[REVIEW] Enemy at the Gates

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:smile: :sad: :eek: :shock: :cool: :-x :razz: :oops: :evil: :twisted: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :mrgreen:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: [REVIEW] Enemy at the Gates

by bruce » Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:34 pm

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I hope they make T4 and just animate a walking vagina to display him. I didn't see T3, but isn't the whole movie Claire Daynes leading him around by the hand?
I think you're thinking of "William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet," directed by Baz Luhrmann. Hope this helps.

Bruce

by Worm » Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:22 pm

chris wrote:
pinback wrote: Based on what?
Based on what makes sense. If you want somebody to pop their head up so you can blow it off, give them a reason to do it. A functional nearby gun is a good reason....a busted gun is not.

Am I the only one with common sense around here?
Yeah, it's real common sense to leave a guy the ability to kill you in an effort to draw him out rather than to take away his ability to kill you and go get a soda or something.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Wed Jul 13, 2005 4:18 pm

John Conner (Connor?) was supposed to be this big, charismatic bad ass and they got a couple of PUSSIES to play him.

I hope they make T4 and just animate a walking vagina to display him. I didn't see T3, but isn't the whole movie Claire Daynes leading him around by the hand?

What a waste of time.

by pinback » Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:54 pm

Yes it does. Terminator 2 would be a fantastic, classic action film, except for ONE thing, which has TWO words, and which words I will now SAY to you:

Word 1: Eddie
Word 2: Furlong

I think *I* am going to send a bloodthirsty robot back to 1990 to kill Eddie Furlong before that movie gets made.

WE HATE YOU, Eddie.

Re: [REVIEW] Enemy at the Gates

by Guest » Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:45 pm

pinback wrote:For all the "Die Hard on a Boat" movies, and the "Die Hard on a Leper Colony" movies, and the "Die Hard on Gossamer Wings" movies, the original is still the only one to really get it right.
Terminator 2 does it pretty well.

by chris » Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:43 am

pinback wrote: Based on what?
Based on what makes sense. If you want somebody to pop their head up so you can blow it off, give them a reason to do it. A functional nearby gun is a good reason....a busted gun is not.

Am I the only one with common sense around here?

by pinback » Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:34 pm

chris wrote:If the gun still works, the good sniper is more likely to NOT wait it out, and grab for the gun after a while. The bad sniper gets his kill faster than if he destroys the gun and has to wait it out. Maybe leaving the gun intact makes for a poorer film, but it's what a REAL sniper would have done.
Based on what?

Next you can explain why Independence Day was bullcrap because it's not what a REAL alien menace would have done.

by chris » Tue Jun 07, 2005 5:18 pm

pinback wrote:1. If the gun is out of commission, then Bad Sniper just has to wait there until the other guy decides he's safe and tries to make a run for it. There's NOTHING ELSE he can do. It'd be a battle of will, and of patience, and that would make for a more interesting movie.
If the gun still works, the good sniper is more likely to NOT wait it out, and grab for the gun after a while. The bad sniper gets his kill faster than if he destroys the gun and has to wait it out. Maybe leaving the gun intact makes for a poorer film, but it's what a REAL sniper would have done.

by pinback » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:42 pm

1. If the gun is out of commission, then Bad Sniper just has to wait there until the other guy decides he's safe and tries to make a run for it. There's NOTHING ELSE he can do. It'd be a battle of will, and of patience, and that would make for a more interesting movie.

2. I wonder if Bad Sniper really thought it would be so bad to have the gun out of commission after he gets that little stigmata in his left hand for his troubles.

Re: [REVIEW] Enemy at the Gates

by chris » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:36 pm

pinback wrote:So, I'm giving this **1/2, just on the strength of the sniper stuff. I'm giving the love/corny bullshit parts of it 0 stars. I'm giving Die Hard ****1/2 (four and a half) stars.
OMFG, a movie that we've BOTH seen?

I guess I liked the movie more than you. Vasily Zaitsev (aka: the Russian sniper) was a real guy, and the duel with the German sniper is supposed to have really happened. I've read that both armies actually stopped fighting while the duel went on. Yeah, the story got "Hollywood-ized" a bit, but 2.5 is a little low. I'd give it 3.5 out of 5.
Bad Sniper has Good Sniper pinned down, without a weapon, behind a big steel obstacle. Good Sniper is attempting to grab a weapon which is just out of reach, by getting a little string and trying to lasso it and pull it towards him. Good Sniper eventually snags the gun, and begins drawing it in.

Bad Sniper shoots the string in half, to keep Good Sniper from getting the gun.

Why doesn't Bad Sniper just shoot the fucking gun?
What good will that do? If the gun is put out of commission, there's nothing to draw Zaitsev out enough to kill him. Shoot the string, and Zaitsev is more likely to get desperate and actually try to reach out and grab for it. Shooting the string baits the hook, as it were.

[REVIEW] Enemy at the Gates

by pinback » Tue Jun 07, 2005 4:12 pm

Die Hard is still the only movie that has really gotten this thing right.

1. Set up the good guy.
2. Set up the bad guy.
3. Have them go at it for an hour and a half.

For all the "Die Hard on a Boat" movies, and the "Die Hard on a Leper Colony" movies, and the "Die Hard on Gossamer Wings" movies, the original is still the only one to really get it right.

Enemy at the Gates (or "OMG CAMPER FAG: TEH MOVIE") is, at its heart, Die Hard on the East Front, with opposing snipers dueling it out. As a person who always wanted to be (and may still become) a sniper when he grew up, I love the setup. And in fact, the actual snipering-related scenes in the movie, I lapped up like a thirsty, blood-lusting puppy.

Okay, fine. Do that for an hour and a half.

But nooo, we gotta stretch it out to 2.2 hours, and throw the stupid LOVE interest in there, and throw the stupid "good friend who becomes an enemy because of the hot chick" crap, and throw the stupid "kid who does the things what the kid does" crap in there, and uughghghhh. I WANT SNIPING, AND I WANT IT NOW.

So, I'm giving this **1/2, just on the strength of the sniper stuff. I'm giving the love/corny bullshit parts of it 0 stars. I'm giving Die Hard ****1/2 (four and a half) stars.

But answer me this: (WEAK-ASS SPOILER WARNING)

Bad Sniper has Good Sniper pinned down, without a weapon, behind a big steel obstacle. Good Sniper is attempting to grab a weapon which is just out of reach, by getting a little string and trying to lasso it and pull it towards him. Good Sniper eventually snags the gun, and begins drawing it in.

Bad Sniper shoots the string in half, to keep Good Sniper from getting the gun.

Why doesn't Bad Sniper just shoot the fucking gun?

Top