Clint Easwood's new WW2 epic. Flags Of Our Fathers.

[JsARCLIGHT]

It's just a different kind of movie... where you saw "metaphysical wankery" I saw deeper inflection on war and life. It's not a film for everyone, with that I will agree, but to brush it off as some sort of rambling dietribe of nonsense is not giving the movie enough credit. Just in your responses and choice of words one can see that while you say you went in with no preconceived notions of what the movie should have been you seem to have quite sharp notions of what the movie wasn't or what it didn't have.

It's a difference of opinion in the end. I liked it, it made me think and reflect on things... it was a good movie in my opinion. Better than that ball of wax that was Windtalkers or that stilted hollywood cookie cutter that was Pearl Harbor.

[bsu legato]

I guess for me it all comes down to the old axiom Show, don't tell. For all of Malick's v.o. and Discovery Channel nature imagery, all he's saying is "War is hell." Aside from my initial reaction to such grade-school philosophy, which is "Well, duhhhhh." he never really delves into why it's hell. Not in any in-depth way, anyhow. Instead he focuses almost exclusively on how all us bad humans are despoiling this "eden" in the pacific. And that's the real kicker. For all the "carnage" that we (humans, that is) wrought on places like Guadalcanal, or Flanders, or Kursk, such damage is only fleeting. Sure these places still bear the scars of war, but is an overgrown ditch that once upon a time was a trench more important than the cost it took on the young soldiers who hid in it? But instead of providing any real insight into the people who fought there, he'd rather focus on some leaf or a macaw and blame everybody, because WW2 was all of our fault.

If Malick wanted to show how war ruins nature, he should have done a vietnam film. The effects of modern warfare were far more lasting (ie, agent orange), and the 1960's seem much more suited to his hippie sensibilities.

[JsARCLIGHT]

Ah but that was not the goal of the movie. The movie was not explaining why we fought there as much as it was depticting common intelligent men, having no real knowledge of what lead to the fighting, trying to rationalize why they fight and die for something unseen above themselves and their scope of vision... a common thing wondered by almost all grunts with half a brain at any time in their careers. His reflection on nature was not to show the effect of war on nature (which was the more obvious visual key) but to show how conflict, aggression, destruction and death ARE natural acts... and how there is a sense of order and direction in nature while those same things are perverted by man. It's a pretty literary work when you dig into it's meanings with repeated viewings.

Then again this is all "high school english lit bullshit" in the eyes of some people and those folks will never really understand why I like this movie (and no that is not directly aimed at you Bsu, it's a wide brush). As I said, difference of opinion.

[bsu legato]

As I said, difference of opinion.

Yes, we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, lest we come to blows. Because as sick as I feel today, I'd hardly put up much of a fight.

[Seven]

I had to say the most powerful moment for me in the whole film was when the Marines charged the Japanese base and the Hans Zimmer score went into full gear. It made me a instant Hans Zimmer fan.

Malick is definitely a polarizing director. Thin Red Line and The New World have to be among the prettiest visual works of the last few years if you ignore the polarizing dialogue.

I did like Elias Koteas' character and I think many of the actors did great jobs. I did think it was interesting to show what drove Nick Nolte's character - the whole being passed over deal and feeling old and used.

Something caught my eye when I watched it again a year back. That girl that plays Ben Chaplin's wife in the many flashbacks is none other than Mirando Otto - more famously known as Eowyn in LOTR.

[Akilae]

I had to say the most powerful moment for me in the whole film was when the Marines charged the Japanese base and the Hans Zimmer score went into full gear. It made me a instant Hans Zimmer fan.

Interestingly, it was Zimmer's score that got me onto The Thin Red Line in the first place, when it was used for the Pearl Harbor teaser, "Journey to the Line" I think is the track.

I actually liked the Thin Red Line with all its focus on the imagery. Given how Saving Ryan's Privates and Band of Brothers were more character studies with lots of big boom, it's a rather welcome change.

[mechaninac]

I didn't much care for A Thin Red Line myself. I found it tedious to watch... good thing I did so on DVD; it was far too long for it's sparse plot. In the end, I think I fall under the category of people who went in thinking they'd get Sands of Iwo Jima, but instead got the last two episodes of Evangelion.

[Seven]

Interestingly, it was Zimmer's score that got me onto The Thin Red Line in the first place, when it was used for the Pearl Harbor teaser, "Journey to the Line" I think is the track.

I actually liked the Thin Red Line with all its focus on the imagery. Given how Saving Ryan's Privates and Band of Brothers were more character studies with lots of big boom, it's a rather welcome change.

"Journey to the Line" - that's the name of the track. Hahahah, that's exactly what got me into watching Thin Red Line too. After watching how awesome it sounded in the Pearl Harbor trailer, I thought that was part of the final score for the actual Pearl Harbor movie and thought it made the trailer seem so great. Needless to say, when I watched Pearl Harbor in its entirety, the movie itself was drivel, the score was pretty meh too with not even anything close to "Journey to the Line" in it.

[Warmaker]

Well, the Gyrene of me will win over.

I'll have to see the movie tomorrow on the 20th.

I hope it's good...

[Noriko Takaya]

I'm still waiting for someone to make a movie about the battle for Betio Island, otherwise known as Tarawa. Perhaps one of the most brutal battles of the Pacific campaign.

[JELEINEN]

I think the main reason is that we actually, unambiguously won in WWII, and on the "righteous" side too. Granted there's a whole slew of Vietnam films, but I think given the current atmosphere it might not be what the audience wants to see.

There's the American Revolution, but somehow that doesn't seem to capture the public's imagination... The Brits torched DC in the War of 1812. We barely hung on in the Korean War. Not sure about the Spanish American War... it does seem righteous enough, what with fighting for Cuban independence and all that...

I think WWI might be interesting to film, less action, more concentration on character development, much like All Quiet on the Western Front... except we already have All Quiet on the Western Front Maybe something set in the opening months of the war, a la Guns of August... except there would be no Americans involved.

The one I want to see is the US vs. the pirates of the Barbary Coast.

[Warmaker]

I'm still waiting for someone to make a movie about the battle for Betio Island, otherwise known as Tarawa. Perhaps one of the most brutal battles of the Pacific campaign.

The landing process was a total mess on that one. Lots of Marines got killed before even hitting the sand.

Landing craft and such getting stuck on coral reefs, Marines swimming ashore, all while getting shot at by rifle, machinegun, and artillery fire.

The resulting large numbers of dead Marines washing ashore was the first time pictures of American casualties were released by the gov't back home.

[Noriko Takaya]

The landing process was a total mess on that one. Lots of Marines got killed before even hitting the sand.

Landing craft and such getting stuck on coral reefs, Marines swimming ashore, all while getting shot at by rifle, machinegun, and artillery fire.

The resulting large numbers of dead Marines washing ashore was the first time pictures of American casualties were released by the gov't back home.

Yep, read a couple of books on the landing and found it to be fascinating in terms of how environment and even gravity itself played out in this battle. Those damned neap tides... There were 3000 Marine casualties, while the Japanese suffered 4700, leaving 17 survivors from that lot. As for the film showing the horrors of that battle, they showed it to us while I was in boot camp as part of our military history course. I do not know if they still show it or not, but it definitely made you open your eyes.

[Warmaker]

I saw the "Flags" today after being secured from work today.

It was great, IMO. It isn't "Saving Private Ryan" in the Pacific, nor is it John Wayne's "Sands of Iwo Jima."

The battles are done well and look great. It may take a bit of getting used to for some in how the movie "jumps" back in forth from the battle, war bonds drive, to post war era, but it didn't bother me.

Adam Beach, the same guy from "Windtalkers," gets a good amount of screentime among the 3 main characters / actors, and does the job well, IMO, considering how much I hated Windtalkers.

Again, I was quite happy that it was it's own WWII movie. It wasn't some "artistic" movie like Thin Red Line. It wasn't a "Ryan" in the Pacific. It wasn't a remake of "Sands of Iwo Jima." "Flags of Our Fathers" to me stands by itself quite well among war movies that I've seen.

Edit to add:

The end credits also made alot of people stand still as they were preparing to leave or sit back down. Most of the audience was captured by what the end credits showed.

The US Marine Corps finally gets a great movie after alot of years, and it isn't just another action flick. I foresee many of my fellow Gyrenes will go and check it out.

"Semper Fidelis"

Edited October 21, 2006 by Warmaker

[bsu legato]

I'm seeing it on Sunday. At this point, I'm actually glad I never got around to reading the book, so I can go into the movie cold and not know what to expect.

[drifand]

When I watched TRL, the only part of the film that resonated with me was when the troops were moving through the bull elephant grass on their way to attack the Japanese base... the tension was so palpable I could imagine myself in the perspiration drenched ranks. Otherwise, the rest of the film was a let down... cinematically there are better ways to communicate such ponderances without boring the audience to sleep.

Will definitely catch Clint's latest, though both of his last 2 'hits' were absolute misses with me. The critics were too kind.

[Warmaker]

After trying to find "Letters From Iwo Jima" since the Christmas holidays, I finally got a chance to see it.

Overall, the movie was much, much better than "Flags Of Our Fathers." There was this ever present feeling of despair and desperation, especially since you're viewing the battle from the Japanese perspective, in the face of overwhelming strength, material superiority, and very determined American attacks. The fighting depicted is the way it was in the Pacific... essentially no quarter fighting.

[Apollo Leader]

After trying to find "Letters From Iwo Jima" since the Christmas holidays, I finally got a chance to see it.

Overall, the movie was much, much better than "Flags Of Our Fathers." There was this ever present feeling of despair and desperation, especially since you're viewing the battle from the Japanese perspective, in the face of overwhelming strength, material superiority, and very determined American attacks. The fighting depicted is the way it was in the Pacific... essentially no quarter fighting.

Those were pretty much my sentiments; I saw Letters last week and Flags back in November.