The missing link between Saving Private Ryan (1998) and Pearl Harbour (2001).

Rating: 5/10 (31 August 2001)

Which has to account for the overall blandness of Enemy at the Gates...

Firstly, lets look at the problem, never before has a language barrier marred my enjoyment of a film, but with Enemy at the Gates it's just a little silly, for you see, director Jean-Jacques Annaud believes that letting his actors speak in their native accents is an interesting concept, and doesn't take away any of the believability of the performances. So, it's not out the ordinary to find an English schoolboy or an Australian sniper musing around Stalingrad. This just destroys any of the film's power, at one point, when Jude Law's character first meets Tania (Rachael Wiesz) a friend says that she taught her German, that's all well and good but who the hell taught her English. It's pathetic.
The look of the film however is splendid, lots of washed out colours and sub-dogme hand-held camera, clearly inspired by Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan... But without characters that are believable this is all just a pointless exercise in style. The acting is also bad, Law looks puzzled, Wiesz is as good as ever, and that's not a complement, she has to be one of the worst actresses working at the moment, Fiennes just hangs around like a wet blanket, only Ed Harris walks away with any dignity, but then again he is the first "American" soldier I've seen working for the Germans.
Added to that the plot makes no sense and there's actually very little action to keep you're attention, also there's a pretty useless sex scene, that seems to be there for the soul reason of saying, "look, a sex scene"... This is an average film not worth the money of a rental, wait for this to be broadcast on TV... The only reason I could possibly think of to recommend this film to any one would be so they can check out Bob Hoskins' performance, as a cockney Khrushchev...
5/10... Still better than Pearl Harbour though.