Not as good as it could have been

Rating: 8/10 (2 April 2001)

Director Jean-Jacques Annaud and DP Robert Fraisse come up with a visual style I'm not sure I like, but know I haven't seen before. They've figured out a way to make big effects shots (Stalingrad being bombed by German planes) look cool without looking like they used a lot of CG. For all I know, they did use a lot. I'm just saying. They definitely succeed in giving `Enemy' a murky, dirty, even smelly look.
It's a really good war film too. Not that it's the best one ever, but it has all the necessary elements of a great war film: Intricate, well-staged battle scenes; human drama; showing mankind both at its lowest and at its most noble. The war movie brings together the elements of many genres to create a genre of its own.
Nikita Krushchev (Bob Hoskins) enforced Stalin's policy of killing on sight any soldier retreating out of fear. Annaud's telling of this tale creates a fascinating paradox. Where does the courage to resist the Germans come from if the alternative is going on living in Stalin's society? Talk about choosing the lesser of two evils.
The backbone of the story is how Hope alone may have stopped the advance of Nazi forces in Stalingrad at the end of 1943. A political officer named Danilov (Joseph Fiennes) believes the city will fall unless its soldiers are given some sign of hope. He decides they need a hero and finds one in Vassili Zaitsev, a sharp-shooter who may be the finest in all of Russia. No German high-ranking officer is safe with Zaitsev within range of him. Within days, he's a national hero (a true story) and is Germany's number one enemy. They send (or does he come of his own accord?) Major Koenig (Ed Harris), their own champion sniper, to find Zaitsev and kill him.
Each man is aware of the other and try and guess the others' next move. Each side uses its champion to inspire its soldiers. The news of either man's death, especially by the other's bullet, could turn the tide of the battle unlike any other event. What a great idea for a film--and executed to near perfection to boot. The love story and other subplots that accompany the two champions' struggle serve their purpose--they give the characters their souls.
In a perfect world, this film would have been made with Russian and German-speaking actors with subtitles for the benefit of us Westerners. I know I would have enjoyed it more and taken it much, much more seriously if they'd gone the other way with it. Annaud wasn't of like thinking with Ang Lee, who could easily have made `Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' in english.
Then again why wasn't, say, `Schindler's List' told in its characters' native tongues? The reasons for both films being in english are identical and, valid. In a film in which many language are spoken, sometimes it helps to unify the communication by having everyone speak one language. It's also a matter of knowing who your audience is going to be. Annaud knew he wanted this film to target a Western audience. As long as Russians aren't offended by it being in english, I have no problem with it. But like I said, I'd rather it were in Russian and German.
`Enemy at the Gates' is a fascinating, exciting film. It's got everything you could want in a war film, but also goes a step beyond. The Battle of Stalingrad is a key moment not only in the history of Russia, but in the history of the world. Unfortunately, this may be the only education some people receive on the subject. So be it. It's certainly better than nothing.
Grade: B