Starring:
Jude Law, Joseph Fiennes, Rachel Weisz, Ed Harris
MFG
Rating: 3/5
"...await
the right moment for one, and only one well-aimed shot" -Vassili
Zaitsev
Many
directors would love to have the opportunity to make a film about
a war story that has been argued over for years as to whether it
was historical fact or propaganda. With "Enemy at the Gates," director
Jean-Jacques Annaud got this rare chance and, thanks to an overabundance
of political correctness and the like, has managed to single-handedly
take what might have otherwise been a 5-star movie and fudge it
up to the point that it barely rates 3-stars.
The
story of the famous duel between Vassili Zaitsev, a real-life Russian
shepherd-turned-sniper, and the possibly fictitious head of the
Nazi sniper school (named Koenig or Thorwald depending on who is
telling the story) during the horrific WWII battle of Stalingrad
may or may not be true. Regardless of the tale's dubious nature,
however, it is still a darn good story with lots of big-screen potential.
As I alluded to above, however, our society's modern "PC" attitudes
have nearly ruined the whole thing.
To
illustrate the point, all you need to do is look back at one of
the best movies in recent years, Clint Eastwood's masterpiece "Unforgiven".
Like in this movie, the whole thing boiled down to two people being
pushed by fate to a final, decisive conflict. Neither of the characters
can be classified as a "good guy" or a "bad guy" and that simple
fact, to me, is the key to that movie's greatness.
Unfortunately
for us, Annaud decided to turn the entire struggle into a conflict
between two ideals instead of two men. To make things worse, it
would seem that he felt it necessary to make Zaitsev a reluctant,
semi-pacifistic soldier who, if not for the despicable actions of
Koenig, would have been happy to avoid any contact between himself
and the German sniper.
All
this ranting aside, however, there is still a lot to like about
this movie. The visuals, for instance, are utterly spectacular.
After seeing the Stalingrad depicted here, I'm firmly convinced
that I now know what it must be like in hell and the opening battle
sequence rivals even the vaunted D-Day landing from "Saving Private
Ryan." This often forgotten part of WWII was a gritty, nasty, desperate
conflict and all of it seems to have been captured by Annaud.
The
acting performances were also quite good. Even though I didn't like
that they made Harris' character an evil bastard, he plays it quite
well! Jude Law also did a great job with his portrayal of Zaitsev.
Bob Hoskins makes an amusing Krushchev as well.
Overall,
this is a movie worth seeing. If you know the history and/or you
hate political correctness, you won't like it nearly as much as
others will, but there's still a lot of praiseworthy stuff here.
posted 04-02-2001 08:21 PM
You should never let a frenchman direct a movie about World War II. I gave this flick 3 out of 5 stars, but the more I think about it, the more it really ticks me off that they trashed this movie with a bunch of PC crap in order to make the movie more palatable to pacifists and other complete wuss-heads in the viewing audience.
Anyone disagree with me? I hope so because I'm in the mood for a fight...
posted 03-13-2002 09:48 AM
I just read your review, and this reminded me why I normally try to ignore reviews as much as possible First of all, I found the site while google-searching for a review of Enemy at the Gates, so that's why I actually got here (I mean, Movies For Guys....... grow up!) OK, my own fault.... If I don't like it, tough luck... But then: I start to read the "review".... Well, review.... More like a rant from a 14-year old who tries to sound older than he really is. A few lines about the movie, the rest about things that have *nothing* to do with a review. Just call it My Personal Opinion about [insert movie title].
(quote "...trashed this movie with a bunch of PC crap in order to make the movie more palatable to pacifists and other complete wuss-heads in the viewing audience..." So you would like the movie to be more palatable to "red meat eating guys (*)" and other complete numbskulls in the viewing audience?
(*): what's a red meat eating guy? And why is he different from other guys?
well, at least there's one positive thing: Next time, when I want a review about a movie, I know what site NOT to go to.
pitje
------------------ I'm really easy to get along with once you people learn to worship me