Enemy At The Gates - Any history in this movie?

[CubanFox]

Did only half the soldiers get a gun?

Did the Russians mow down their own retreating men while screaming mantras like "Death to traitors!" and "No mercy to cowards!"

Did the soldiers really cross the Volga in leaky boats with Stukas overhead?

Did snipers play a major part in the battle of Stalingrad?

Why the hell did the Germans surrender? The movie goes from a winter battle that Russia seems to be losing, to a spring, the snow melting off twisted monuments of the hammer and sickle, with thousands of surrendering Germans marching through the streets and happy Stalingradians waving the red banner. How the hell did that happen?

[chamo]

Enemy at the Gates is one of the most historically accurate films. It is not like most Hollywood propaganda bullshit.

Vassili Zaitsev paid a major role in the battle, as did a lot of Soviet snipers and their Mosin-Nagants. 400 kills is quite a spectacular record for one sniper.

The only inaccurate bits I know of in the movie is when Zaitsev actually comes across the German officer he is hunting, major Koning or something. There was another historical innaccuracy, but I can't remember it now.

A story about Stalingrad; the Red army soldiers were missing their Vodka, but then one of them discovered anti-freeze and stated "hey, this has alcohol in it comrades". The next day half of them dropped dead.

[Ian]

Cuban Fox: An historical inaccuracy I spotted was during the Scene when Koenig (sp?) went and met with General Paulus, In that scene Panzers were lined up in 2 parallel lines, no one with half a brain would do that knowing Russian Il-2's or other planes were overhead. I am also skeptical as to whether they would have that many tanks in reserve, especially in that formation!

No one even knows in Koenig went to the East during the war, let alone died there, although I may be (horribly) misinformed.

I do not know about only 1 in 2 getting a gun, but the Soviets were quite unequipped early in the battle. Maybe it is a little inaccurate.

(this is the first time I've posted pictures)
http://battle.volgadmin.ru/front_foto/img/499m.jpg

You can see that their boat has been shot to bits, presumably by a plane.

Snipers did not play a great role in the battle, although the idea of 'Sniperism (Sniper's being used as a propaganda tool) did develop in this battle.


Did the Russians mow down their own retreating men while screaming mantras like "Death to traitors!" and "No mercy to cowards!"
Yes, either that or they would be put in a company that was used in the most suicidal of exercises i.e. clearing a minefield :o!


Why the hell did the Germans surrender?

Well I'm no tactician, but the way I read it is, After pushing and pushing at Stalingrad the German army allowed the Russian army time to surround them in a ring (Kessel) and cut off supplies and re-inforcements, but let me re-iterate, I'm no tactician!


Happyguy:
400 kills is quite a spectacular record for one sniper.

You're right that is a spectacular record, I don't think any soldier in the war got that many, but I know that Vasili Zaitsev got 149 (he had promised 150 for the aniversary of the revolution), and Zikan got 224 (Zikan was an anonymous person, quite possibly a woman, and before you snatch it, it's my pseudonym).


(For your viewing pleasure, a katyusha rocket display!)
http://battle.volgadmin.ru/front_foto/img/61m.jpg

... and ...

http://battle.volgadmin.ru/front_foto/img/69994m.jpg

(Edited by Ian Rocks at 12:19 pm on May 23, 2003)

[Cassius Clay]

Personally I thought the film was just plain boring. The only scene that is any good, the opening scene happens to be totally historically inacurate. I would recommend the German film from 1994, 'Stalingrad'. It's more historically accurate and is much better entertainment.

I highly doubt the Soviets would of made a WW1 style charge in the middle of a city, and use the only machine gune they had to mow down their own troops. I mean it doesn't make any sense of what so ever and every single account of the war from every source says the one good thing about a 'Stalinist' economy was that they were able to supply the troops with more than enough.

On Zaitsev, he existed but I dont believe there's any account or documents which prove the existance of the Nazis sending one of their best purely to knock out a rival. Note that the scene with him in a luxourious train seeing all the wounded and pulling down the curtain is what happened to Hitler once. Oh yes and I'm sure the Red Army victory at Stalingrad had more to do with other factors than one sniper.

[GCusack]

Yes there this is very accurate, except the part where he killed the German, he held up a glove from 500yrds and the guy shot it then he shot him through the sight. But anyway;
Yes the Russians had one gun between 2 and when the Russians tried to retreat they mowed them down forcing the remainder to turn around and charge again. One one occasion just outside Kursk, the Russians charged at a German paratrooper regiment then got beaten back, then got mowed down by both the Russians and the Germans from either side! Horrific theatre of war!
snipers where the main source of death to the Germans jst after diseas and their own bombs! and crossing the Volga was one of the hardest parts of the battle for the Russians.
The reason the Germans surrendered was because the Russians managed to encircle the city with three armies and the Germans failed to break their lines. The Germans lost a million men I think 500,000 went into captivity and about 1,000 returned alive. The German Field Marshal was the only Field Marshal to ever be captured by the enemy on the Field of Battle, he only became a Field Marshal a week before because then Hitler said that no Field Marshal has ever been captured in an attempt to force him to fight to the last man.

(Edited by GCusack at 6:03 pm on May 23, 2003)

[the SovieT]

you forget one primal thing..

there isnt a oficial record proving the existence of Vassili..

he may be a myth...

the film wasnt that acurate..
the romance (a very hollywoodeske romance allow me to say) didnt exist..
and the Comissar that was his friend in the movie wasnt realy his friend.. he only had to follow him around,,,

the final batle did not happen like it was portraied..

first of all Vassili had ONE comrade in arms..
not a entire team like in the movie..

then the "brave" action of the comissar of showing himself to alow Vassili to detect the German sniper never existed..
in fact what the commisar did was stupidly show himself and allowed the german to detect Vassili´s position..

about the final battle..
the german sniper fel for the simplest trick there is...

Vassili used the old "helmet trick".. this after ong hours of wating and patience...

the german.. who was obviously nervous shoot and gave his position..

then Vassili and his comrade in arms hunted him down..

it was very simple and basic...

but this only after long hours of wait and patience..



Vassili (suposly) played a vital role in Stalingrade battle...
before him examples were made by kiling the famiys of the desertors and punishing them hardly...
then with Vassili and other snipers instead of examples they gave inspiration to the soldiers...

the Surrender of the Germans wasnt that easy nor simple...

they fought hard and resisted untl theyr last strenght...

what made them surrender was a huge role of inevetable events..

to start off the Russian winter of wich the German soldiers werent used nor prepared..
they didnt had the proper Gear for the winter wile the russians had....

then it was the numerical superiority of the russians...
wich obviously contributed to the German defeat...

also to had Stalin´s industrialization of Russia allowed Russia to build tanks very quickly..
they not only had more soldiers but they aso had more and some times bether tanks than the germans..

oncea again the German tanks werent prepared for the russian winter... wile the Russian tanks had the proper Gear and such to work in such conditions...

al this amde the anexation of Russia impossible for the Germans...




what also amde me laugh was the fact that the NKVD oficers had only one freaking nagant hand gun and only used it against theyr own soldiers... fucking propaganda my friends...


"in the Red Army its necessary more courage to retreat than to attack" Stalin

[Tasha]

These are just a few notes I made on historical accuracy after watching the movie


I can tell you the german sniper's jack boots were not accurate they do not have the correct hobnails, actually i dont remember them having any hobnails they were probably east german boots with rubber soles, didnt pay much attention to rest of uniform anyways.

Soldiers depicted in 1943 are actually wearing uniforms not manufactured until 1944.oh also at the end part the girl steps on a land mine and dies from organ failure in real life.

Yes they did shoot retreating troops, however this was not the case during the entire war, in August 1942, weeks before the battle for Stalingrad would begin sttalin issued the highly unpopular Order no. 227 for "not one step backward" requiring the army to form its own blocking detachments in each regiment. Less than 1 in 2 men received a gun, I do not know exact figures right off hand.

the general who commits suicide in the beginning of the movie under pressure from Khrushchev is completely fictional.

Zaitsev is credited with 225 kills during the battle and for his efforts he was made a Hero of the Soviet Union, their highest military honor. He volunteered to leave his post in pacific fleet to goto stalingrad/

In the movie chain of command is seriously lacking. zaitsev was guided by much more than a simple political officer as is portrayed in the movie.

One bad mistake that I noted was when konig spoke about his son who got killed and handed a medal down which he claimed to be an iron cross which was actually a german war merit.

Also I assure you that the russians would never have won this battle if they were such idiots as are portrayed in this movie. Russian infantry assault tactics in the Stalingrad did not involve mass charges across open squares. The battle was mainly fought in urban warfare inside buildings. The russians generally tried to stick close to the german front line to render their air superiority and artillery useless. Snipers did play a big role in the battle of stalingrad as did suicide bombers and other methods of this type of guerilla warfare. Over 10,000 kills are credited to women snipers.

Oh and it is widely believed that the duel between the snipers is a true story when it is in fact not it was derived from simple rumors. It is propaganda and entirely fiction.

(Edited by Tasha at 10:06 pm on May 23, 2003)

[Dirty Commie]

Yeah, I read that the commisar was actualy sent with Zaitsef to hunt down the German. The commisar's job was to write astory about Zaitsef killing the sniper...
Then when they were less than a hudreds yards apart, he stood up, said "I see something moving" and was shot then.

I also heard that the soldiers on both side stopped fighting to see what would happen with the snipers.

[Ian]

Quote: from Tasha on 10:03 pm on May 23, 2003
Zaitsev is credited with 225 kills during the battle


Actually, as I said earlier, it was 149 kills, Zikan killed 224

[Tasha]

right it was 149 i just looked for it.

[Ian]

Of course it is only 'during the battle' Zaitsev may have killed many more after the battle

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Mmm, the movie and some of you're wrong in one thing, they did attack in massive charges.

Those massive charges were excecuted by punishment battallions, Stalin orderd that officers who didn't have succes, soldiers who retreated, civilians who acted cowardly should be put in those battallions and just rush at the German lines and try to put a whole in it.

Ofcourse these battallions couldn't retreat, because of the Soviet guns behind them.

There are even cases inwhich these battallions were starved on purpose to let them rush at German supplydepots.

Second, the Germans didn't really believe in the use of an scope. So most German snipers didn't had a scope, in the opposite of the Russians who did use them, with succes.

However the movie doesn't really have the usual amount of Hollywood propagandism.

[Ian]

Although there is that one bit where Comrade Comissar Danilov renounces socialism because Vasili took his dream-girl (what the hell!?).

But, as has been said, it was relatively free of propaganda.

[Kapitan Andrey]

I HATE that FUCKIN' film!!! I HATE it's author!!!

Did only half the soldiers get a gun?

Half of true...sometimes there were 1 rifle for 2...

Did the Russians mow down their own retreating men while screaming mantras like "Death to traitors!" and "No mercy to cowards!"

FUCKIN' FALSE!!! Only Shtraf-batalions were shot(if retreating)!!!

Did the soldiers really cross the Volga in leaky boats with Stukas overhead?

Sometimes...

Did snipers play a major part in the battle of Stalingrad?

No...of course there were snipers duels, but not MAJOR part!

Why the hell did the Germans surrender?

Our armies took them in the ring...no food, no ammo! Two ways...DIE or surrender!

Happygay said: Enemy at the Gates is one of the most historically accurate films. It is not like most Hollywood propaganda bullshit.

No! It is bullshit!!!

WHAT THE SEX DOING IN THE FILM!? - Hollywood did it, FUCKIN' MORONS!!!

[Cassius Clay]

Okay I think it's time to put a end to one or two myths going around here. First of all this 'one rifle between two'? Is this how the Red Army defeated the best army in the world man for man and half a dozen of their allies who had allready smashed the French and British Army's with ease? By the end of the war the Red Air Force had over 16,000 aircraft, NOT including those planes lost in combat. And then there is the tens of thousands of Tanks produced during the war. Yet the Red Army isn't capable of giving it's soldiers simple guns? What do you think the soldiers at Brest-Litovsk held out on for weeks? Or the 40 odd soldiers in the early stages of Stalingrad in a building where it took weeks for the far more numerous German forces to overcome? It wasn't just courage.

There is no account of soldiers making a WW1 style charge in the middle of a city, let alone without rifles. I reccomend you all read the book 'Stalingrad' by Athony Beevor.

[GCusack]

It wasnt a hollywood film most of the cast, researchers, the director, writer, studios and money was British.
The Russians did only have one gun between 2 often less due to the shear mass of men and women in the Army. The snipers did play a key role, that role was called Moral boosting or moral weakening! By the time they surrender the Nazi's could not see their skin because of the masses of lice and also the fact that it was so frozen it look like clothing!
The Russians encircled the city and created a Pocket, the Germans tried a break through with the use of a Panzer divison and a Romanian division but were repulsed.
U r right that the commisar was shot because of his stupidity.

[Kapitan Andrey]

Cassius Clay...no-no! About rifles in Stalingrad - IT IS TRUE!!!

Our Veterans told, that sometimes it was!!!

[Ian]

Towards the end of the war USSR's military was very well supplied as you have already stated Cassius, but you must admit that there were shortages in some regards, the rifle thing sounds very inflated to me, makes a good story but not sure about its truth.


I have read 'Stalingrad' by Antony Beevor, Cassius, it's a good book by a good author, (I'm enjoying his 'Berlin: The Downfall' at the moment), The most disturbing figure I remember was from start of the war, USSR lost an average of 97 000 men a day for 21 days!!


Was their ever a serious effort to break the Kessel (German for Cauldron, I previously made the mistake of calling it German for Ring)? I believe it may have been possible to break the Kessel if it was co-ordinated, did Hitler forbid such an action? Were the Germans too Stupid?

Kapitan Andrey, You may hate the film, but it does make for some good entertainment, hell I even watched the movie '13 Days' for the entertainment, it was boring but I watched it!

[Sensitive]

Shrug, I thought it was pretty damn good, for a capitalist movie anyway.

[Silent Eye]

The Soviets did make use of prisoners/ families of enemies of the people in a sort of suicide battalion style. They were not given guns and told to get them "from the enemy."

I liked the movie, they didnt spend the whole time bashing socialism, but it did have many flaws, but what can be expected from a movie made for an American audience?

[Indysocialist]

I've heard different stories about Zeitsev, and even seen a picture of him so I don't think he's a myth. And apparently Tanya I think it was survived the battle. If I can find the link to what I read I'll post it later.

[Jesus Sanchez]

The Red Army Snipers (http://216.198.255.120/russianpart/russnipers.html)

[JonP]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 11:24 AM
Enemy at the Gates is one of the most historically accurate films. It is not like most Hollywood propaganda bullshit.

Vassili Zaitsev paid a major role in the battle, as did a lot of Soviet snipers and their Mosin-Nagants. 400 kills is quite a spectacular record for one sniper.

The only inaccurate bits I know of in the movie is when Zaitsev actually comes across the German officer he is hunting, major Koning or something. There was another historical innaccuracy, but I can't remember it now.

A story about Stalingrad; the Red army soldiers were missing their Vodka, but then one of them discovered anti-freeze and stated "hey, this has alcohol in it comrades". The next day half of them dropped dead.
........................................ words fail me