Enemy At The Gates

Hunter px1

just got back from seeing this film, top class, id recomend every one to go see this one, great acting and great cast, the opening is great and the ending is great. Visuals are top class

Jelvon

aye , just back from seening it aswell. pure class , as good as saving private ryan. Nice to see there was no mentions of Americans either in it

Yossarian

Having seen it i thought the acting was mediocer (apart from Bob Hoskins as Krushchev was pretty good) , the plot somewhat disjointed. Whoever was acting the part of General Paulus was completly wooden. It was an ok film, but not nearly as good as SPR.
The city fighting scenes in SPR where better done I thought.

But there were no Americans

Vincent

Just back from seeing it, it's pretty good, but i wouldn't rank it as good as saving private ryan, but on the plus side there was no yanks , and it's the best thing in the cinema atm.

richindub2

Twas quite good, not amazing tho, could have done with one or two big battle scenes imo

---

UP DA DUBS!!

Zaphod Beeblebrox

Acting was complete and utter sh!te, but...
1) Snipers
and
2) No yanks
so
10/10

Slydice

I thought it was brill
NO yanks\
NO yanks \/
Snipers\
Snipers \/
Decent acting + Shagging scene\
Decent acting + Shagging scene \/

what more cud ye ask for

oh yea and no americans i think more non american hero flicks shud be made

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

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

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Slydice:
what more cud ye ask for
</font>

A well written plot?

Mills

Thought it was pretty good myself, an entertaining 2 hours.

Kali

its woefully inaccurate historically wise nearly on a par with U-571 or whatever for complete madeup facts.

and theres the scene where one sniper hits another and then proceeds to stand up and walk away.. ?? hell that makes sense.

its totally hollywoodified a potentially good story, and have to agree with Yoss there.. theres not one of the characters that are properly developed throughout the film both due to the writing and the acting.

Shiminay

I thought it was quite good.

It really tried a "Saving Private Ryan" Shock opener with loads of bloodshed etc, but I don't think it quite suceeded (it was very close mind).

Well worth a look.

---

All the best,

Dav
@B^)

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Prepare yourself - The Beefy King stirs from his slumber...</font>

[honey i] violated [the kids]

Mills

About the beginning..... The scenes where some of the russians had to retreat , and were gunned down by their own side when they approached the line were some of the most chilling I've seen in a long while. Also the one where the few russians jumped from the boat to avoid being gunned down by the fighters, only to be shot by their own officers, it's one thing to read about it in history books but quite another to see it portrayed like that on screen.

plastic membrane

Good flick. No, a very good flick. Opens with loads of carnage, that vividly show just how horrific Stalingrad actaully was, then goes into a nicely done battle of wills between two expert snipers that is really quite tense. The whole love triangle works about as well as Sly Stallone as Heidi Of The Hills, so it doesnt get full marks, but i love a good war film, and yes, no yanks (except Ed Harris, but he's cool, so we'll let him away with that), so, pretty damn good by my book...

---

Damn it Jim, im a doctor, not a Beefy King !

ThunderingMike

It's fine if you like Heroes and Villains, Love triangles and honour, lack of historical depth, and let's be fair here, who ever saw Jude Law as a leading man for a WWII flick. I think he held his own in fairness. Ed Harris was good. So... calm. It was a bit old fashioned and could have done with a bit more of that SPR 'We would really rather not be here' attitude that was made very vaguely evident in this film.

---

ThunderingMike Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, And thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, And enterprises of great pitch and moment, With this regard their current turns away, And lose the name of action... Nows that's a sig.

RubberDuck

I must say i was fairly unimpressed with this film. I was expecting more from Jude Law after seeing his great performance in The talented Mr.Ripley. Did anyone else find it a bit difficult to tell russians from germans seeing as they both had 16th centruy english accents? The battle scenes were Ok, nothing like those in SPR. I also found the whole story to be very biased to Russian people and didnt concentrate on the crulety of both sides in WW2 but just the German side. But that's typical these days..

[This message has been edited by RubberDuck (edited 21-03-2001).]

Mills

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I also found the whole story to be very biased to Russian people and didnt concentrate on the crulety of both sides in WW2 but just the German side. But that's typical these days..</font>

Mowing down your own men while they retreat not cruel enough for you?

Void

The film is based on a meticulously researched book of the same name that was written in 1976. As usual, the book is better...

Bullitt

Having read the reviews i am not expecting the film to be great as the story lets the film down along with the script which doesn't give the actors a good stab at developing their characters. But i will go along to see it all the same for a bit of entertainment all the same.

As for it being the best film in the cinema atm i doubt it "Crouching tiger, Hidden Dragon" it out in places and is well worth going to see.

For anyone who is interested in Stalingrad i can reccomend the book "Stalingrad" by Antony Beevor which i read about a 2 months ago its an excellent factual day by day account of the battle. If you think the scenes where the Russinas shot they're own men were bad, i can assure you that is only the tip of the iceberg.

An interesting fact: The Russian used to feed their dogs under trucks and tanks on purpose. When the dogs were sucessfully trained to get food under wehicles they would be sent to the frontline. Then they would be starved. Then when the germans attacked explosives would be tied to the dogs with a stick pointing upwards. The dogs were then let lose and would if they weren't shot dive under the german tanks in search of food and destroy the tank.

It really is a good book .

RubberDuck

That's what im talking ab00t.

Magwitch

I loved it. Did not expect too much but it did deliver.

HOWEVER!!!! I do have one quibble! When Judd Law and his "moh" got it on, she had filthy hands and a filthy face, but her ass was in pristine sparkling condition! Surely after living in the harrowing existence of Stalingrad and all the deprivations that go with it you would expect to walk away with a least a dangle berry.

theCzar

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Yossarian:
apart from Bob Hoskins as Krushchev was pretty good</font>

a good question would be wtf Krushchev was doing giving orders and acting like a senior politik apparachik when of course, he was a 20something low level political appointee, where the hell was Zhukov?

i enjoyed it tho, i used my powerful mental block to blot out these things that didnt make sense...

does anyone else think it extremely ironic that in a film which depicted Zaitsev as a great but still human soldier elevated to a godlike hero by Russian propaganda...that the epilogue mentioned all his awards, awards which we must assume are propagnada themselves...

top marks for the sets, anyone see "World at War" on bbc a few weeks ago? the film was perfect, down to that fountain...

---

"The post you have just read is true... and by true, I mean false, it's all lies... but they're entertaining lies, and in the end, isn't that the real truth? The answer... is no..."

Paladin

Ive see a History channel documentary on the events the film was on. Absolutely unreal.

Yossarian

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by theCzar:
a good question would be wtf Krushchev was doing giving orders and acting like a senior politik apparachik when of course, he was a 20something low level political appointee, where the hell was Zhukov?
</font>

Krushchev was the political supremo of the stalingrad Front, assiting the commander of the stalingrad front (initially Yeremenko, then Rokossovsky). Zhukov as STAVKA represetative wasnt really involved in the cities defence, but in the counter-attack latter.
More plausible would havve been to have included Chuikov (commander of 62Army defending Stalingrad) in the film.


Anyone else find the depiction of 'German Headquarters' pretty feeble. A line of tanks out side a tent. Later in the film the exact same line of tanks but with a dusting of snow...




[This message has been edited by Yossarian (edited 05-04-2001).]

BlitzKrieg

I enjoyed the film buuuuut:


I found it better then SPR but the opening doesnt hold together aswell as in SPR the russains dont look so paniced (apart from 1-3 who jump the rest sit down and get there backs blown off) its not that its unrealistic or something its very realistic its just well for a movie u'ed expect abit of shine put to it like in the opening of SPR.

The first battle ****ed me off, it looked like world war 1 for christ sake in reality towards the russain defeat there was no control they were all over the place in squads. Some buildings had russains on one floor and germans below them without knowing it. The fact that the whole armies of both sides were so lost made it such a horrific battle.

I didnt like the first rush eithr cause it felt very amateurish i mean the soldiers didnt look scared.

After that the film improved alot. i liked the sniping scnes (due to CS) and ignored plot. One thing i wished they improved movie wise not historical wise more invovlement beteen the 2 snipers i mean i was begging at the final scene that they would at least say something before one got his head blown off.


P.s For the germans sniping was worse outside stalingrad because snipers would nail themselves to top of trees with enuf food for a week and ammo. I saw pictures of russain snipers who had to be shot with half-trak machine guns cause they couldnt get them down. It was cary mangeld bodies hanging from trees.


The thing abut the dogs is true.


DID anyone else see StalinGrad??? now tha is horrific.

Yossarian

whats the film Stalingrad like?
Any good?