Enemy at the Gates

Posted on December 13, 2002 at 5:17 am

B+
Lowest Recommended Age: Mature High Schooler
Profanity: Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs: A lot of smoking, some drinking
Violence/ Scariness: Very violent battle scenes, extremely tense, many deaths, characters in peril
Diversity Issues: Women are as strong and effective as the men, reference to anti-semitism
Date Released to Theaters: 2001

It is 1942 and Stalingrad is “a city on the Volga where the fate of the world is being decided.” Hitler is trying to do what Napoleon could not and has sent his troops to invade the Soviet Union.

The Germans have enormous strength, and the Russians are overmatched. Soviet officers hand guns to every other soldier, telling them, “When the one with the rifle gets killed, the one following picks up the rifle and shoots.” The Germans establish a stronghold and the Russian soldiers are badly shaken. A new commanding officer, Nikita Krushchev (Bob Hoskins), terrorizes one of the senior officers into killing himself and asks for suggestions on how to build the morale of his soldiers. A young political officer named Danilov (Joseph Fiennes of “Shakespeare in Love”) makes a suggestion — “give them hope.” He has seen a soldier kill five Germans, each with a single shot. He urges Krushchev to “give them heroes.”

The soldier is Vassily Zaitsev (Jude Law), an uneducated boy from the Urals with an extraordinary talent for hitting his target. Danilov’s propaganda makes Zaitsev a legend. And that makes him a target for the Germans, who dispatch their own legendary sniper, Terminator-style, to go after him. When that legend arrives (Ed Harris as Major Koenig), he can research Zaitsev by reading Danilov’s circulars about Zaitsev. Danilov sees Koenig’s arrival as a chance for bigger and better propaganda. Koenig is a nobleman, so that now there is a class war to add to the story.

But everything Danilov does to make Zaitsev a hero and an asset to the Soviets makes him more vulnerable to discovery and attack by the Germans. Things get even more complicaged when Danilov and Zaitsev fall for the same girl, a tough soldier named Tania (Rachel Weisz of “The Mummy”).

This is a thinking person’s historical epic, so impressively ambitious in taking on issues and ideas that you have to cut it some slack when it does not manage them all as skillfully as it hopes to. The story of the German siege of Leningrad is worth a movie in itself. The cat and mouse game between Koenig and Zaitsev is like something out of a classic western, more much about strategy, courage, ingenuity, and patience as about sharpshooting. The issue of using one individual’s story to manipulate the masses plays out fascinatingly throughout the movie. It is reminiscent of “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence’s” famous line, “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.” If the love triangle is the weakest part of the movie, that is only because the rest of it is so strong.

All four stars are excellent, especially Law’s guileless integrity and Harris’ variation — a sort of guile-full integrity. When the two men face off against each other, it is clear that they understand each other in a way that no one else ever can.

Parents should know that this is a very tense and violent movie, with graphic battle scenes and piles of dead bodies. Characters are in constant peril and many are killed, including a child. There is a brief but fairly explicit sexual encounter with brief nudity. The characters use strong language, drink, and smoke.

Families who see this movie should talk about the effect that fame has on people. At first, Zaitsev innocently enjoys the attention, though he never lets it go to his head. Later he says, “I can’t carry that weight any more. I want to fight as a regular soldier.” Was what Danilov did necessary? Was it fair to Zaitsev? Did it do what it was intended to? How was that similar to what the Germans did to Koenig? (Think about the scene where he turns in his dogtags)? Why did Tania chose the one she loves? Think about what it says about the real Zaitsev at the end of the movie — does the movie do to the real Zaitsev what Danilov did to the fictional one?

Families who enjoy this movie should read more about the invasion of the Soviet Union, a key turning point in WWII. Younger members of the family might like to hear what happened to the commanding officer, Nikita Krushchev, whom baby boomers may remember best for banging the table with his shoe at the U.N. Families who enjoy this movie should also see “Doctor Zhivago.”

Related Tags:

 

Movies -- format

Hearts in Atlantis

Posted on December 13, 2002 at 5:17 am

C+
Lowest Recommended Age: Mature High Schooler
Profanity: Some mild language
Alcohol/ Drugs: Some drinking and smoking, scenes in bar
Violence/ Scariness: Violence, including rape, mostly off-screen
Diversity Issues: Tolerance of individual differences, mean gay character
Date Released to Theaters: 2001

If you’re allergic to the kind of movie that starts with a funeral and then goes into a flashback about a sensitive kid’s last childhood summer, then stay away. But audiences with an appreciation or even a tolerance of this genre will find this to be above average. It is based on a story by Stephen King. There is some tension and an element of the supernatural, but this is King’s coming of age mode (“Stand By Me”) and contact with an extraordinary character mode (“The Shawshank Redemption” and “The Green Mile”), not a horror movie.

It is summertime, and Billy has just turned 11. His mother’s birthday gift is not the bicycle he dreams of but an adult library card. She is quick to remind him that they have very little money, since Billy’s father died leaving them with unpaid bills and no insurance. Billy’s friend Carol points out that his mother buys new clothes for herself, but Billy defends her, saying that she has to look good for work.

A stranger comes to live above Billy and his mother. His name is Ted Brautigan (Anthony Hopkins). He hires Billy to read him the newspaper and watch out for “the low men,” who wear hats, drive fancy cars, and leave odd messages in code on telephone poles. Billy thinks Ted is a little loony, but he agrees, at first because he wants to earn money for the bicycle, and then because he is drawn to Ted’s warmth, humor, and even to his strangeness. He begins to see signs of the low men, but he does not tell Ted. He knows that when Ted hears that the low men have come, he will have to leave.

Billy gets a chance to see through Ted’s eyes, which may be weak when it comes to reading but which see important things very clearly. When Billy touches Ted, he gets a little bit of Ted’s ability to somehow “know” things. All of a sudden, in the next room, Billy can tell that what Ted is wondering about is his cigarettes. And a surprised three-card monte shark (well-played by “A Knight’s Tale’s” Alan Tudyk) finds that Billy can tell him where the Queen of Hearts is without even looking at the cards. Even more important, though, is that way that Ted, like all special grown-ups in the lives of children, guides Billy to a new knowledge of himself and the world. Ted helps Billy realize that his friend Carol is more special to him than he thought, that he deserves better treatment from his mother, and that the town bully is not as powerful as he thinks.

Parents should know that there is some strong language, characters are in peril and some are injured, and a character is raped (inexplicit and mostly offscreen). A character is wrongfully accused of molesting a child. A bully who accuses others of being “queer” turns out to be acting on his fears about his own sexuality. Fighting back is portrayed as heroic. There are a couple of chaste kisses.

Families who see this movie should talk about the grown-ups who inspired them the most, and might also want to discuss how we decide whom we will trust.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Stand By Me – Special Edition(some mature material).

Related Tags:

 

Movies -- format

Kiss of the Dragon

Posted on December 13, 2002 at 5:17 am

D
Lowest Recommended Age: Mature High Schooler
Profanity: Some strong language
Alcohol/ Drugs: Drug use, drinking and smoking, character is a former junkie
Violence/ Scariness: Extreme and prolonged violence, some very graphic
Diversity Issues: Heroes are Chinese, bad guys are French
Date Released to Theaters: 2001

Jet Li is always a pleasure to watch, even in this silly story about a Chinese spy befriended by an American prostitute on a mission in Paris.

No longer the pretty boy in the equally silly but more romantic “Romeo Must Die,” this time, in a story he created, Li lets us see some chicken pox scars on his face and he lets us see him get knocked down a few times, too.

But don’t confuse that with realism. This is still a ridiculous fantasy story about an evil policeman named Richard (Tchéky Karyo) who seems to be behind most of the crime in Europe. Richard runs prostitutes and deals in drugs. And when the Chinese government sends a representative to help investigate drug traffic into China, Richard kills his Chinese contact and frames the representative, whom he insists on calling “Johnny.”

All of this is, of course, just a thin excuse for extensive and sometimes inventive fight scenes, featuring lots of punching and kicking and also injury and death by grenade (which blows a guy in half), laundry irons (applied to faces), automatic weapons, chopsticks to the throat, a billiard ball to the head, and some tiny acupuncture pins with devastating effects. My favorite encounter was when Li, chasing through the police station, locks himself inside a room only to turn around and discover that he is facing an entire class of cops who are in a karate class.

Parents should know that the movie is extremely violent and very graphic, with many gross, bloody deaths and behavior that is reckless to the point of insanity. Richard makes Al Capone look like a consensus-builder. Even most movie bad guys are not as out of control as Richard, who wildly shoots automatic weapons into crowds of civilians. Li made headlines the week before the film was released by recommending that parents not allow their children to see the movie, which is rated R for extreme and graphic violence, drug use, and sexual references and situations. This is good advice.

Families who do see the movie should talk about how Jessica, an American girl from North Dakota, made the foolish choices that left her a heroin-addicted prostitute and kept her away from her daughter. What other options did she have? What will happen to her after the movie ends?

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy Jet Li in Romeo Must Die and Lethal Weapon.

Related Tags:

 

Movies -- format

Modern Times

Posted on December 13, 2002 at 5:17 am

A+
Lowest Recommended Age: Kindergarten - 3rd Grade
Profanity: None
Alcohol/ Drugs: Cocaine ("nose powder") accidentally ingested by Chaplin
Violence/ Scariness: None
Diversity Issues: Use of term "darkie" in a song.
Date Released to Theaters: 1936

Plot: This Chaplin classic (he produced, wrote, directed, starred, and composed the music) is about two people struggling with the isolation of the industrial era. Chaplin (simply called “A worker” in the credits) is tightening bolts on an assembly line. He does it so intently that his arms continue to twitch as though he is still tightening when he takes his break. On a break, he smokes in the men’s room until the big boss appears on a television screen to tell him to quit stalling and get back to work.

The boss watches a demonstration of a new machine, designed to feed employees while they work, to reduce breaks. Chaplin is selected to try it out. Everything goes wrong in the most deliriously slapstick fashion. He eventually becomes trapped in the huge factory machine itself, stuck in the gears. He comes out a little crazed, tightening everything resembling bolts. He loses his job. A doctor tells him to take it easy and avoid excitement.

Nevertheless, he almost immediately finds excitement by accidentally leading a communist parade while just trying to return the red flag to the man who dropped it. He is arrested. The prison is not unlike the factory in its regimentation. At lunch, the guards come in “searching for smuggled nose powder.” The prisoner who has smuggled it puts it in a salt shaker. When he is taken away, Chaplin sprinkles it on his food and becomes a bit delirious. When he comes upon an attempted escape, he captures the prisoners and releases the guards.

Meanwhile, we have met “a gamin,” Paulette Goddard, stealing food for herself and other children. Her unemployed father is killed in a street fight, and she and her siblings are taken into state custody, to be sent to an orphanage. Goddard escapes as Chaplin remains “happy in his comfortable cell.” However, he is pardoned because of his heroism in the attempted escape, and is given a letter of recommendation to get a job.

After another job disaster, he is “determined to go back to jail” where he was safe and warm. He sees Goddard captured for stealing bread, and confesses that it was he who stole it. But a witness identifies Goddard. He orders a large meal, eats it, then turns himself in as being unable to pay, and happily settles into the police truck on the way back to jail. When Goddard is put in the same truck, they escape together. He takes a job as night watchman in a department store, and they enjoy having the store to themselves. But robbers break in — Chaplin’s former colleague at the factory. And the next morning, Chaplin is arrested again.

Goddard is waiting for him when he gets out of the police station. Goddard gets a job as a dancer in a nightclub and arranges a job for him as a singing waiter. He is a huge hit (even though he forgets the words to the song and has to make them up). But the police come after Goddard, to take her back into the custody of the state. They escape once more, and walk off into the sunset together.

Discussion: We have to remind ourselves how prescient this movie was. To us, it may not be surprising that the boss watches the workers on screen, but this was before the invention of television–and more than a decade before the publication of Orwell’s 1984. Interestingly, it was several years after the invention of the talkies. But Chaplin wanted to make a silent movie, and silent this one is, except for a few words, some sound effects, and a gibberish song. Children will adore the slapstick in this movie, especially the scenes where Chaplin tries out the feeding machine and when he experiments with roller skates at the department store. Grown-ups who watch with younger children can read them the title cards, and help them follow the story. They can tell older children something about the Depression and the concerns about the dehumanizing effect of technology that are a part of this movie. Point out the use of sheep at the beginning, and then their human equivalents, the crowds of people on their way to work.

Questions for Kids:

· Why did the boss want Chaplin to try the eating machine? What would Frank Gilbreth of “Cheaper By the Dozen” think of the machine?

· Why did Chaplin want to go back to jail? Why didn’t Goddard want to go to jail?

· Did Chaplin want you to think that prison was like the factory? Better? How can you tell?

· How did Chaplin and Goddard differ in their reactions to their troubles?

· For high school age: Why was Chaplin arrested for leading the communist parade? Does that violate the freedom of speech guaranteed by the First Amendment?

Connections: Some of the Chaplin shorter movies like “The Rink” and “The Gold Rush” are delightful for kids. “City Lights” is a wonderful movie with a darker tone and a more ambiguous ending.

Related Tags:

 

Movies -- format

On the Line

Posted on December 13, 2002 at 5:17 am

C+
Lowest Recommended Age: 4th - 6th Grades
Profanity: Mild language (strong for a PG)
Alcohol/ Drugs: Beer and wine
Violence/ Scariness: Brief fistfight
Diversity Issues: Diverse cast
Date Released to Theaters: 2001

The only way to write about “On the Line” is to have separate mini-reviews for the three categories of people who are most likely to be curious about it. I’ll begin with the group least able to wait (but also least likely to care what anyone else says about it): N’Sync fans. You will like the movie. Lance Bass (who also co-produced) and Joey Fatone appear throughout the movie and are cute. There are a lot of jokes and there is a sweet romance. There are some N’Sync songs on the soundtrack and some good songs by other performers and some cameo appearances by other stars, including Richie Sambora and Brandi. You also get to hear Joey perform some hard rock songs like “Pour Some Sugar on Me,” and Lance sings “Two Princes.” The other members of N’Sync appear very briefly during the end credits. Judging by the reaction of the mostly teenage girl audience in the screening I attended (and that was a group of intense fans who aced a pre-show N’Sync trivia contest), that was the highlight of the film.

Next, for parents of kids who want to see the movie and want to know how bad it is: I’ve seen worse, but then I am one of the few adults who has seen all three “Pokemon” movies AND all three “Mighty Ducks” movies. But I well understand the audience for this movie — back in the day, I went to see an awful musical called “When the Boys Meet the Girls” just because it had a performance by Herman’s Hermits.

If your kids want to see the movie, it is probably because they are fans of N’Sync, because, though it never mentions the group in its advertising, the movie stars two of its members. The story is a basic boy meets girl (on Chicago’s elevated train), loses girl because he is too shy to ask for her name and phone number, and then finds her again after several near misses. It is rated PG for some crude humor and brief bad language. On the scale of pop star vanity productions that reaches from the depths of “Glitter” and “Can’t Stop the Music” to the pinnacle of “Hard Day’s Night,” it is not very good but not destined for status as a legendary disaster. It’s about as harmless as an average sitcom episode.

Finally, in case there is anyone out there who is considering going to this movie for any reason other than its N’Sync connection: don’t bother. Go see “Serendipity” instead – it has a similar story with a better script and a much better cast. The script is really terrible, not just dumb but sloppy. It can’t even get the definition of “tweens” right, a pretty big lapse, considering that tweens are the primary demographic for the movie’s audience. Much of the movie takes place on Chicago’s famous “El” trains, and yet in the movie they spell it “L.” And Lance’s character either goes massively into debt with a last grand gesture to find the girl of his dreams or he embezzles the client’s ad campaign money to put his copy on their billboards. Apparently, this little detail was not important enough to clear up. Furthermore, the movie unforgiveably wastes the talents of Dave Foley and Jerry Stiller. We may forgive Stiller for complaining about his internal organs and bodily functions in “Zoolander” — that was a favor to his son, who wrote and directed it. But in this movie we get the same shtick for no reason whatsoever.

Parents should know that the movie has some vulgar humor and some strong language for a PG (there is some obvious overdubbing that indicates that the movie may have been cut down from a PG-13). Characters drink beer and wine. One actor does what could be considered an insensitive caricature of flamboyant gay male behavior. Guys ask each other how much “action” they got following a date. Despite some crude conversation, the behavior of the characters is not inappropriate and one male character comes on too strong is told by his date in no uncertain terms that his behavior is inappropriate, a good role model for the young girls in the audience.

Families who see the movie should talk about how it can be hard to take a risk. Parents may want to talk about some of their own experiences and how they learned from their mistakes.

Families who enjoy this movie will also enjoy the best teen idol movie ever made, A Hard Day’s Night, starring the Beatles.

Related Tags:

 

Movies -- format
THE MOVIE MOM® is a registered trademark of Nell Minow. Use of the mark without express consent from Nell Minow constitutes trademark infringement and unfair competition in violation of federal and state laws. All material © Nell Minow 1995-2025, all rights reserved, and no use or republication is permitted without explicit permission. This site hosts Nell Minow’s Movie Mom® archive, with material that originally appeared on Yahoo! Movies, Beliefnet, and other sources. Much of her new material can be found at Rogerebert.com, Huffington Post, and WheretoWatch. Her books include The Movie Mom’s Guide to Family Movies and 101 Must-See Movie Moments, and she can be heard each week on radio stations across the country.

Website Designed by Max LaZebnik