Enemy at the Gates Review

[M Hofbauer]

Firefly wrote: If you want realism the Germans should speak German and the Russian should speak Russian - with no subtitles

Fine with me

Guy w/gun: All this brings to mind Tom Clancy. While his books are top notch,...

*cough* *cough*

finally, killmore, all I'm saying to your ravings is: unsubstantiated flamebait

[von Lucke]

Originally posted by Freak:

killmore Said:

Soviet system looked so bad it feels like it is actually better to serve Hitler.

Most "Big Studio" movies don't do very well at expressing moral ambiguity. This is something that rather bothered me in Enemy at the Gates: Half way through the movie I found myself thinking that the Russians might very well have been better off going over to the other side, as the German psy-ops boys kept suggesting.

What I couldn't figure out is why the Russian characters in the movie all seemed so non-challant about their circumstances vis-a-vis their own political situation. It comes up several times, too: The Commissars gunning down their own men, Ron Pearlman's character (excellent cameo, by the way!) talking about his time in the Ghulag, a disparagingly off-hand comment about the worthlessness of Ukrainians.

But the best example of "double-think" is when Tatyana describes how her parents are put on a train with other "undesirables" by the Moscow Commissars and deliberately sent into the hands of the Germans. Who is she mad at? Not the Communist Party! Not the men who rounded up her parents and sent them to their certain death! The Germans!

[crumply]

that film is really bad. it was strangely bi-gendered conceived (a love story that is also a gory war movie). i don't think there were more than a couple plausible things that happened in the whole movie.

[mensch]

saw it last night, not bad... not great.. spent half the time explaining to my wife why the russian army did this and did that.... the german sniper character could have used more devleopment.. and what we did learn from this "master" making the mistake at the end of the film which I thought was a week american type ending for all those hopless idiots that need a ending.. winner looser...which this movie fails to get accross there are no winners and no loosers.. As for effects, not bad, the backdrop of stalingrad was wel done and unerving everywhere you went there were dead bodys all over the place... *ick*

I give this a 6 out of 10 if anyone realy would care what my rating would be...

crap ending.. made for those Republicans. ;D

-----------

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

"...one who once was and still is but does not as often but does it better although somewhat sloppily."

-Hiram Sedai/Phillies Phan

[coralsaw]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

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!)

Michael, indeed it was a brutal war, but please try to find for me an RL example where a sniper (a soldier, not an SS fanatic) hangs a child. Snipers preferred to attack Officers, for morale reasons. Snipers were not criminals, far from it. Sniping was never AFAIK tried as criminal behaviour, and sniping schools still exist in most modern armies in all their glory. Also, one might find it hard to believe, but not all Germans that fought WWII were criminals...

Originally posted by David Aitken:

Remember the kid had been selling 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 Konig seen to.

David, nice remark mate. No I wasn't expecting him to say "run along", or on second thoughts, yes I would expect him to do so. Koenig knew Sacha was betraying him since the tractor factory scene where Saitsev tries to get behind him, having got the info from Sacha.

IMO the film producers wanted to appeal to the anti-Nazi sentiment of the audience. They found a horrible way to do so. In any case, I just made a remark saying that IMO it was out of Koenig's (noble posh Major) character to do so. If you think otherwise, well your arguments, your opinion.

The forced ending debacle did not end with the hanging of the kid. Koenig gets killed at the end because he walks in the open, to get to the spot that Saitsev was. Now that was DUH! The first time in the movie where he actively hunts his pray. To go and check out what? If the guy he killed was Saitsev. He knew it wasn't, cause the guy stuck his helmet-less head out in the open. And Koenig saw his face, but even if he didn't, how did he know that Saitsev was not alone. DUH again!

"Let's finish this movie in a heroic anti-Nazi way guys, cause our initial ending was booed by the test audiences. Oh, and keep it down to 130 mins, just get the nazi killed fast, I don't care how."

coralsaw

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

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

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

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by coralsaw:

The forced ending debacle did not end with the hanging of the kid. Koenig gets killed at the end because he walks in the open, to get to the spot that Saitsev was. Now that was DUH! The first time in the movie where he actively hunts his pray. To go and check out what? If the guy he killed was Saitsev. He knew it wasn't, cause the guy stuck his helmet-less head out in the open. And Koenig saw his face, but even if he didn't, how did he know that Saitsev was not alone. DUH again!

The ending was the only real weak point I saw with the movie. It wuld have been much better if Major König had just returned to Germany as ordered rather than having the 'final showdown'

[Jochen Schmidt]

Saw it yesterday in Germany.

Well, hmmmm - it´s not a "real" warmovie, it´s not a "real" love-story-movie, it´s not a "real" sniper-movie.

So, i´m not sure what it is. It´s not bad but is not as good as Private Rian.

As you can see, i don´t know what to say about it ...............

Greetings from Germany

Jochen

[Rupert_2]

I'm off to see it tonight...Fingers crossed !!

[John Erickson]

Originally posted by Kettenkrad:

I had alot of problems with this movie, most of which revolve around pacing. Since the director realized that he had a bloodfest on his hand once he had filmed the most exciting parts of the movie, he decided to back off and augment the love story/kid story/political moral aspect. This part of the story was all jammed into the middle of the movie. So much more could have been done to reflect the misery and other characteristics of the historical setting, but instead of saying "we're dirty and miserable" it said, "we're dirty and starving but were happy and OK".

Ok, I pointed out earlier that the love story really happened. Now another surprise. Sacha was really hung. I haven't read any connection between Sacha and Vassili but Sacha did exist. He was a 15 year old cobbler working for the Germans and spying for the Russians. He was hung by the Germans for spying. According to the book he was hung in front of his mother though. I thought it was a pretty good way to work that story into the movie.

Now as for the "political moral aspect" it's a movie that takes place during a war Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. How do think anyone can do a movie without some political moral aspect? The little speech at the end was a bit much but he was shot in the head shortly thereafter what more could you ask for?

John

[Firefly]

You know I can't wait to see what this group makes of Captain Correlli's Mandolin. Obviously I haven't seen the film, but I've read the book and it is a love story with a WW2 background, and a pretty good one too.

Still one of the main characters is gay, so that should keep some of the people who prefer 'male bonding' happy .

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

[Stefan Fredriksson]

Originally posted by Forever Babra:

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

I am not so sure about that. Can not remember where I read it, but it was said that Costner's accent was probably closer to the real thing than you would expect.

Or to put like this - 12th/13th century English may have sounded a bit like American English.

Take this with a pinch of salt since I can not remember the source, but at the time it did not sound too far-fetched to me.

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Stefan Fredriksson:

Take this with a pinch of salt since I can not remember the source, but at the time it did not sound too far-fetched to me.

Apparently the inhabitants of the Blue Mountains (Virginia?) speak the English closest to Shakespeare's English that is still extant. Reason being the original settlers left Britain in the 17th century, and after that only very unkind souls would suggest that inbreeding has something to do with it .

That 12th/13th century English should have sounded like American English is an 'interesting' assertion. It probably would have sounded closer to old German or Danish or French than anything else. Have you ever looked at an English text from that period? The Europeans had not even discovered America then, except for some enterprising Vikings.

I believe I can assure you with equal certainty and knowledge of the source you found that in that it actually sounded not quite unlike modern day Korean.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

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

[David Aitken]

Stefan Fredriksson wrote:

> it was said that Costner's accent was probably closer to the real thing than you would expect.

Are we talking about Robin Hood? I don't think Costner was trying for an English accent in that film. He just used his own US accent.

I think a lot of Americans could be fooled into thinking it was authentic, because in certain respects, a stereotypical English accent is not that far from a US accent. But Nottingham forest is not London, and accents from that part of the country are far more obviously British.

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

[RMC]

12th/13th century middle english as spoken in Chicago? "Interesting" to say the least.

When I read Chaucer all those years ago...

Whan that Aprille, with hise shoures soote,

The droghte of March hath perced to the roote

And bathed every veyne in swich licour,

Of which vertu engendred is the flour;

Whan Zephirus eek with his swete breeth

Inspired hath in every holt and heeth

The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne

Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,

Somehow I don't see this coming across witha US accent.

Oh, haven't seen the film yet.

[Geier]

Originally posted by Stefan Fredriksson wrote:

it was said that Costner's accent was probably closer to the real thing than you would expect.

Old Kevin spent a long time (several weeks iirc) trying for a brit accent but failed to pull anything believable off. Some actor.

One fun thing about that one (Robin Hood) is the fact that the director positively hated Christian Slater who doesn't get to do even one tiny little heroic thing in the entire movie.

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

Johan

"I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy"

Tom Waits

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by RMC:

12th/13th century middle english as spoken in Chicago? "Interesting" to say the least.

When I read Chaucer all those years ago...

Whan that Aprille, with...

When dat aprille, wit...

Yeah, 'Chicago English' works

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Geier:

Old Kevin spent a long time (several weeks iirc) trying for a brit accent but failed to pull anything believable off. Some actor.

Wow! Kevin Costner can't act! I am Sooooo surprised

[Mark IV]

I keep looking through killmore's "review" to find anything at all that might be true.

The closest I got was: "Soviet system looked so bad it feels like it is actually better to serve Hitler." Actually, quite a few Soviet citizens drew the same conclusion- at first. Turned out they were wrong.

A lot of the feel of the movie was what is was like to be an ordinary guy caught up in the death struggle of two completely screwed political systems. Perhaps this was too subtle for some.

Charges of Nazi propaganda are best forwarded to the French director (of Quest for Fire fame, one of my faves, a documentary on the Peng thread inhabitants) and the usual hotbed of 4th Reich activism, Hollywood.

Geez. Over some heads, or what.

[Dr. Brian]

For the record... that movie sucked. I was falling asleep.

The best part was about the first 20 minutes. The train ride to Stalingrad and the river crossing were the coolest part.

After that, it was not believable with NKVD shooting their own regular army troops on a massive scale (since we all know that it was the "political prisoner" units that suffered that fate).

Almost wanted to walk out, but, I was hoping for more.

That's my 0.02 rubles.

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

Doc

God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is!

[pford]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the bit about the Germans bringing out their best sniper to hunt him down is pretty much BS too. I think the Germans had a bit more to worry about than one sniper in the general context of the battle.

Actually that part and that he lost are accurate. Not much else is. The History Channel had an episode about this where they interviewed the participants. Hitler did stupid things like this, and concentrating troops at Stalingrad while leaving the flanks weak.

[DeadHorse]

Stop Beating me...PLEASE!!!

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

You ain't smelled nothing until you smelled a Dead Horse rotting in the sun. -- Somebody

[ASL Veteran]

I saw it on Saturday, and it was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I was literally laughing during the movie with my friends as we made fun of what we were watching. What the heck was that Commissar clown doing driving around in a car with all those leaflets in the middle of the front lines? Then the Germans drive by in some tanks and spray the fountain with bullets. Not more than two minutes later some genius decides that it would be a great place to take a shower? Ha Ha Ha.

Yeah, sneaking through all those pipes was a stroke of genius. They might as well be shouting "look at us, we are being sneaky" as the guys were noisily clumping along inside them pipes. Then when that guy gets injured Zaitsev tells him to go back. I was thinking "great, now that guy is going to bleed to death in the pipe and block it" What the hell was Konig thinking too when he had Zaitsev behind the stove? If he just moved a few meters to the right he could have picked him off with no trouble. But no, the genius Konig just sits there and waits for the ridiculous bombers to fly overhead and ruin the showdown once again.

I almost fell out of my chair when Zaitsev was hiding amongst the dead bodies waiting for Konig to appear and my friend said "I am a stone."

Oh yeah, and Konig just up and figures - well I guess it is time to get going so I'll flip up the corrugated iron and just start walking around. Whatever.

Zaitsev walks into that woman's house and starts writing to all his admiring fans when that chick comes over ... "Oh, its okay, its just the neighbors coming over." said in true Leave it to Beaver fashion. Neighbors just visiting in the middle of Stalingrad - said like it was a Sunday in the middle of Indiana.

The difference between Soviet HQ and the front lines was a little dramatic - and it is unclear how far back from the front they are going. From the looks of things, HQ was located somewhere 500 miles away.

I guess that's enough for now

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

When we were in the Bocage country we were assaulted by them Tigers ... you know what I mean by assaulted huh? WELL I MEAN ASSAULTED!!!!

[Spook]

Originally posted by Germanboy:

Apparently the inhabitants of the Blue Mountains (Virginia?) speak the English closest to Shakespeare's English that is still extant. Reason being the original settlers left Britain in the 17th century, and after that only very unkind souls would suggest that inbreeding has something to do with it .

Hmmmmm. You mean the Blue Ridge range, or the Virginia Appalachians as a whole? In nearby towns like Lexington or Charlottesville or Lynchburg, it wasn't overly obvious to me. But then, I'm not exactly the most perceptive of people.

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Spook:

Hmmmmm. You mean the Blue Ridge range, or the Virginia Appalachians as a whole? In nearby towns like Lexington or Charlottesville or Lynchburg, it wasn't overly obvious to me. But then, I'm not exactly the most perceptive of people.

Must have been the Blue Ridge whatevers, and only really isolated places. I was told this years ago by my Japanese lecturer, and it somehow made sense to me. Still does make more sense than 12th/13th century English having some similarity to North American English (which one anyway - Alabama rednecks or Boston Wasps?).

Hmm, if it was true, maybe that is a cheap way to get the Domesday Book translated...

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

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

[killmore]

Originally posted by Mark IV:

I keep looking through killmore's "review" to find anything at all that might be true.

Which part was not true? Was it the part about 10 germans killed vs 300 soviets?

You mean germans were not defending themselves through out the movie? How many times did you see germans attacking soviet positions? Once for 10 seconds?

How many soviet high officials commited suiside? That was at least a colonel.

Did you see any soviet airforce in the movie? Would you like some numbers of german airforce losses?

Do you believe that human wave attacks accross the only open terrain for miles were common in Stalingrad? Especially into prepared german positions fortified with tanks?

And tell me what was there preventing germans from rolling all the way to Volga after human wave attack? Nothing - at least in the movie.

Soviet tech in the movie is almost always already dead. So it is human waves vs. advanced german tech. At least to the average USA movie goer who does not read historic WWII books.

You don't agree that by 1942 80 million of soviet population was under a german occupation? (That makes it about 40%)

I am not saying that french director was Nazi - I am saying he showed Stalingrad from the point of view of german propaganda. Maybe he tries to justify why Soviets did not surrender but France did.