My long winded .2 worth on Pearl Harbor

Okay okay okay. Before we all go off on a rant here about how bad Pearl Harbor was, I'm gonna come out and say that I really thought it was a great film. We can't always be blessed with a Saving Private Ryan - type film. Although a bit simplified at times (i.e. the Dolittle Raid......ahem) the historical accuracy was somewhat surprising to one not expecting much, and the flying scenes put a chill up my spine. Yes, it had a very slow start, but your patience was rewarded by a much faster paced second half. It was almost like there were two separate movies. But there were some things that added and subtracted from Pearl that are definitely noteworthy......

Cons:
1. If you noticed, FDR was actually standing during his December 7th speech. What da???????

2. During the attack on Hickam airfield, a sailor was seen holding an M-60 heavy machine gun. Oops.

3. Why insult those who went though such a horrible time in history with a stupid love story? (See the pro for this below)

4. Ben Affleck

5. The takeoff day for the Dolittle Raid was really done in stormy weather; Bruckenheimer could have taken a few notes from the old 1940's film "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" (at least they had Ruptured Duck, which was a real plane on the raid).

6. Despite our original belief, they still used those dumb looking Spanish "civilschmitt" ME-109s.


Pros:
1. As short as it was, they portrayed the Battle of Britain well. It was painted as a dark, depressingly cold, and borderline hopeless time for England that was reflected in their overall attitude.

2. Admiral Chester Nimitz' character was portrayed well also.

3. Think about it - the filmmakers are not going to sink that kind of money into a film that appeals to a narrow population (or strictly World War Two enthusiasts). Rather, they had to make a movie that appealed to much more people. So, they went the love scene route. I saw this as a "necessary evil" to get out of the way before getting to the better parts. And it was well worth the wait.

4. They did not paint the Japanese as they usually do in war movies, as bloodthirsty almost comic book-like characters that makes you want to hate them. If you noticed, a Val tail gunner even tried to wave off children playing in a nearby ballpark in an attempt to warn them of the coming danger.

5. The entire Pearl Harbor strike was excellent.

6. THe movie reminded me of how cool the old P-40 was!

 

Dear Erich: Thanks for this good review of the movie. I'm still undecided if I want to bother with watching it or not--I suppose I will suede myself into seeing it just because it has Jon Voight as FDR-since he is a good actor. Since this movie does show some on the Battle of Britain (BoB) and the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo, I suppose I could force myself into watching the early Matinee sometime this week--but only cause its cheaper. I have the feeling that I should keep my money for a 3rd go around with "Enemy At The Gates".

I wonder why Hollywoodland, just HAS to mix fragging romance with what could have been a much better movie W/O the darn romances.

THE only time I have ever seen romance mix with a war movie--that actually worked!!! That movie was: A Time To Love And A Time To Die" A N D this IS an excellent war movie.


Ben Affleck: whats so special about him?

Jon Voight-er FDR standing during one of his speeches--it happened a few times early in the war.

Hollywood Du ist ein ashlohl.

[ 29 May 2001: Message edited by: C.Evans ]

[ 29 May 2001: Message edited by: C.Evans ]

 

I thought the movie was great. But then again, I saw it from the perspective of what it was intended to be, a movie about three lives and how the events leading up to Pearl Harbor affected them.

Unforunately, it was promoted as a replica of the greatest Pearl Harbor flick, Tora, Tora, Tora! It was marketed that way to attract the crowds I believe.

Nevertheless, a good flick with rather good effects. My opinion.

 

I don't know. I liked baldwin in the movies "Hunt For Red Oktober" and the "Nuremburg" two parter. I don't recall ever watching him in anything else.

I have to ask: How was Jon Voight as FDR?

Plus, what roles did ben Affleck and Josh (whoever the hell he is?) Hartnet? play in the film. Were they the two pilots who got their P-40's in the air during the first attack?

 

It took me a while to figure out that it was Jon Voight as FDR. The fake neck gave it away. I thought the portrayal of FDR was a little strong. I have never read or seen FDR in the light he was portrayed in the movie. He sounded more like Truman.

As for the roles of the two pilots, I think so because they did mention their planes being at a satellite base but it sure did not look like it.

 

Fake neck--eeeeee, this movie is looking more worse, all the time.

I'm still a bit as whether I should go see it or not.

Thanks for your opinion.....

 

I agree, go see it. It does take a while to get to the scene but it is great. Unlike Enemy at the Gates where the great attack scene is at the beginning, but effects are better. As I always say, nobody has my taste in movies so I only take criticism for what its worth. Just do it.

 

OK: ya got me, i'll try to see it tomorrow after my Drs appt. I just don't know if I can set through 3 hrs worth, unless there is an intermission

 

To Erich H. You said there was a scene in which a sailor was seen holding an M-60? if it was from a good distance, it could be a Browning Automatic Rifle? The Brownings have been around since WW1, but, I will go ahead and see the movie and I will look out for that scene.

 

For those who are concerned...there wasn't an intermission at the screening I went to BUT, get an aisle seat---just make certain you are back in it prior to the attack and then you can run out again before the Raid if you need to!!

For what it is worth, GO SEE IT ON THE BIG SCREEN!!! You will NEVER enjoy it as much given the SFX! I still wish I had seen Jurassic Park in the theatre!!

Having said all of that...I guess I enjoyed it overall but was disappointed how they "Hollywoodized" the Doolittle Raid! I guess, I have either met and/or written several of the Raiders; read most of the books on the subject, seen several videos documenting the Raid; (purchased from the Raiders' organization-so they are a bit more reliable than some of the "commercial" offerings) and I simply feel the whole Raid got the "short end of the stick" so-to-speak as Hollywood simply "made it fit" to carry thru the movie!

Personally, I would have enjoyed seeing Ed Harris as Doolittle!!! I mean, pretty darn close to a "twin"---at least compared to Alec!!

Hopefully, I haven't dampened anyone's parade! I honestly thought I went to the movie without a bunch of major expectations...perhaps if I see it again...?

 

Hey Carl - quit your whining and speculation about Pearl and go see it. And PLEASE don't waste any more time with Enemy at the Gates.

I couldn't agree more that Ed Harris would have been a much better fit for Dolittle's role. Unfortunately, Hollywood probably looked for a tall, dark, and handsome actor - with hair - to draw more teens and women. Sorry if that is a little sexist.

Also, I just thought of something else. When Affleck's character was being shot down in his Spitfire, the oil that spewed everywhere would have darn near seared his face clean off. I once changed the oil in my car after just running it for five minutes. When I tried to get the bolt after it fell into the full drain pan, it nearly scorched my hand. One can only imagine the operating temperature of aviation oil hitting your face........

 

Don't worry about being "sexist" and offending me....(the "only" resident female?)...Ed Harris would have been handsome enough for me...and I suspect that the aviation oil didn't sear Ben for the same reason we didn't have Ed for Doolittle!
HA!

 

Dear USSBOWFINSS-287: I agree with you and Erich, Ed Harris does look more like Doolittle. Also thanks for the advice on an aisle seat and "arrangements" I was going to watch it today but we had some bad weather here around noon and lightning knocked out the power to the theatre that it was showing at.

So I opted to make copies of many photos that will be posted on this site soon--all are German U-boat and crew photos and a few surprises.

Dear Erich: I quit my whining yesterday

Tomorrow is a lighter schedule for me and I will try it again then. ??

 

AHHHHHHH now it's my turn lol!
Did i like the movie or not...wellll
OF COURSE!
Was the plot good...NO
Was what i wanted to be good...good? YES!!
The whole plot was rather eh...for if this film was not a war film i probably wouldn't have liked it.
BUT
What i have been looking fwd in seeing was simply the pearl harbor scene. That 40 minutes was simply a GREAT scene of events and i feel captured what happened on Dec. 7th perfectly. during the war scenes it had surprisingly VERY few inaccuracies. And like someone said i like how they portrayed the Japanese. (i really liked how that tail gunner waved the kids to get down because i could see that happening)
The battle of Britian scenes were good and gave a welcome relief from the plot line!
The Doolittle raid was fun to watch but lol i don't think that antiaircraft weopon the japanese were using would put up that kind of flak but whatever...things like that are to small to bother me.
So basicly was it worth the money...TOTALLY...would i see it again? YES (for the war scenes) Was the story good...NOPE but good enough to be able to sit through in order to see the good stuff...On a side note i found this film was more accurate historiclly than Enemy at the gates. But enemy at the gates was better written. I liked pearl harbor better that enemy at the gates...but i like saving p. ryan better than pearl harbor...oh yeah as i rant another great thing about pearl harbor was the sound!!
I was shocked to even find out that the salors in the pearl harbor scene were actually using the write rifle...the bolt action one (the model escapes me) Anyway go see it the scenes make it WORTH it.!! OH OH before i forget i think the biggest inaccuracy of the film happens at the very end of the film...they show an underwater view of the Arizona...well a ship that is supposed to be the Arizona. (special effects) But lol they wern't thinking when they threw tthat in the movie. 1. When you see it it looks like it's sitting in like 500ft of water!! 2. The guns are still there!! as well as the superstructure. HUH??!?!
lol in reality it's a memorial sitting in like 50 ft of water with all guns and superstructure gone...with #3 main turret support(guns gone) still potruding out of the water for it's that shallow.!! lol anyway i digress go see it!!

[ 06 June 2001: Message edited by: Ron ]

 

Hello Ron: Thanks for letting me know morw about the movie, I still have not been able to see it yet.

What you said about the rifles-they should be Springfield .03's. They had these before the Garand.

I was thinking about NOT seeing the movie based on how much the vets hated it. The Batteling Bastards of Bataan Society, and many ww2 vets are banning the movie.

I think the main reason is because of the Japanese are being portrayed much better than they were. That part about a Japanese pilot waving people to ground was in simple terms-utter B.S.

I'm not attacking you for this but basically just stating that this movie is wrong for portraying the japanese sneaks the way they are portrayed.

Do you know that a different version (a "toned down" version) of this film, was made for the Japanese? What a load of manure

It would be just like making a movie about the Malmedy Massacre, and having those members of the Waffen SS, after executing the soldiers, to have a doctor to try to go out there and save some of the prisoners.

Im not mad at you, but at the PH movie makers because of their "toning down" of the film just for the Japanese.

I don't know if anyone was aware here but, the Japanese Govt, wants to build a monument for the Japanese flyers killed at P.H. and have it located somewhere near the Arizona Memorial. Guess who gave its full kodos from, none other than slick willy clinton itsself.

 

I'm sorry: I just have a problem with people that have an opinion about a movie without having watched it yet. Carl, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. So find the time, dig into your pockets for change, buy a big box of popcorn, get your favorite girl (after all, it has Faith Hill in the soundtrack - she'll love it), and WATCH IT.

As Otto once said, the Pearl attack is worth the price of admission alone……..

……and so is the engine roar of the P-40s!

 

dear Erich.H. No problem, and no apologies needed. I know I should'nt talk bad about something I have not seen yet (I plan to do so on Friday) but, I only speak at what the "real" Pearl Harbor vets/survivors are saying. I do have enough respect for them to take them at their word.

Without seeing the movie yet, I do see at least one positive thing about it. It will bring the sneak attack back out of history and into younger inquiring minds, as it should be done.

Having not seen it yet, I would bet that Enemy At The Gates is the better of the two movies, but my final opinion comes after I do see the movie.

 

well i wasn't aware of some of those points. The toning down or to my shock a japanese memorial near the Arizona !@#$%
that makes absolutly NO sense.
You think the Japanese would want a US memorial in downtown Hiroshima for US fliers killed?
i don't think so.!
As for how the Japanese were portryed in the movie...I still think theyn were portrayed ok. For there were horrible Japanese and Horrible Germans...but as you know there were MANY good germans so i'm sure there were good japanese too...and a pilot waving for kids wouldn't surprise me. wether they were Japanese German Italian American whatever. I'm not saying it happened but i could see it. And as for the attack...the Japanese felt they were given no choice but to attack with all the embargoes. Was it right? No but They portrayed the Japanese as i think they were, good and bad. Waving a kid down...but shooting sailors in the water. I can see, all that happening.
But yes go see the movie carl lol...and then say how much you disliked then...or hopefully how surprised you were lol
oh and for posting pictures all you need to do is put this: right after the URL
if you want more instructions Look under "Instant UBB Code" click on the link that says "What is UBB Code?" and it will tell you lots of interesting stuff regarding this now go see the movie!! lol

[ 11 June 2001: Message edited by: Ron ]