MovieChat Forums > Enemy at the Gates (2001) Discussion > Why do so many people like this movie?

Why do so many people like this movie?

posted 10 years ago by vh8686
10 replies | jump to latest

Actually I can see why. Accents aside, the premise is scintilatting, its nicely shot, the production design makes the film feel very authentic, and other than Rachel Weiz, I think everyone is casted perfectly, though I'm on the fence with Bob Hoskins as Kruschev.

But this movie has some problems. The music for instance is cliche for a period drama and doesn't really fit the tone of the film. The love story/triangle is a huge misfire narratively. Its unneccesary, contrived, takes away from the meat of the story (the sniper duel) and creates an inconsistency in the plot - Sasha tells Konig that Zaitsev and the girl are in love, but a romantic relationship hadn't even been established yet, let alone presented to that degree. This becomes a classic example of Hollywood-ization of film even though this movie I think is from an independent studio.

Other problems with the plot include Joseph Fiennes' character, upset that he doesn't get the girl, writing that Zaitsev is a coward and hurts the soviet cause etc., with no subsequent consequence, followed by a complete inexplicit about-face to sacrifice himself in the end. WTF?

Its dissappointing because the good things about the movie are really good and anyone who dislikes the movis is probably irked by how good it could have been.

[–] userrrrr 10 years ago

i do like this movie, although i haven't seen it in almost a decade, but i also agree with everything you've written here. kudos

[–] Jimmycakes 10 years ago

The music is incredible, and has a soviet theme to it. So you're way off there, as usual, another uneducated idiot.

[–] vh8686 10 years ago

Thank you Jimmycakes, I am grateful that you are so qualified to gauge my level of education. I of course don't have your depth of knowledge to render a proper opinion, so I'll just adopt your perspective. Of course the music is brilliant if only because you say so, and that soviet theme without a doubt assures that the tone of certain scenes is in no way reminiscent of any other film ever made... Ever with a capital 'E'.

How could I be such and idiot? Its probably because I'm a left-wing nutjob with communist leanings. Wouldn't you agree ya isolated anti-social Adam Lanza motherfu**er? Get off the computer and go find some *beep* friends.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] agracier-574-436194 10 years ago

There was only one instance that I can recall of Soviet music being used in the movie, when Zaitsev is introduced by Kruschev to a meeting of the press under a huge banner of Stalin. The music is indeed the Soviet anthem ... but it was only introduced as anthem in 1944 - 2 years after the events portrayed in the movie. If they had used the correct anthem of the Soviet Union at that time, it should have been the Internationale.

So there goes the Soviet music theme in the movie, which is very unfortunate as using more authentic music from that era would have added to the atmosphere.

What you might perhaps think to be Soviet music in the movie would instead be more typical Russian music - a completely different thing as Russian music themes would hark back to either folk songs with instruments like a balalaika being used so as to cue Western audiences in the connotation.

Or else more bombastic 19th century composers would have been emulated to give a Russian feeling to the score. Think of Tjaikovsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Borodin etc ...

I find it a missed opportunity to have used some rousing Soviet music to accompany the movie. It would have been much better suited to the story and given it a somewhat more suitable Soviet feel.

[–] bastasch8647 10 years ago

The music stinks, and only a virginal naif would think that it's beautiful and original. It may have been beautiful and original the first time Horner used it - but not in its nasty, lazy recycled form in Enemy at the Gates. Nice film, execrable score by the criminally lazy James "P for Plagiarist" Horner. It would have been much better to hire a composer or orchestrator to beef up the score - as Johnny Mandel did with the Russian music in The Russians Are Coming.

[–] vortexrider 10 years ago

I don't like it because I hate Jude Law.

[–] aubie84 9 years ago

Because- it's an actual story and place to get lost in watching... When movies had dialogue other than F bomb and Soundbytes...about people and a Love story- not just Hooking Up... And Before- CGI- so it looks like a Movie, w/ sets, Not A Cartoon Exploding around actors... I found it quite entertaining. Anyone else?

Overkill, is underrated ...
-Crixus-

[–] herbsuperb 9 years ago

though I'm on the fence with Bob Hoskins as Kruschev.

I simply cannot take any part of this film seriously anymore. So Bob Hoskins as Kruschev is the only part of the film I actually enjoy. Just by virtue of it being a bit ridiculous. I've always enjoyed Bob Hoskins performances.

The opening sequence is decent, and the initial encounter between Joseph Fiennes and Jude Law is interesting. But the moment the film falls apart is where that kid shows up. After that it gets worse, and worse, and worse, and never recovers.

Its dissappointing because the good things about the movie are really good and anyone who dislikes the movis is probably irked by how good it could have been.

You nailed it. Good premise, and a story worth telling. But it was just really poorly told. I'd love to see a much better group of filmmakers take another shot at the 'Stalingrad' story.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]