Enemy at the Gates

Friend to stunning filmaking


Features: Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, Joseph Fiennes, Bob Hoskins
Director: Jean-Jacques Annaud
written: April '01

Enemy at the Gates is a stunning, multi-level movie. Set during World War II, it's about an actual Russian sniper who picked off German officers as easily as you swat flies. So the Germans send in their Top Gun to off the officer killer. The movie is the cat-and-mouse game (actually cat-and-cat) between these two snipers as to whom will fix the other in his sights first. While Enemy is on the "trench" level with these two men stalking each other, it's also at the 10,000 foot level detailing the logistics, management and idealogy of war. I can't think of a war movie which tackled so many themes so effectively.

Consider these aspects of war:

  • Logistics: you have to get your troops to the battle or it's lost before it starts. The movie begins with Russian troops locked in cattle cars for the long boring journey to Stalingrad. Once there, the troops have to make a harrowing river crossing while German fighters strafe the boats to the consistency of Swiss cheese.
  • Management: Khruschev, played by Bob Hoskins, gives a Russian general his job review which is "not meeting expectations" in corporate parlance. You can imagine what the general does with this news. Later a gut-wrenching battle is portrayed. And if the Russian soldiers dare to retreat, then their officers are at the rear using their weapons "empowering" the troops to keep advancing.
  • Idealogy: the Russians have to have someone to believe in, so the political propoganda machine paints the sniper as the People's Hero--the Michael Jordan of his day. The movie portrays him not only receiving fan mail, but answering it. Dictated by the political officer couching the response in proper "good for the Motherland" terms.

    Jude Law plays the Russian sniper. He brings an earnestness to the role which should be expected. Joseph Fiennes is the political officer who turns Law's character into a Russian "star". Bob Hoskins is under extensive makeup playing Khruschev with a level of belligerence that makes you wonder how historically accurate his portrayal is. Rachel Weisz from The Mummy is the equivalent to a Russian WAC and proves she can do more than play English ditzes as in The Mummy. Here she's just as capable of shouldering a rifle as the men. Ed Harris is the German major who proves he's as adept with a scoped rifle as Law.

    The movie is a technical knockout. When those boats are strafed by German fighters, the F/X are so good that you believe those were real planes. Same goes for the bombing run made over Stalingrad. The planes filling the sky (CGI? One plane copied-and-pasted buku times?) are utterly realistic, unlike the laughable copter/plane in The 6th Day

    Not only that, but there are entire blocks of some city put to ruin emulating WW2 Stalingrad that's a jaw-dropper. Stayed for the credits to learn where it was shot, and the credits are placed on the screen at such odd angles (you have to see it to believe it) that they are unreadable.

    Adding to The Look are the atmosphere people, the extras, in their Russian and German costumes. They are so prevalent and go about their tasks so naturally that you would swear a movie crew had time-traveled back to Stalingrad and actually filmed there.

    The movie has the same washed-out, desaturated look as Saving Private Ryan . The "color" is near-monochromatic blues and greys with only people's faces breaking the monotony. Kudos to the cinematographer for achieving such a bleak look.

    The movie throws in a love triangle that's almost two-sided instead of three. Fiennes has the hots for Weisz, she goes for Law, and Law is oblivious to whole situation. (It's a weak aspect to the movie.) Law and Weisz prove when there's will, then there's way as they finally consumate their relationship.

    Since this is based on a true, grim story, this movie is no U-571 . This story revolves around men whom if they did what they did during peacetime, they would be considered two of the highest body count murderers in history. (These two men make Charles Whitman, the sniper in Austin who killed 16 people back in 1966, look like a piker in comparison.) But everything is relative and when you cold-bloodedly set someone in your sights during wartime and make their head explode, then your a hero. Go figure. And yes, a modern movie means utterly realistic F/X and this movie is not for the squeamish. (On the other hand, since this is based and real events and not some sick college-girl-being-chased-by-a-slasher flick, the violence is in a whole other better realistic instead of gratuitous category. In this respect the movie is equivalent to Schindler's List.

    While the movie is grim and pulls no punches as to the effects of war, the very end is a letdown. I say the writer had to wrap things up somehow and I don't agree with its conclusion. It was a little too pat, too simple. Plus Harris's last actions simply make no sense compared to the first 90% of the flick.

    They're small quibbles. If you want gut-wrenching entertainment that entertains you while it makes you think just what war is and what war really and truly means, this movie is for you. The rest can rent McHale's Navy.

    Movie's suitability for:

    Back to the movie list or to the home page.