[OT] "Enemy At The Gates" Review
From: Allan Goodall <awg@s...>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2001 17:34:13 -0500
Subject: [OT] "Enemy At The Gates" Review
This is off topic, but I know a lot of people were interested in this
film.
"Enemy At The Gates" is the story of a sniper duel during the Battle of
Stalingrad. There is a question as to whether this duel ever took place.
It's
a part of Soviet folklore, but the incident is very much in question.
I came to the conclusion that the director Jean-Jacques Annaud ("The
Bear",
"Quest For Fire", "Name of the Rose", "Seven Years in Tibet") knows very
well
that this is folklore and may not be true. The conflict between reality
and
propaganda is a recurring theme throughout the film.
I had the good fortune of attending the movie with two friends who are
much
more literate in film than I am (one of them, Michael Skeet, is
reviewing the
film for CBC radio). My friend Dave Nickle (journalist and writer)
pointed out
that much of the film, from lighting to composition, is a deliberate
homage to
the great Soviet director Sergei Eisenstein ("The Battleship Potemkin")
(see
http://www.carleton.edu/curricular/MEDA/classes/media110/Severson/eisens
te.htm).
This is echoed in the Soviet style art deco graphics used during the end
credits and the cartoon of Nazism "flowing" into the Soviet Union at the
beginning of the film.
The focus of the film is Vassily Zeitsev (Jude Law), a farm boy from the
Urals
who is thrown into the meat grinder of Stalingrad -- without even a
rifle --
and becomes a Soviet legend. He saves the life of Political Officer
Danilov
(Joseph Fiennes, "Shakespeare In Love") by killing 5 Germans with 5
bullets.
Danilov turns this episode into a propaganda coup, designed to raise the
morale of Soviet troops in the city. He builds up Zeitsev into a sniper
ace,
reporting his kills with all the zeal reserved for World War I fighter
pilots.
In response to this, the Germans send in their own ace sniper, Major
Koenig
(Ed Harris, "Apollo 13", "The Truman Show"), to eliminate Zeitsev.
You're never really sure what is real and what isn't. It occurred to me
later
just how many Germans you see Zeitsev kill... and that number is
incredibly
low. The theme that Zeitsev has been built up as something he's not is
presented consistently. There's a mythical quality to Koenig. He appears
in
Stalingrad on an empty train, where he is the only person in his train
car.
Zeitsev dirties his face and covers his gun in burlap, yet the only dirt
Harris' Koenig gets on him seems to be his boots (though his gloves do
get
ripped). I've heard people criticize this, but I think it is wholly
intentional. Annaud is so meticulous in details that he included the
wreck of
an obscure, but accurate, German aircraft in the ruins of the city. He
obviously understands the way that snipers camouflage themselves. Yet,
Koenig
seems "above" that. This is very much deliberate.
A clue to this is the climactic confrontation between Zeitsev and
Koenig. It
takes place in a railroad yard that is completely empty except for the
two of
them. Everything is quiet and still, in spite of it occurring during the
battle of Stalingrad. The effect is quite intentional. Symbollically,
the war
has come down to the conflict of these two men, and these two men are so
hyper-focused that nothing else seems to exist. The lighting, though, is
exactly the same dull, washed out grey tone as is found in the opening
scene
of Zeitsev hunting his first wolf. Are the colours used just as a
framing
device? Or is Annaud suggesting that this final confrontation is nothing
more
than a legend? I personally believe the latter.
Another theme is that of class struggle. Annaud made an intelligent
decision
by not forcing the actors to use fake accents. The Soviets have British
accents. The educated Soviets have upper class accents, while Law and
Bob
Hoskins (playing Nikita Kruschev) represent Soviet workers with their
working
class English accents. Harris keeps his American accent, and it works.
The love story that has many worried (i.e. that the movie has "gone
Hollywood") is handled very well and as part of the class struggle
theme. In
the "worker's paradise" all are equal and there is no reason for
jealousy.
Yet, Danilov eventually realizes that humans are NOT equal, that there
is
always someone who is born with better attributes. As such, he can not
prevent
Tania Chernova (Rachel Weisz), an educated woman from Stalingrad who has
volunteered to defend her people, from falling for Zeitsev. This sets up
the
conflict between Zeitsev and Danilov. The love story is a fairly small
part of
the film, and is set up nicely early on by showing two other snipers
that
obviously have a relationship of their own.
The battle scenes are very well done, particularly the first battle
scene
where Zeitsev is thrown into the conflict. The sniper duel scenes are
tense
and well crafted. The CGI Junkers 88s bombing the city, and the Stukas
attacking the boats as they cross the Volga, show that it is indeed
possible
to do a World War II film accurately with computer animation. There
weren't a
lot of tanks shown, but those that I saw looked authentic. Early on
there's an
armoured train car with two T34/85 tank turrets mounted on it, which I
thought
was well done. The ruined buildings are excellently portrayed, though it
would
take someone with more knowledge of the battle than me to see if the
city was
laid out in an authentic manner.
>From an acting point of view, I thought the performances were well done
throughout. Ron Perlman (best known as the Beast from the "Beauty and
the
Beast" TV show, but last seen in "Alien Resurrection") is a treat as a
Soviet
sniper who studied under Koenig before the war.
This is an artistic film. But it proves that a film can work as a war
movie
and an art film at the same time. The art direction and the symbolism
all
point to film of multiple dimensions. But it is possible to enjoy this
movie
just as a war film, and a well made war film at that.
Allan Goodall awg@sympatico.ca
Goodall's Grotto: http://www.vex.net/~agoodall
"Now, see, if you combine different colours of light,
you get white! Try that with Play-Doh and you get
brown! How come?" - Alan Moore & Kevin Nolan,