ENEMY AT THE GATES.... a history lesson about the true story it's based upon
by
Harold Hellman
[SPOILERS]
Hey folks, here's an EXCELLENT look at the facts behind the story that the film,
ENEMY AT THE GATES will be based upon. This is the film that Jude Law, Ed
Harris, Rachel Weisz and Joseph Fiennes will be starring in for director,
Jean-Jacques Annaud. Enjoy this rundown of the history of the event upon which
this film is based....
ENEMY AT THE GATES: The True Story
Stalingrad, 14 Sept 1942. German forces -- the Fourth Panzer and the Sixth --
are moving into the city's ruined downtown. But the Russians have snipers all
through the city, positioned in ones and twos, and their marksmanship takes a
heavy toll on the Wehrmacht as it slogs through the rubble. The delay gives the
Russian Army on the other side of the city time to mobilize and bring forward
additional forces to resist the Germans.
One of the Russian snipers was well-known to the Germans. Vassili Zaitsev was an
infamous marksman, credited during one ten-day period with forty-two killshots.
As his reputation spread, German command began demonizing him, making his
capture and/or kill a primary morale-building objective. Naturally, then, when
they learned he was among the Stalingrad sniper crew, they knew they had to do
something.
So they shipped to Stalingrad one of their own infamous hunters, a certain Major
Konings. His job was simple: Enter Stalingrad, locate Zaitsev, and eliminate
him.
This was not kept secret for long. Konings was researching Zaitsev's style and
tactics, while Zaitsev knew only that Konings had previously headed a German
sniper training program. And meanwhile, the news spread quickly through both
armies: A virtually gladitorial match would be taking place, as the Russian hero
would be facing the German in a one-on-one duel to the death.
So, incredibly, both armies, hundreds and hundreds of soldiers, settled down to
wait on opposite sides of Stalingrad, giving the two lone combatants free run of
the destroyed city.
Konings announced the beginning of the duel, issuing the challenge by killing
two Russian snipers. Zaitsev -- who was, in fact, not alone, but accompanied by
his spotter, Nikolai Kulikov -- began working the terrain, looking for Konings.
Visualize the scene: destroyed buildings, piles of rubble, twisted metal... an
infinite number of places to hide, and wait.
To an outside observer, it would have seemed that nothing at all happened for
the first whole day. But in fact, both Zaitsev and Konings were slowly,
carefully moving and watching. Each knew their opponent was an expert, and one
mistake would finish the contest. Even when Zaitsev saw a flash of a German
helmet, towards sunset, he held his fire; he couldn't be certain it wasn't a
ruse.
Before dawn broke, Zaitsev and Kulikov dug into a bombed-out building, while
Konings hid himself amid scraps of twisted steel. And all the second day, they
watched and waited.
The third day, as tension was continuing to escalate, a political officer
entered the city with Zaitsev and Kulikov to observe the duel. His name was
Danilov, and he was, of course, a useless Communist ladder-climber. After only a
couple of hours, Danilov couldn't stand it any more, and he jumped up out of the
hiding place, waving and pointing furiously -- there he is, look, I'm pointing,
get him, get him.
Zaitsev didn't move a muscle at Danilov's gesturing. Nor did he move when
Konings drilled Danilov through the shoulder, apparently hoping it would flush
Zaitsev.
And both remained completely still, even when a team of Russian medics picked
through the debris, put Danilov on a stretcher, and took him away.
Hours passed. Zaitsev, scrutinizing the environment, had decided the German had
to be in one of a couple of places. Because Danilov's outburst had narrowed down
his own hiding place, Zaitsev used a simple trick -- a glove on a branch -- to
draw Konig's fire. And at the movement, Konig drilled the glove.
His suspicions confirmed, Zaitsev and Kulikov backed out and moved to a
different hide. By the time they got there, the sun was going down, behind
Konings, therefore shining into Zaitsev's eyes. Zaitsev chose to wait for
sundown, then all the way through the night, so the sun would be at his own
back, blinding Konings.
Morning four. Kulikov had taken up a position away from Zaitsev, off to the
right. And they set in motion their plan.
First, Kulikov fired a single shot into the rubble, aiming at nothing in
particular. Zaitsev knew Konings would be focusing on the shot's origin,
thinking perhaps Zaitsev had fired at a false target.
They let time pass, until the sun had climbed higher, obscuring Konig's vision.
Then Kulikov slowly raised his helmet, again using a stick, as if peering out to
check the results of his shot.
And Konig drilled it. Kulikov screamed and thrashed around as if wounded,
keeping Konings's attention on the spot.
And that's all Zaitsev needed. When Konings fired, Zaitsev had spotted the glint
of the German's scope. He settled his finger on the trigger, exhaled gently, and
blew Konings's face through the back of his head. It was his only shot in four
days.
And then the battle of Stalingrad continued. Cut to Joseph Vilsmaier's film to
see how it all comes out...
(The details of this account can be found in the semi-classic sniper book, "One
Shot, One Kill," and has no citations as to source and/or history to validate
its version.)
Obviously, there's a hell of a movie in here. As I understand the Var/HR
article, there may be some fictionalizing going on; I seem to remember reading
about a love triangle or something, an artificial attempt to give some personal
history to the two combatants. I personally don't know if that's necessary,
since the actual story is so compelling. The casting sounds great -- Jude Law
and Joseph Fiennes as the Russians, and Ed Harris as the German. The shooting of
Danilov, the political officer, should be a hilarious showstopper. It'll also be
interesting to see if Annaud references, in any way, the great 1993 Vilsmaier
film.
One major question I have about how this will be filmed: Although the story is
gripping to read and hear, how will it be to see? If it accurately portrays what
being a sniper is like, there are going to be long stretches where Law/Fiennes
and Harris lie on their bellies, staring at dust and rocks, barely breathing. I
imagine that'll be suspenseful for a while, but will that last for a whole
movie? Maybe that's what the fictionalized elements are about, giving us some
flashbacks or something to cut away to if the audience gets bored. Remember that
movie with Tom Berenger, "Sniper," in '92 or '93? It started out trying to
capture the essence of sniper-dom, but it felt the need to keep audience
interest with fancy bullet photography (a la "Prince of Thieves"), plus a
generic odd-couple "they hate each other but must learn to trust" buddy-film
structure. Not a bad movie, but certainly not a great one either.
Let's hope "Enemy at the Gates" trusts the value of its source material, and
doesn't fall into any of those traps.
Saw your item on the new Annaud film. As an amateur history buff, I recognized
this tale when the film project was mentioned in Variety or Hollywood Reporter
or wherever I saw it first. Some of your talkbackers were aware that it's based
on an actual incident, so I thought you might enjoy a recounting of the
historical facts. It'll be interesting, to be sure, to see where Annaud and his
fine cast take this baby.
