CLICK TO SUPPORT
PEARL HARBOR ATTACKED

 


Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

1 members are viewing this topic
>Guest

Page 6 of 6<<23456

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: What Do You Think of the Movie?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 51
pennylee Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: Sep. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 10 2001,3:27  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

Quote
Quote: from Pieter on 6:32 pm on Sep. 5, 2001
Yesterday I finally had time to go and see the movie. As it is going out of circulation this week in a dutch smalltown (Delft) after only 20 days it does not seem to have been a success here. I had been warned about the storyline beforehand so I didn't pay that much attention to it (should have though; Ed Wood would have been proud of it...). The dogfighting scenes looked nice. Someone else on this board remarked that they were unrealistic in being too fast but this seems to be one of the few movies in which they use the fact that it took a lot of time to down a WW2 fighter. This is used in the part with  the P40's getting chased by zero's. The P40 pilots off course should have equal trouble against the zero's but that's stretching it a bit. Almost all characters that were real in the movie are seriously misrepresented and/or misqouted. The movie is unneccesarily harsh on Kimmel. The movie does contain the shift of warhips to the european theatre but fails to mention that 80% of the capital ships were concentrated in the Pacific as a result of the 1920's and 1930's belief that Germany would never again be a serious enemy.
Anyway, as a naval modeler I came for the warship scenes. This was a bit mixed. Lots of explosions on the present day mothball fleet in Pearl Harbor (nicely doen but not really dec.7 1941). Very nice scenes of Oklahoma, West Virginia and Arizona. The capsize scene of Oklahoma could become a classic. The man drowning in Oklahoma while people outside are trying to save him is based on a real story but the scene is ruined by the fact that the water does not rise on the outside (i.e. Oklahoma does not sink deeper)at the same time. I could go on for about 1000 words like this.
It is nice that some 15 year old american highschool  students  get interested in the subject by this movie but I sincerely hope that their teachers will teach them not to base their understanding of what happened on a fictional movie but on balanced sources and/or original research. I did so in highschool on a subject that is as controversial
in Dutch history as this is in American history (Indonesia's war of independence)and it got me really interested in serious 'living' history.
BTW, in a number of posts there are remarks about Alec Baldwin.
Who is this man an what is so bad about him that he shouldn't be playing the role of Doolittle?


Alec Baldwin playing Doolittle was a little offensive because Alec as and actor and liberal...far left Liberal, could never understand a man like Doolittle.  During President Clinton's impeachment proceedings Alec Baldwin advocated the stoning of Henry Hyde and his family, all that for doing Henry doing his job!

I didn't think that the movie was harsh at all with Admiral Kimmel.
The movie to me, didn't make any judgements about him at all.
It appeared to me more that Kimmel was a victim of timing, poor communication and following orders to transfer more ships to the Atlantic.  Can't see how this makes Kimmel look like he was the one responsible for Pearl Harbor and the poor response to the attack.  I felt the way the movie handled the miss communication, problems of code breaking etc, was pretty good.  So many things happened to conspire and prevent the US from being ready for the Japanese attack, not any one person seems to have made THE big mistake.  If only we had known more about radar...etc. If we had satellite tracking...you name it, there are many things that were seemingly unavoidable.  We as a nation were complacent.

All movies take liberties with the exact truth of events.  I felt that as a mere mortal observer, the movie did a good job of putting the viewer into the action and horror of December 7, 1941.
As a young child growing up, my Grandfather was a member of the VFW.  I never could understand the big deal about Pearl Harbor then.  As I grew up I began to read and become more interested in my American History, and realized what Pearl Harbor meant to us.  The movie for me, helped me put a picture in my head about the events.  I know this picture isn't exact, but it does communicate the absolute horror of the events of that day and help me see and understand much more what I know to be the truth about Pearl Harbor.

IF the movie causes any interest in any young people it has served a great purpose.

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 52
if-i-had-one-more-day Search for posts by this member.

1



Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: Jun. 2006

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Jun. 25 2006,9:53 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I think the Movie is awsome!! its so sad!! its wicked sad! it made me cry! i dont like that fact that all those poor innocent people died. but as long as i know they were dieing to protect our country! Its still wicked sad! Josh harntett was wicked good in the movie! he was really hot too! but its sad to see him die and not even see his kid be born!! SAD!!:(

--------------
I Love Pearl Harbor!! the movie is so sad!
[img]http://p5.piczo.com/img/i81245488_74548_5.jpg[img/]
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 53
Kiwiwriter Search for posts by this member.

1



Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: Mar. 2006

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Nov. 30 2006,4:59 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

I was not impressed with the plot -- yet another test-pilot love triangle, sans the noble pilot wrench -- or the acting.

The nurses were portrayed as sexually predatory, which was out of keeping with the mores of the period, especially with middle-class American girls.

I was annoyed by the many anachronisms in dialogue and even shots -- there's a scene of a missile destroying a modern frigate, which is supposed to be a WW2-era shot. And planes were not "good to go" until the first Persian Gulf War.

The air battles were WW2-era re-makes of the Star Wars battles to destroy the Death Star. Very unlikely.

If the movie gets kids to study history, I'm all for it, as long as they learn what really happened.

The best special effect in the whole movie? Kate Beckinsale! Hubba-hubba!  :laugh:


--------------
Very respectfully, David H. Lippman

"My intensity is intense."  -- Roger Clemens

"The war is on, no fooling!" -- Pearl Harbor sailor

Try my piece of WW2 history at

http://www.usswashington.com/dl_index.htm
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 54
Mr. SP Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 12
Joined: Feb. 2007

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Feb. 04 2007,10:07 Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

The movie Pearl Harbor has too much Hollywood in it. The real facts are not presented. A better and more accurate movie is Tora Tora Tora. This movie was made using the information from both the United States and Japan military records and the recollections of those who survived the war.
Tora Tora Tora is very accurate with little embellishment.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
53 replies since -- < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 6 of 6<<23456
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply What Do You Think of the Movie?
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code




Spring into Action Banner