the Spanish Civil War????!!!!

The civil war is merely a back drop for Picasso to express the fear and terror of the innocent people involved. His painting is supposed to provoke empathy, not satisfy historians with it's accurate representation of warfare.

As mentioned before the battle at Stalingrad is a backdrop for the points the writers tried to make in the movie. You'd be very surprised to find out that some artists express themselves/make statements using historical settings. And if the artist is truly serious about his or her expression/statement, they may change a few things to aid them.

I truly hope that the people on this forum can seperate their grog side and art viewing side. In other words try to get over the accents, the stray T-34/84, and all other inaccuracies and try to view EATG as a movie about things other than warfare.

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 03-18-2001).]

Well said, Guy w/ Gun!

Trouble is, when people specialize in a field (or just know a lot about something), they tend to like showing off their knowledge by pointing out every inaccuracy. It makes them look smarter. No trouble with it, I suppose, we all like to feel inteligent.

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[M. Bates]

Originally posted by Los:

M.Bates said...

"Having just seen the film, I am happy to have British accents for the Russians. If the actors had been told to do Russian accents then they would have, it is hardly their fault. The alternative was Russian actors speaking English. In any case it's better to have British actors trying their best than some hot-headed American actor spitting and yelling his pro-Stalin lines across the screen."

So Brit actors will do what the director tells them but not American actors? What about Ed Harris?

Los

You have to realise that different things are expected of different actors. An actor trained in Europe will be called upon to play perhaps a sympathetic supporting role to the main star, or even a villain or foil for the hero.

The formation of a modern Hollywood movie tends to be dicatated more by the North American market: so the hero or main player, from that part of the world, is going to act differently.

It's plain to see that actors from seperate parts of the world are used in varying ways.

[M. Bates]

Originally posted by Bimmer:

While I seem to be in the minority here, I felt this movie was, to use a technical movie-reviewer term, a steaming pile of melodramatic crap. The people responsible took 131 minutes of my life, and I want them back.

Fortunately movies are not made for and judged by WW2 freaks. The general public, including 50% women, need more than brain-dead blood n guts.

I think that Enemy At The Gates is successful at want it is trying to do: I don't think it's intended to be an out-and-out war film so people will be disapointed if they go to a cinema expecting this.