Clint Eastwood film about Iwo Jima: Flags of Our Fathers


PDA






psyopspec
October 10, 2006, 01:47 PM
Review from Variety.

John "Doc" Bradley - Ryan Phillippe
Rene Gagnon - Jesse Bradford
Ira Hayes - Adam Beach
Keyes Beech - John Benjamin Hickey
Bud Gerber - John Slattery
Mike Strank - Barry Pepper
Ralph Ignatowski - Jamie Bell
Hank Hansen - Paul Walker
Col. Chandler Johnson - Robert Patrick
Capt. Severance - Neal McDonough
Pauline Harnois - Melanie Lynskey
James Bradley - Tom McCarthy
Commandant Vandegrift - Chris Bauer
Belle Block - Judith Ivey
Madeline Evelley - Myra Turley
Franklin Sousley - Joseph Cross
Harlan Block - Benjamin Walker
Lindberg - Alessandro Mastrobuono
Lundsford - Scott Reeves
Gust - Stark Sands
John Bradley - George Grizzard
Dave Severance - Harve Presnell
Walter Gust - George Hearn
Mr. Beech - Len Cariou
Ed Block - Christopher Curry

By TODD MCCARTHY

'Flags of Our Fathers' is the first of a pair of war dramas about the battle of Iwo Jima from director Clint Eastwood.

Clint Eastwood's 'Flags of Our Fathers' looks at the story behind the famous photo shot by Joe Rosenthal.

Ambitiously tackling his biggest canvas to date, Clint Eastwood continues to defy and triumph over the customary expectations for a film career in "Flags of Our Fathers." A pointed exploration of heroism -- in its actual and in its trumped-up, officially useful forms -- the picture welds a powerful account of the battle of Iwo Jima, the bloodiest single engagement the United States fought in World War II, with an ironic and ultimately sad look at its aftermath for three key survivors. This domestic Paramount release looks to parlay critical acclaim and its director's ever-increasing eminence into strong B.O. returns through the autumn and probably beyond.
Conventional wisdom suggests directors slow down as they reach a certain age (Eastwood is now 76), become more cautious, recycle old ideas, fall out of step with contemporary tastes, look a bit stodgy. Eastwood has impertinently ignored these options not only by undertaking by far his most expensive and logistically daunting picture, but by creating back-to-back bookend features offering contrasting perspectives on the same topic; the Japanese-language "Letters From Iwo Jima," showing the Japanese side in intimate terms, will be released by Warner Bros. next year.

One way to think about "Flags" is as "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" of this generation. That 1962 John Ford Western is famous for its central maxim, "When the truth becomes legend, print the legend," and "Flags" resonantly holds the notion up to the light. It is also a film about the so-called Greatest Generation that considers why its members are, or were, reticent to speak much about what they did in the war, to boast or consider themselves heroes.

Skillfully structured script by William Broyles Jr. and Paul Haggis throws the audience into the harrowing action of the Iwo Jima invasion as a personal memory that can never be softened or forgotten. But the brutal fighting is eventually juxtaposed with the government's use of the celebrated image of the Marines raising the flag on Mount Suribachi for propaganda and fund-raising, with scant ultimate regard for the "heroes."

Reflecting its origins in the bestselling 2000 book by James Bradley (son of one of the central figures) with Ron Powers, tale is framed around a son's search into the wartime exploits of his father John Bradley, one of the six men pictured raising the flag. The I.D.ing and matching of some old-timers to their younger selves is never the easiest thing to do, and the same goes for getting all the names immediately straight for a bunch of young soldiers wearing identical uniforms and very short hair.

But the camera focuses on a handful of the 30,000 troops that landed on the inhospitable spec of volcanic ash and tufa that is Iwo Jima on Feb. 19, 1945, to dislodge some 20,000 well-fortified Japanese.

Among the men are John "Doc" Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), the only Navy man in a group that otherwise includes Marines: Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford), Native American Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), the highly capable leader Sgt. Mike Strank (Barry Pepper), Hank Hansen (Paul Walker), Ralph "Iggy" Ignatowski (Jamie Bell), Harlan Block (Benjamin Walker) and Franklin Sousley (Joseph Cross).

Such is the carnage at the initial landing (the Americans suffered 2,000 casualties that first day alone) that there will be some temptation to compare the scene to current co-producer Steven Spielberg's justly celebrated D-Day invasion sequence in "Saving Private Ryan." But Eastwood does it his own way, impressively providing coherence and chaos, awesome panoramic shots revealing the enormity of the arrayed armada and sudden spasms of violence that with great simplicity point up the utter arbitrariness of suffering and death in combat.

The visual scheme Eastwood developed for the picture is immediately arresting. Perhaps taking a cue from the island's black sand, as well as from WWII's status as the last war shot, from a filmic p.o.v., in black-and-white, pic is nearly as monochromatic as anything shot in color can be. Dominated by blacks, grays and olive greens, cinematographer Tom Stern's images have a grave elegance, a drained quality that places the events cleanly in history without diminishing their startling immediacy.

On the fifth day of fighting, some Americans reach the summit where a great deal of the Japanese firepower is concentrated, and six soldiers plant a small stars-and-stripes. Shortly after, a larger flag is sent up and, in an event only shown in the film considerably later, six different men, Bradley, Gagnon and Hayes among them, responding to a photographer's half-joking question of, "O.K., guys, who wants to be famous?," put their muscle behind pushing up the new flag held in place by a heavy length of pipe.

At once, AP photographer Joe Rosenthal's shot became arguably the most iconic image of the American war. No faces were identifiable in the photo, leading to some confusion as to who was even in the shot, and three of them were killed soon after.

But the surviving three are spirited back to the mainland to spearhead a final war bonds drive. Bradley, Gagnon and Hayes are treated like gold-plated heroes everywhere, all the while being confronted by replicas of the flag raising made of papier-mache or even ice cream.

Of the three, Gagnon embraces his sudden celebrity, gallivanting around with his fiancee and expecting great things to stem from it. Already haunted by the horrors he witnessed, Bradley copes in a subdued way. But Hayes, whose story was dramatized onscreen in 1961 as "The Outsider" with Tony Curtis, of all people, portraying the Pima Indian, can barely hold it together.

Feeling from the outset that their participation in the tour is a "farce," that the real heroes are the guys who died or are still out there fighting, Hayes drinks heavily, embarrassing himself while having to stomach the everyday casual racism of being called "chief" or being refused service.

And once they've done their bit raising billions for the government, they're left on their own to put their lives back together. It's not an easy road, particularly for Hayes, who in one moving, genuinely Fordian moment, treks a long distance for a brief visit with the father of one of his fallen comrades.

Given this dramatic, wrenching arc, Hayes' story becomes the heart of the movie, and Beach, who previously played a Native American in the Pacific campaign in "Windtalkers," unquestionably takes the acting honors with it, delivering a full sense of the character's pain and sense of entrapment in an absurd situation. Other perfs are thoughtful, credible and deliberately unspectacular, although Pepper supplies special power as the leader the young men need as they come face to face with the enemy.

The director and editor Joel Cox find an effective and comfortable rhythm for the drama's parallel tracks. Spectacle is by no means limited to the battle scenes; one major setpiece is an enormous rally at Chicago's Soldiers Field where the men are expected to scale a large model of Mount Suribachi and plant the flag. Perhaps the most felicitous of the film's many outstanding visual effects is the elimination of the recently built flying saucer-like addition to the venerable stadium.

The film's themes are so thoroughly embodied in the drama as it's told that there is no need for explicit statement of them, which makes the final bit of narration about the nation's need for heroes seem unnecessary. Another minor flaw is a Hollywood backlot look to a couple of Chicago street scenes.

Otherwise, "Flags of Our Fathers" is exemplary in its physical aspects. Combination of exteriors shot on the black beaches of Iceland with CGI work conveys a vivid and comprehensive feel of the godawfulness of Iwo Jima.

This and the forthcoming "Letters" represent the final work of the late, great production designer Henry Bumstead; no one could wish to go out on a better note. Pic is dedicated to him and two others who died during production, Eastwood's longtime casting director Phyllis Huffman and flag-raising photographer Rosenthal.

The director himself composed the spare, effective musical score.

Camera (Technicolor, Panavision widescreen), Tom Stern; editor, Joel Cox; music, Eastwood; production designer, Henry Bumstead; art directors, Jack G. Taylor Jr., Adrian Gorton (Iceland); set designers, Joseph G. Pacelli, Gorton, Gary A. Lee; costume designer, Deborah Hopper; sound (Dolby Digital/DTS/SDDS), Walt Martin; supervising sound editor, Alan Robert Murray; co-supervising sound editor, Bub Asman; re-recording mixers, John Reitz, Dave Campbell, Gregg Rudloff, Steve Pederson; visual effects supervisor, Michael Owens; visual effects and digital animation, Digital Domain; military technical adviser, Sgt. Maj. James D. Dever; stunt coordinator, Buddy Van Horn; assistant director, Donald Murphy; second unit camera, Richard Bowen; casting, Phyllis Huffman. Reviewed at Warner Bros. studios, Burbank, Sept. 22, 2006. MPAA Rating: R. Running time: 131 MIN.

_______________________________________________

I'm looking forward to this if the action is anything in the vein of Saving Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down. It'll be interesting to see what Eastwood's final product of the aftermath for these gentlemen was like as well.

If you enjoyed reading about "Clint Eastwood film about Iwo Jima: Flags of Our Fathers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Onmilo
October 10, 2006, 11:13 PM
I look forward to this film.
As any soldier knows,,,,"It's a helluva way to make a living!"

nswtex
October 11, 2006, 12:07 AM
Please read the book before seeing this film. It is written by the son of one of the men in the famous photograph. Excellent read once I started I couldnt stop until I hit the back cover.

The_Shootist
October 11, 2006, 01:20 AM
Kinda nice to see Pepper (Saving Private Ryan) and McDonough (Band of Brothers) in this movie. Hope they aren't getting typecast, :D

Davo
October 11, 2006, 01:49 AM
It was a great book, and I look forward to the movie. There really arent any modern movies about the Marines in the pacific in WWII. Id also like to see a modern movie dealing with Korea,and the Mexican-American war.

Valkman
October 11, 2006, 02:18 AM
Can't wait to see it. When I saw the ad I thought of my friend's Dad who was there. I asked him about Iwo Jima one night, and over 50 years later he still cried like a baby remebering the friends he lost there. He's died since and I truly hope the movie does right by these heroes.

psyopspec
October 11, 2006, 09:09 AM
I went to The Departed last night and there was a trailer for Flags. I couldn't make up my mind about whether I'll like it, but after seeing the preview, I know I've got to see this movie in the theater. The actor chosen for Ira Hayes seems particularly good, as does Eastwood's score for the movie.

Tom C.
October 11, 2006, 09:25 AM
I have seen interviews with the book's author. I look forward to the film.

I saw Flyboys this past weekend. It is about the action of WWI. Good flying sequences and good computer graphics.

MM
October 11, 2006, 09:47 AM
John Bradley, the 2nd class HM in the book, lost his best friend, IGGY Ignatowski, in a most horrific way. His later treatment of a Japanese friend of his son, the author of the book, shows him to be a much better man than I.
SatCong

Phil DeGraves
October 11, 2006, 10:03 AM
Yes, FLYBOYS was pretty good even though it was not historically accurate at all (which is maddening, since the true story of the Lafayette Escadrille is truly dramatic, exciting and moving.) Saw the preview for FLAGS there; it looks pretty good.

MechAg94
October 11, 2006, 10:29 AM
I'd like to see "With the Old Breed" made into a movie, but I would be concerned someone would screw it up.

Dannyboy
October 11, 2006, 01:17 PM
'Flags of Our Fathers' is the first of a pair of war dramas about the battle of Iwo Jima from director Clint Eastwood.


I know this is getting a bit ahead of myself but has anyone heard about the second movie?

Tommygunn
October 11, 2006, 01:47 PM
I think it is "Letters from Iwo Jima" or something like that and is an account based on the Japanese account of the battle.

lysander
October 11, 2006, 02:49 PM
My understanding is that the second film is told from the perspective of the Japanese general in charge of defending the island. The general is being played by Ken Watanabe (the same actor who played the Samurai in the Last Samurai).

I am curious if the film (Flags of Our Father's) is going to address the controversy over whether or not the photo was authentic.

I like Eastwood's films quite a bit and I am looking forward to this one. Great cast, great director, epic subject matter...it should be good.

Davo
October 11, 2006, 03:37 PM
Thats a great idea for the second film! I love stories that show both sides, and Ken Wantanabe is an excellent actor.

ambulldog
October 11, 2006, 04:30 PM
I cannot wait to see this movie. Its been a while since I've seen a good WWII movie. If I had to pick a favorite film genre it would be WWII movies. My favorite movie when I was a kid was The Big Red One. I want to see Fly Boys but I'm not dying to see it. To me it seems more focused on action and graphics. I need a good story, dialogue and hopefully historical accuracy.

bowfin
October 11, 2006, 04:43 PM
+1on reading the book first.

If you only read one book in your life on the Second World War, this would be my choice for you. This recommendation picked out of literally hundreds of books on the war that I have read.

Cromlech
October 11, 2006, 05:32 PM
TRAILERS

I believe that I posted these links somewhere here already, but it can't hurt to do so again:

For anyone that cares, there is a new trailer available.

Quicktime: http://www.flagsofourfathers.com/public/video_files/flags_of_our_fathers_trailer1_large.mov

Windows Media (look for it in the upper left of your screen): http://a.videodetective.com/?PublishedID=839606

I can't wait.

No really, I can't. :cool:

SoCalShooter
October 11, 2006, 06:22 PM
Should be a great movie. Heard a rumor he was doing the American side and then the Japanese side.

Cromlech
October 11, 2006, 06:28 PM
Should be a great movie. Heard a rumor he was doing the American side and then the Japanese side.

Correct. They are both finished, and in post-production.

Flags of Our Fathers: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418689/



Letters from Iwo Jima: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0498380/

SoCalShooter
October 11, 2006, 06:30 PM
Thanks man, I really liked the fact he was doing it from both sides.

Cromlech
October 11, 2006, 06:39 PM
Indeed, my Limey arse shall be firmly perched on a seat at the movies when they are shown.

Unfortunately, we don't get FooF until December 22nd.

No_Brakes23
October 11, 2006, 06:48 PM
I am curious if the film (Flags of Our Father's) is going to address the controversy over whether or not the photo was authentic.

Could you elaborate? I know that the original was reshot later that day.

SoCalShooter
October 11, 2006, 06:53 PM
My understanding about the photo is this, they took it the first time and it did not come out well so they set back up and took it again and the second was the best.

Grampa
October 11, 2006, 08:13 PM
I doubt it will come out too much in the movie, but the story of the naval bombardment (or lack thereof) is infuriating. So many American lives lost due to criminally incompetent Navy brass. Just read it.

The battleship as a weapon platform took an undeserved black eye, too.

CalamityJane
October 11, 2006, 09:51 PM
Another rec for reading the book; this same author, James Bradley, also wrote "Flyboys", another true story about WWII flyers. (not the same story as the current movie by the same name)

This book, Flyboys, affected me as much, or even more, than Flags of Our Fathers. Both are excellent true stories about that war and our fathers and grandfathers. And mothers and grandmothers.

I also have a special place in my heart for that period of history of our country, and for the men and women of that time. My parents' time; my father was a POW, never talks about it.

sjones63
October 11, 2006, 11:43 PM
My father was there.He told me many years ago that he was about 50 yards down the hill where the flag was planted with his buddies and they had their backs to the hill looking downward to keep the japs away.He said that the first flag was a lot smaller than the second one,the famous one.He passed away on jan1,2003 at the age of 86.The last 5 years of his life he and mom were in a nursing home.One day I found a sculpture of the flag raising with a marine with his rifle at port arms and just knew I had to get it for him.When I brought it into his room at the home,he broke down and cried.He said that was the best present I could ever have given him.When he died we had a military funeral and I have the flag,the bullets and his medal.If it sounds like I am proud of him,I am.I don't think this world will ever see their like again and they are slowly dying off every day.I was in the service myself,but I couldn't hold a candle to men like him.sj

.38 Special
October 11, 2006, 11:52 PM
The gentleman who took this picture died recently, and I had the chance to learn more about him and the episode. I believe the Wikipedia article sums up the various issues very well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Flag_on_Iwo_Jima

Short version: It wasn't staged. It wasn't the first flag raising at that spot, and later there was a staged photo, but the one we're all familiar with is the real deal.

Walter
October 12, 2006, 12:16 AM
As any soldier knows,,,,"It's a helluva way to make a living!"
There it is...
but for some reason this old Marine just can't pass up a look at a
film like this. You would think having been there would erase any
desire to see a movie about war, but sometimes the subject is so
strong that it demands to be seen. Like "Saving Private Ryan".

Walter

Texshooter
October 12, 2006, 12:25 AM
Honestly, SCREW TELLING BOTH SIDES.

Surprised Eastwood didn't have baldwin, penn, and streisand in the movie.

I know the jap side, we all do. Wonder why they keep going to the shrine that honors their dead war criminals?

JMO

.38 Special
October 12, 2006, 12:31 AM
< edit >Never mind. Drank too much and talked myself into believing that some kind of value could come from arguing on the internet.

Wags
October 12, 2006, 01:28 AM
I read the book earlier this summer and highly recommend it for military history buffs. Very seldom do I go to the movie theaters but this may change to see this film. If the movie is anything like the book it will be a success.

roscoe
October 12, 2006, 02:13 AM
I know the jap side, we all do. Wonder why they keep going to the shrine that honors their dead war criminals?
I think you have demonstrated that, in fact, you don't know.

tanksoldier
October 12, 2006, 04:39 AM
You've displayed your ignorance pretty well.

"I am a Soldier. I fight where I am told and I win where I fight." GEN George S. Patton, Jr. I usually use it as my sig. It applies to every soldier that ever was. There is atrocity, heroism and valor on both sides of any war.

The Japanese fought for their country, people and emperor.
They were honorable according to their culture and understanding of honor... at least as much as our side.


Honestly, SCREW TELLING BOTH SIDES.

Surprised Eastwood didn't have baldwin, penn, and streisand in the movie.

I know the jap side, we all do. Wonder why they keep going to the shrine that honors their dead war criminals?

Lucky
October 12, 2006, 04:59 AM
Roscoe said it a little bluntly, to be sure, but he might not be wrong. It's one thing to try and understand why they did what they did, but 'forgive and forget' is not something that we should do.

Maybe in Iwo Jima they were honourable. But I'm not convinced that's representative of the whole. I did like 'Tora Tora Tora', the way it showed both sides. But they never really explain the firing on women and children and ambulances...


A 'contrasting' view of Japanese soldiers in WW2, though not at Iwo Jima.
http://www.valourandhorror.com/HK/

http://www.valourandhorror.com/HK/HK_script.php

"WALTER JENKINS (DRAMA):10:22:14:12 Everybody gets the wind up, see. Hey, the Japs are coming down the road. This is the main road in Hong Kong, right. Everybody out. Everybody gets down there, they're behind these sandbags, right. I said to the sergeant, always an efficient sergeant around there. I says "Hey, I haven't got a sandbag." "Ah, don't worry about it, it'll just get in your way..." And I'm thinking... well, that's what I want the ****ing thing for... 10:22:35:23
BOATS IN HARBOUR

NARRATION:10:22:39:28 Everyone scrambled for a place on the few boats back from Kowloon to the island. 10:22:44:19
10:22:53:00 Canadian troops commandeered the last ferry, but a 21-year-old Manitoba farm boy missed the boat. John Grey, the eldest of seven children, was captured by the Japanese, and executed. He became the first Canadian infantryman to die in combat in the Second World War. Shortly after the evacuation, the Japanese commanders paraded through the city of Kowloon with some of their other prisoners. And then most of the commanders turned the town over to their soldiers. All Chinese women were declared to be prostitutes and free. The raping and pillaging began. 10:23:36:06
AERIAL VIEW OF HARBOUR
10:23:44:05 The Canadians just on the other side of this harbour could hear it all. 10:23:47:22

CLAYTON:10:23:49:10 It was horrible - the screams and all night long was just.... I don't know what they were doing when they got in there. I guess they were looting and everything else. But that whole city was just one massive scream all night long. Just raised the hair on the back of your head. 10:24:02:28"




"NARRATION:10:44:26:10 Bob Clayton was upstairs in St. Stephen's when the Japanese closed in on the hospital at 5:30 a.m. on Christmas day. 10:44:39:28

CLAYTON:10:44:35:00 The war wounded were laying in bed there. And just before they broke in on the hospital, there was a hell of a commotion outside, and I heard a guy holler "For Christ's sake, don't let those bastards get in this hospital." When the Japanese came through the door, the doctors met them. And they had their hands up. 10:44:52:28

LAURIE MACKAY (DRAMA):10:45:01:15 The doctors tried to surrender the hospital, but they killed them. The Japanese soldiers started killing all around me. I said "Oh, my God, this is it." I pulled the blankets over my head. One Jap ran over me to bayonet the guy in the next bed. I rolled up my mattress and I made a run for the door. And I was hit over the head. I went arse over teakettle. Don't remember a thing 'til I came to and this Red Cross nurse was trying to stop this Japanese soldier from killing us. So the soldier grabs her by the throat and drags her away. 10:46:00:18

NARRATION:10:46:10:22 The surviving nurses, and soldiers like Laurie Mackay and Bob Clayton, were dragged down this corridor in the school's dormitory. Separating the nurses, the Japanese jammed more than 60 wounded and terrified soldiers into this dorm. One after the other soldiers were taken out, tortured and dismembered with swords. The raping of the nurses began. 10:46:39:10

LAURIE MACKAY (DRAMA):10:46:42:00 They kept coming back to the room and firing into it. The fear had really set into me. I had my head down. And this old first world war vet says to me "Look, kid, we're going to die today. But one thing we're going to do. We're going to die like Canadians. Don't be scared o'them." 10:47:13:08

CLAYTON:10:47:18:00 It was Christmas Day and you're thinking about home. I thought of my mother a million times and I knew she'd be going crazy, absolutely crazy. Which I found out after. Anyway, you do stupid things, and I sat down... sitting there on the floor and I kept saying "Ma, I'm all right... Ma, I'm all right..." 10:47:52:15

LAURIE MACKAY (DRAMA):10:47:59:05 Then this Jap soldier came in, and he says "Canada..." And I says "Yeah, the hell with you. Go ahead, you bastard, kill me." He looks at me. He starts kicking me and then he says, "Canada... cowboy?" I says to myself "What's going on here?" So I say "yeah, cowboy." So he steps back, and he twirls his hand over his head like a lariat and he yells Hoo-hoo-hoo-yip-yip-yip. And then he tells me to stand up,... and quick draw. All night he kept bringing back his friends and telling me to quick draw. 10:49:29:08"



NARRATION:11:18:27:20 Many of the Japanese that live and work in the neighbourhood near the old prison camp have a different view of the treatment given Canadians and other prisoners. Eighty-year-old Mr. Kuwato worked in the shipyard during the war, and he stayed on for many years with the NKK Company. He was interested in meeting the Canadian veterans, and he even had some souvenir pictures that he wanted to show them. 11:18:53:08
11:19:00 There were pictures of the POWs lined up outside their barracks; pictures of the prisoners supposedly having a party. 11:19:11:18

MR. KUWATO:11:19:12:00 Christmas party... 11:19:13:22
CLAYTON11:19:15:00 Christmas party?... Ah so. Tell him they don't look too happy. There isn't any of them smiling. 11:19:21:02

NARRATION:11:19:22:25 They were old propaganda pictures from the neighbouring American POW camp, for which the prisoners were forced to stage happy-looking occasions. 11:19:31:08

CLAYTON:11:19:35:15 Yeah, at Christmas. 11:19:36:20

NARRATION:11:19:37:18 Mr. Kuwato wanted to point out the very good treatment given prisoners. 11:19:41:20

MR.KUWATO:11:19:47:10 (voice of interpreter) They received many cakes, or something … 11:19:48:26

CLAYTON:11:19:48:28 Many cakes? Tell him they were lucky. We didn't get any. 11:19:52:19
11:19:52:19 INTERPRETER (speaks in Japanese)
CLAYTON11:19:55:15 Was he a guard there, or … 11:19:58:00
11:19:59:22 INTERPRETER (in Japanese)

NARRATION:11:20:06:10 He was a guard. He pointed himself out in the picture. He was the captain of the guards. But he said that he only worked in administration. 11:20:14:10

CLAYTON:11:20:16:20 I would like to know: how does he think that the POWs were treated in his camp? What did he think of the treatment? 11:20:23:12

11:20:23:19 KUWATO & INTERPRETER (in Japanese) 11:20:30:00

NARRATION:11:20:30:05 Mr. Kuwato allowed as how there were some problems there. 11:20:33:18

INTERPRETER:11:20:34:20 Sometimes a difference of the culture... and the customs. 11:20:37:22

CLAYTON:11:20:38:10 It isn't a custom to be hungry all the time, dear. I guess a lot of POWs died in his camp? 11:20:43:26

INTEPRETER:11:20:51:10 Just one, he remembers. 11:20:52:12

CLAYTON:11:20:52:15 One?

INTERPRETER:11:20:56:15 He got sick and died. 11:20:57:22

CLAYTON:11:20:57:15 Oh, he got sick and died? I think this gentleman has a poor memory, dear. Well, many men died in our camp, dear. Many, many. I took four out one time myself to the crematorium - in a cart. If you got pneumonia, you just died. So it had to be the same in his camp. 11:21:14:28

INTERPRETER:11:21:22:25 He never heard of that. 11:21:23:25
CLAYTON11:21:23:26 He never heard about that...? 11:21:24:22
INTERPRETER:11:21:26:10 He didn't know that, no. 11:21:27:20

CLAYTON:11:21:28:00 That's all right....They never remember, you know... 11:21:31:15

INTERPRETER:11:21:35:18 Maybe the difference of the culture or something... they couldn't understand each other. That's why there's a possibility... 11:21:42:10

CLAYTON:11:21:42:10 We couldn't understand them either... 11:21:43:16

lysander
October 12, 2006, 10:19 AM
Inevitably this thread is going to get locked down following that last run of comments...we may be better suited talking about Eastwood's film and how accurate it is/isn't in terms of the weaponry presented during the battle at Iwo Jima.

As far as the atrocities committed in the Pacific theater...how about we just call it a push. Nobody had clean hands...they bombed Pearl Harbor, had Bataan, did horrible things to the Chinese, etc. We threw 150,000 Japanese-Americans into prison camps and saw their land and assets sold off, then to end the war dropped atom bombs on two civilian targets (many would argue uneccesarily) instantly killing vast numbers of non-combatants and contributing to later deaths from radiation, cancer, burns, etc.

Forgiving is not forgetting and empathy is not weakness...but both are certainly steps towards understanding our mutual humanity and preventing future conflict.

Their bad, our bad....all bad...the trick is in future avoidance and that isn't accomplished by ignoring the other side of the coin.

Sistema1927
October 12, 2006, 10:33 AM
The revisionist historians have won.

"The United States is just as bad as.....":confused:

Makes me want to :barf:

Harve Curry
October 12, 2006, 12:21 PM
I was driving through the Gila Indian Reservation a couple of years ago. There had just been a parade/memorial celebration. Family and veterans were there and some relations and friends Ira Hays. Anyone traveling between Phoenix and Tucson should get off the interstate and go to the cemetary near Sacaton. One of the first American soldiers killed in the recent War was a girl from this reservation. It lists the American Indians from there since WWI.

Harve Curry
October 12, 2006, 12:38 PM
QUOTE: sjones63

"My father was there.He told me many years ago that he was about 50 yards down the hill where the flag was planted with his buddies and they had their backs to the hill looking downward to keep the japs away.He said that the first flag was a lot smaller than the second one,the famous one.He passed away on jan1,2003 at the age of 86.The last 5 years of his life he and mom were in a nursing home.One day I found a sculpture of the flag raising with a marine with his rifle at port arms and just knew I had to get it for him.When I brought it into his room at the home,he broke down and cried.He said that was the best present I could ever have given him.When he died we had a military funeral and I have the flag,the bullets and his medal.If it sounds like I am proud of him,I am.I don't think this world will ever see their like again and they are slowly dying off every day.I was in the service myself,but I couldn't hold a candle to men like him.sj "

That last sentence of yours, yes you could. As long as there are people like you there will be men like that. It's the timing and being put in the situation.

My Grandfather was in the trenches of WWI and cried when he told me some of it when he was 81 years old.
Bill Raftery, who taught me horse shoeing, went up Pt du Hoc on D-Day with the 2nd Rangers wouldn't go back to visit 50 years later. When asked why he told me "All I left there was alot of good friends and bad memories."
We have good soldiers doing it now, we just haven't heard their stories yet.

m1aman
October 12, 2006, 05:18 PM
i have heard that the movie starts off great, and soon turns into a movie about racism and ira hayes (sp). if so, i am disappointed with eastwood and his bowing to the hollywood left. if not, i will catch it on showtime next year.

Texshooter
October 12, 2006, 10:07 PM
If anyone thinks the japs conducted the war with "honor", then they obviously don't know or they are brain dead.

offthepaper
October 12, 2006, 10:29 PM
yes, war is hell.

Lucky
October 12, 2006, 10:41 PM
texas shooter and sistema, I think that it must be us who are crazy:)

How could you question it, didn't you read? They gave prisoners many cakes:rolleyes: . Only 1 guy died in the prison camp. Japanese text books skip over any WW2 atrocities, I guess because people don't need to be dredging up the past. The cultures are a little different, that's all. Stop being racist or ethnocentric or whatever, and concede that the Japanese were doing good. What's more, it's probably our fault that they ever acted badly, we're to blame, clearly.:banghead:



I think what has been exhibited is referred to as 'moral relativism', no? People saying that bad here and bad there means that neither was really bad?

What's worse is that Japanese actions are being justified by the reactions they caused. A man is raping a woman, and when a bystander tries to intervene the rapist pulls a gun and fires on the good samaritan. The samaritan has a gun and fires back. What Japanese apologists are saying is taht since both guys are shooting guns at each other, they're basically morally equal.

.38 Special
October 12, 2006, 11:24 PM
< edit >Never mind. Drank too much and talked myself into believing that some kind of value could come from arguing on the internet.

m1aman
October 12, 2006, 11:33 PM
ask the chinese how honorable the japs were. or ask the filippinos. heck ask american soldiers!

beheading unarmed people is honorable.

.38 Special
October 12, 2006, 11:36 PM
< edit >Never mind. Drank too much and talked myself into believing that some kind of value could come from arguing on the internet.

Lucky
October 12, 2006, 11:39 PM
.38 spl, So when faced with reality being different from what you've been told, your reaction is to retreat into sarcasm, and hope rationalisation and denial can bring you through.

They can't. The Japanese were monsters, doing monstrous things. Wrongs done to other peoples in other places will never change that.

Harve Curry
October 12, 2006, 11:47 PM
I don't know of any jap POW's that were starved to death, beheaded, or forced marched.:barf:
Read history ,read first hand accounts by soldiers that were there. Some you can still get an autographed copy from. Read "Lt Ramsey's War" , about the war in the Phillipines by Ed Ramsey of Orange County California. He has a website.

.38 Special
October 12, 2006, 11:49 PM
< edit >Never mind. Drank too much and talked myself into believing that some kind of value could come from arguing on the internet.

.38 Special
October 12, 2006, 11:51 PM
< edit >Never mind. Drank too much and talked myself into believing that some kind of value could come from arguing on the internet.

Trebor
October 12, 2006, 11:54 PM
My understanding about the photo is this, they took it the first time and it did not come out well so they set back up and took it again and the second was the best.

No, not exactly.

What happened is that a combat patrol went and raised a flag on Iwo Jima. There was a military photographer there and he take some pictures of the first flag raising. You can find them on the net if you do a search.

A short time later, a second patrol went up with a larger flag to replace the first flag. Joe Rosenthal and a newsreel cameraman escorted this patrol. They met the first patrol coming down and Rosenthal thought he'd missed his chance to get a picture. When the second flag was raised, Rosenthal and the newsreel camera both caputured it on film. They were standing very close to each other, so the angle of the flag raising on the newsreel is almost identical to the angle in Rosenthal's photo.

Rosenthal did not pose the Marines raising the flag or arrange to have the second flag raised. He just went up with them, took some pictures, and came down. He did take a few posed "group photo's" after the flag raising, but they were obvioulsy posed as the guys were even sitting down like in a class photo.

In short: The flag raising was real, although it was the second flag raised, and the photo was real.

Harley Quinn
October 12, 2006, 11:55 PM
While I am probably not the guy who should say much being one of the those who served in the Marine Corps. I'll be interested if Clint Eastwood's true colors show.:uhoh: Basicly he is very liberal.

HQ

Lucky
October 13, 2006, 12:37 AM
.38 Special
Actually, I'm faced with your version of reality, with which I disagree.

I can't tell if you are pulling my leg or not. Lol, you got me, ok you can stop kidding now, you got me. So seriously, now you can re-read the excerpts of transcript I posted, and confirm that what the Japanese troops were doing was wrong... Please. No excuses, rationalizations, quantifications, just that they were bad.

Or on the other hand feel free to deny them.

It's just that you seem to be, well, ignoring them.

.38 Special
October 13, 2006, 12:41 AM
You win, mate. All Japanese soldiers -- heck, all non-American soldiers -- are evil monsters deserving of slow painful deaths.

May I be excused now?

Lucky
October 13, 2006, 01:02 AM
No... You have to either affirm or deny that what the Japanese did was wrong. You are prevaricating, avoiding answering. If you really believe that they did no wrong, then I absolutely support your right to that opinion, and am willing to hear you out.

.38 Special
October 13, 2006, 01:08 AM
Actually, I don't have to do anything, especially now that I've sobered up to the point that I fully realize the foolishness of arguing about such things on the internet -- especially with people who are willing to call perfect strangers liars.

I'm excusing myself.

m1aman
October 13, 2006, 02:19 AM
Basicly he is very liberal.

i fear you are correct. but he has managed to keep it out of his movies from what i can tell. i dig him for that.

Dr.Rob
October 13, 2006, 04:57 AM
RE: which flag raising was which... read the book.

EVERY MAN at both raisings gets his due.

Both sets of photos are explained fully, as as the so called 'gung ho' photo Rosenthal shot a half an hour later. (Supposedly the reason for the second flag raising was the first one wasn't big enough to see from the navy ships, this too is covered.)

The aftermath, the rush to get the three survivors home (and even identified) is there, as are the real life experiences of Ira Hayes.

That's not Eastwood 'pandering to the left' that's in the book.

Flags of Our Fathers was a very indepth read, and in many ways the Pacific equivalent of "Citizen Soldiers" by Stephen Ambrose.

As war movies go, this isn't meant to be a shoot 'em up. The story is a thoughtful piece explaining the heroic and barbaric acts of men in war, and the troubles of those warriors in peace.

Read that last sentence again. It could apply for any soldier in any war, regardless of which side they fought for.

Maybe that's why Eastwood decided to shoot the Japanese side as well, maybe it's a piece that confronts the audience with the reality of the things men in war did back then. Eastwood has never been accused of putting on kid gloves when approaching any subject, I think it's best to see a film before completely dismissing it.

This thread isn't exceptionally gun-related, but if we can keep the rhetoric down i see no reason to close it yet.

Harley Quinn
October 13, 2006, 09:44 AM
I am sure they will be using the combination of rifles and shotguns and handguns that were avaliable at that period and time. I am thinking it will be a very gungie movie. :uhoh:

Hollywood has a reputation to go and help the government stir up the masses when it comes to war films and the desired effect to get more soliders or fighting men into the service.:barf:

I am not concerned with the who did the first raising of the flag it has been documented and for the desired effect that they wanted from this proud moment and to the historical monument in DC. It has done what the Gov. and others wanted to do, which is instill and keep the pride up there.:)

As far as atrocities of the Japanese it is very well documented. I am a very big fan of the Filipine Martial arts, the sword and dagger and the arnis stick (baton). I for one have not forgotten about the story or the reason we fought them. :mad:

I like the particular discipline of their country, but for the reason we fought against all of the various tyranical forms of Gov.
I am still of the opinion that we will rise to the occasion when needed to get the job done.:fire: Remember the forum is for discussion.

The forum is a gun forum. They were using many various weapons at the time and we still do. One of the reasons the Marine Corps, still uses the shotgun and the semi auto rifle and the bolt action, very wicked combination when used effectivly and all men that are appointed to use them are willing or able.

The Flame thrower was very useful on the Islands. The gernades of that era. The Flame thrower is not used in todays battles. Not good PR.
Remember the Napalm of old. Now we ruined that forest but you would not know it now.

Both the items mentioned are not used at the present not very effective but if we needed them again I would think they would be used? Also were not as we were in the first one over in Iraq, trying to kill all and any. We did that remember. Now many that fought against us are here in the states. Can we say the enemy within. :barf:
....
(Bad PR. Both sides did things that were not really proper at times but one of the channels on tv of late showed that the japanese were actually eating the prisoners and keeping them alive while doing it, on the Islands of the Phillippines. Pretty bad stuff.)
.....

Hand held firing devices that launched the heavier projectiles were very effective also. Japanese side used them, and we are now very good with them. The Cong used them very effectivly against us. :eek:
Same in the Korean war. Lobbing an item right in there with precision and over items that were in the way, (sandbags, or dirt) very effective.
Dropped them right into the (fox) fighting holes of that time and era.

HQ

Phil DeGraves
October 13, 2006, 03:25 PM
Special on the History Channel about the film on Sunday night at 6:30 pm.

motorep
October 13, 2006, 09:57 PM
I need to see this, too. I didn't realize there was a book, I'll look for it this weekend. My dad was there- 4th Marines.

Aguila Blanca
October 14, 2006, 01:08 AM
I was driving through the Gila Indian Reservation a couple of years ago. There had just been a parade/memorial celebration. Family and veterans were there and some relations and friends Ira Hays. Anyone traveling between Phoenix and Tucson should get off the interstate and go to the cemetary near Sacaton. One of the first American soldiers killed in the recent War was a girl from this reservation. It lists the American Indians from there since WWI.
I thought Hayes was a Pima Indian. Their reservation is south of Tucson, and is now called the Tohono Od'am reservation. ("Pima" was a name we anglos pinned on them.)

And I thought Laurie what's-her-name, the girl killed in the early days of Iraq, was a Navajo, not a Gila. I'm almost certain I remember reading that she was from Tuba City, which is in northern Arizona near the western end of the Navajo res.

Harley Quinn
October 14, 2006, 12:26 PM
I got this as a mention they were there at the funeral of the Gila person who was killed in the Iraq battle.

Not that Ira Hayes was one. Johnny Cash had a good song as a tribute to IH.:)

HQ

aspen1964
October 14, 2006, 01:06 PM
Frankly..I think Eastwood's merits have been going downhill for some time...I hope this is a good movie, but in light of what I usually see today, I have doubts...way back when I was a teenager I thought Eastwood was the greatest thing in movies...now I watch his movies by accident on tv...other movies & actors I look for and wait for them to come on...he has done too many flops over the years & his same expressions he shows as an actor become too much all the same again and again...2nd rate actor & director...don't bring up any awards won because they mean even less today...junk awards...

m1aman
October 14, 2006, 10:23 PM
just read a lot of reviews of this film. hard to find a kind one. looks like this movie could be a real disappointment. lots of people say eastwood blew it. disjointed story and characters no one cares about seems to be peoples beef. beach assault is a just a bad rip off of saving private ryan.

hope its not true as i like eastwood.

44AMP
October 14, 2006, 11:12 PM
But will sometime in the next couple of weeks. I will go for the combat footage. I enjoy watching how Hollywood has improved their treatment of combat. It now approaches realism more closely than what was available in the past. Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers clearly set a new standard. As long as sappy story lines don't overly detract from the movie, I will see it.

Saw Flyboys a couple of weeks ago. Enjoyed the planes, and the dogfighting, but was disapointed by the lack of historical accuracy (Germans flew alot of other things besides DR I triplanes, and red was NOT the main color for every plane!) And about 2/3 of the way through, I was put off by a number of things. Overall, a disapointment.

I don't know why Hollywood feels it has to "improve" on history. Even the history channel strays away from the truth on occasion. Sad, but what can one do? I would love to see (and it is possible with today's CGI effects) films put together with accurate depictions of equipment and events.

As far as Iwo Jima beach invasion scenes being a "rip off of Private Ryan", How much different do you think it can be? Do you think anytime men fight in similar terrain situations that it is a "rip off" of a previous battle?

m1aman
October 14, 2006, 11:40 PM
As far as Iwo Jima beach invasion scenes being a "rip off of Private Ryan

if that is directed at me you are off base as i was just paraphrasing what was in the reviews i have read.

but, why cant it be different? that is like saying how much different can war movies be from each other. or any movies with similiar subjects. i think it falls on how the directors treats it.

personally i won't know until i catch it on hbo as woudn't spend a penny to see a movie in a theater.

tulsamal
October 15, 2006, 01:44 AM
Frankly..I think Eastwood's merits have been going downhill for some time... ...don't bring up any awards won because they mean even less today...junk awards...

I'll strongly disagree with that. Unforgiven deserved every award it got. There isn't anything I DON'T like about that movie.

Gregg

m1aman
October 15, 2006, 02:44 AM
unforgiven was great. one of the few dvds i have purchased. that's been a while ago though.

Lucky
October 15, 2006, 05:07 AM
I was thinking Iwo Jima was the easy landing, then the hard fight the rest of the way?

Harley Quinn
October 15, 2006, 11:22 AM
I'll strongly disagree with that. Unforgiven deserved every award it got. There isn't anything I DON'T like about that movie.
I'll add I really liked the movie Million Dollar Baby also.:)

Saw both of those in the Theater, not many I go to see though.:scrutiny:

I believe that Iwo was the Highest casualties in the island hopping. Lost Sgt Striker (John Wayne).:(

HQ:D

The Grand Inquisitor
October 15, 2006, 12:36 PM
Honestly, SCREW TELLING BOTH SIDES.


I agree totally.

Why should we bother with historical integrity? Who cares if we believe stories that have been wrapped in myth and created out of whole cloth? Why should we bother understanding the other side - I mean, the most it could do is help us understand them and their motivations and lead to less conflict in the future.

Why on Earth would we want to know the truth?


With all that said, it's nice to see a film coming out about WWII that is going to really explore the other side as more than evil villian. We've allowed ourselves to forget how absolutely horrific WWII was, and we've also willingly forgotten our own atrocities during the war in favor of finger wagging at the Germans (generally forgetting the Japanese atrocities - and almost always forgetting the atrocities commited by our Russian allies).

Movies are not history - but anyone who claims to be interested in history or even in the truth must welcome any kind of opening of dialouge about the war so that we can really examine what happened - we need to get beyond the false, kitschy idea that WWII was "the good war".

Lucky
October 15, 2006, 04:01 PM
With all that said, it's nice to see a film coming out about WWII that is going to really explore the other side as more than evil villian. We've allowed ourselves to forget how absolutely horrific WWII was, and we've also willingly forgotten our own atrocities during the war in favor of finger wagging at the Germans (generally forgetting the Japanese atrocities - and almost always forgetting the atrocities commited by our Russian allies).

When the British bomb a German city, and then the Germans bomb British cities, and then the British bomb German cities, that's what the war was. You can call it atrocious, to be sure, but it's not distinguished for how horrible it was. When the Germans go in to Russia and rape and murder, and then the Russians repay the favour, again you could call it atrocious, or you could call it 'war'. In most cases what the allies did to the axis was simply giving back what the axis gave to them.

What the Germans and Japanese have going for them is that they went above and beyond that,the heinous crimes they committed are too numerous to mention, and absolutely widespread and accepted. The worst serial killers, the most horrible horror movies, no trial transcript or movie plot comes CLOSE to the things the Japanese and Germans did, on a daily basis. THEY REALLY WERE THAT BAD.

PAshooter
October 15, 2006, 04:56 PM
Originally posted by Lucky
I was thinking Iwo Jima was the easy landing, then the hard fight the rest of the way?

IIRC, we lost 2000 marines on day one in the initial landing. Compare that to the total lost thus far in Iraq.

One day.

We have no appreciation today of the sacrifices this country made back then.

Harve Curry
October 16, 2006, 09:43 AM
Aguila Blanca
Originally Posted by Harve Curry
I was driving through the Gila Indian Reservation a couple of years ago. There had just been a parade/memorial celebration. Family and veterans were there and some relations and friends Ira Hays. Anyone traveling between Phoenix and Tucson should get off the interstate and go to the cemetary near Sacaton. One of the first American soldiers killed in the recent War was a girl from this reservation. It lists the American Indians from there since WWI.
_______________________________________________________________
I thought Hayes was a Pima Indian. Their reservation is south of Tucson, and is now called the Tohono Od'am reservation. ("Pima" was a name we anglos pinned on them.)

And I thought Laurie what's-her-name, the girl killed in the early days of Iraq, was a Navajo, not a Gila. I'm almost certain I remember reading that she was from Tuba City, which is in northern Arizona near the western end of the Navajo res.
______________________________________________________________
The reservation is still called the Gila because the Gila River flows through it. Papago, Pima, Tohono O'odham, I'm not sure how they differ. There is a Memorial with American Indian's names who served on it .

spooney
October 16, 2006, 10:29 AM
The initial part of the landing was easy as the Japanese plan was to allow the Americans to get bunched up onto the beach before they started firing.

Trebor
October 16, 2006, 11:14 AM
Here's a review of the book I wrote a few years ago. I'll probably review the movie after I see it as well. I think my review gives a good idea of what the book is like.

http://www.epinions.com/book-review-3332-EA04BFD-3950623E-prod5


Btw, on a gun related note: There was a good article in American Rifleman a few months ago on a special gun they built for the movie. One of the Marines in the battle used a customized .30 cal "Stinger" machine gun. This was a gun originally used as the rear gun in the dive bomber that he had scrounged up and then had modified to fire with a bipod and a shoulder stock made from a Garand stock.

I'd always assumed that aircraft rear guns were just standard Browing .30 cals, but that actually wasn't the case with dive bombers. The gun was a completely different design, with a shorter receiver, and a much higher rate of fire. It was also lighter then the standard M1919 MG.

The producers of the movie went to the trouble of having a replica of this one-off "Stinger" built up. Unfortunately, the scenes with the gun were cut from the finished film. The AR article is pretty interesting and is worth a look if you come across a copy.

Harley Quinn
October 16, 2006, 12:00 PM
IIRC, we lost 2000 marines on day one in the initial landing. Compare that to the total lost thus far in Iraq.

One day.

We have no appreciation today of the sacrifices this country made back then.
__________________

Simply stated I am not so sure that is true, but it does seem that way, the way the press spins all of the various things that are happening. :banghead:

Terrorists are doing it all over the world if not one group another one is at it.
Sri Lanka just got a heavy killed over the weekend by terrorists.:uhoh:

I'll read that review of the book, and follow up later. thanks.;)

HQ:)

Grump
October 16, 2006, 01:19 PM
The Japanese fought for their country, people and emperor.
They were honorable according to their culture and understanding of honor... at least as much as our side.

Key here is "according to their culture and understanding of honor..." [ellipsis in original].

Same is true, from a pure subjective standpoint, for the self-styled "mujihadin" or whatever they called themselves on those four airliners on 9/11.

Face it folks, some cultures are twisted, so yes, we can say that some are *better* than others. The refusal of "the other guy" to see the truth does not invalidate the truth.

Note this has nothing to do with who is without sin. Our culture, at least, recognizes the atrocities of its own troops as evil, and at least makes frequent attempts to identified the crimes, find the perpetrators, and punish them. Arguments over whether "we" ID all crimes, try hard enough to find the evildoers, or punish them severely enough, are mere quibbles which should not obscure the ultimate point, and the ultimate distinctions.

I may not see the movie, not even for the gunnie stuff, if futher firsthand reports indicate that it obscures the US actions in doing A Good Thing by over-emphasizing how some ham-handed government goons handled The Good Thing in a Bad Way.

My Mom's favorite Uncle landed in North Africa and then walked through most of Europe. Would not talk about it until the day he died, bless his soul.

Joe Demko
October 16, 2006, 01:50 PM
This:
Face it folks, some cultures are twisted, so yes, we can say that some are *better* than others. The refusal of "the other guy" to see the truth does not invalidate the truth.

is an example of this:
from a pure subjective standpoint,

There is no need to refute you when you undermine your own points.

Feanaro
October 16, 2006, 01:59 PM
When the Germans go in to Russia and rape and murder, and then the Russians repay the favour, again you could call it atrocious, or you could call it 'war'. In most cases what the allies did to the axis was simply giving back what the axis gave to them.

And since the Axis did it first, that maked it a'okay. If someone rapes your wife, you should be justified in returning to favor on their wife.

Evil is evil. The Axis started it and they did more of it. That makes them more evil than us, it does not make our banner stainless.

spooney
October 16, 2006, 02:22 PM
:uhoh: I never thought that I would live to see the day when Americans would legitimately argue that the Nazi's and the Japanese were not the bad guys when it comes to World War 2. Do the words Nanking or Auschwitz not ring a bell to anyone anymore?:barf:

ryoushi
October 16, 2006, 03:05 PM
I never thought that I would live to see the day when Americans would legitimately argue that the Nazi's and the Japanese were not the bad guys when it comes to World War 2. Do the words Nanking or Auschwitz not ring a bell to anyone anymore?

What you are seeing is the end product of free and easy public "education".

Joe Demko
October 16, 2006, 03:12 PM
What you are seeing is the end product of free and easy public "education".

Start a new thread to grind that particular axe and I'll discuss it with you there instead of derailing this thread.

Joe Demko
October 16, 2006, 03:13 PM
I never thought that I would live to see the day when Americans would legitimately argue that the Nazi's and the Japanese were not the bad guys when it comes to World War 2. Do the words Nanking or Auschwitz not ring a bell to anyone anymore?

Nobody is defending the warcrimes committed by the Japanese or the Germans. What you are not grasping is that their evil does not automatically make all our deeds and motives pure.

Lucky
October 16, 2006, 05:07 PM
Yea Spooney, one quits and 3 more show up:rolleyes:

About the landing, then, I think it would be strange if they had a big 'Saving Private Ryan' landing scene as was mentioned earlier in the thread, for the reasons you said.

lysander
October 17, 2006, 10:08 AM
Yea Spooney, one quits and 3 more show up

I'm still here...I'm just not interested in derailing the thread beyond what I thought its original purpose was....discussing the realism or lack thereof of Eastwood's upcoming war pic.

Regarding the landing scene...the rights to Flag of our Father's were originally owned by Spielberg...and I understand he was consulted with on the landing scenes. Similarities to SPR should be expected.

jdomin
October 17, 2006, 05:09 PM
i have several photos of the higgins boat used in the movie. I can send it to anyone who will post it to this thread.
mdomin186@msn.com :banghead:

CobraF100
October 18, 2006, 11:44 AM
I'll be seeing this movie tonight.

To all Military in the Colorado Springs area tonight they are having a Military Special Opening night to see Flags of Our Fathers.
7:00pm
Cinemark Tinseltown USA
address:
1545 E. Cheyenne Mountain Blvd
(Must have Military ID,was what I was told)

I'm not good with giving reviews but I'll let you know what I think about it.

CobraF100
October 19, 2006, 12:36 AM
QUOTE]I'm not good with giving reviews but I'll let you know what I think about it.[/QUOTE]

Sorry,but I will NOT state a Opinion on the Movie.

I think if I made a "Opinion" on this movie it would be wrong of me.I wasn't there with these Men and because of that I have No Right to a Opinion on now it was shown.

The Theater was totally filled with Military Service Members,there was NOT a word spoken Durring nor at the end of the movie It was "Respectfully Quiet".

There was an Gentlemen there that was part of the Landing/First Wave.I dont know who it was that was interviewing him afterwards but he had tears in his eye's,what I heard was "Thats how it was".I interrupted them just to say Thank You.

Also when you see this movie dont just up and leave stay and watch the Pictures with there names,you'll know when it is really over.


Our service members do not owe our Country anything....Our Country owe's them EVERTHING

I'd like to say Thank You to all thoses that have served our Country.

46574

46575

PAshooter
October 19, 2006, 05:03 PM
Simply stated I am not so sure that is true, but it does seem that way, the way the press spins all of the various things that are happening.


You may be correct... but the losses over the course of the battle were staggering.

I heard an interesting bit on Fox News this evening on the way home about the comparisons being drawn between recent increases of the violence in Iraq and the Tet Offensive in Viet Nam. Tet was a massive military setback to the NVA and Viet Cong (in terms of personnel losses), but might have been a politlcal victory in the long run in terms of the reactions to the images shown here at home as a result of the fighting. Again, calling on my feeble memory, the "bad guys" lost over 20,000 troops during the two weeks after Tet, and American losses during the same period were in the 4,000 range. Again, a number that dwarfs the total losses thus far in Iraq.

Any combat loss of a U.S. soldier is tragic, both "then" and now, but what we see every night on the evening news seriously lacks perspective IMHO.

xd9fan
October 20, 2006, 01:46 AM
While I am probably not the guy who should say much being one of the those who served in the Marine Corps. I'll be interested if Clint Eastwood's true colors show. Basicly he is very liberal.
I dont think this is right....last I heard he was libertarian....

psyopspec
October 20, 2006, 02:27 AM
There was an Gentlemen there that was part of the Landing/First Wave.I dont know who it was that was interviewing him afterwards but he had tears in his eye's,what I heard was "Thats how it was".I interrupted them just to say Thank You.

Also when you see this movie dont just up and leave stay and watch the Pictures with there names,you'll know when it is really over.


Our service members do not owe our Country anything....Our Country owe's them EVERTHING

I'd like to say Thank You to all thoses that have served our Country.

I'm not convinced that it's right or wrong.

But after that, I know I need to see this movie.

Harley Quinn
October 20, 2006, 05:29 PM
What I have heard and read I'll be seeing this movie, probably more then one time.:what:

xd9fan, mentions...

“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” — Patrick Henry

Libertarians.....champions of Individual Liberty,private property, the free market, and constitutionally limited government. www.fee.org www.mises.org
www.ij.org

I am wondering::uhoh:

What would happen if all the people in the government were to think like this?

Regards,:D

HQ

Aguila Blanca
October 22, 2006, 06:20 PM
Kind of off-topic and I dislike belabouring points, but since the question of historical accuracy in the movie has been raised, we might as well try to get the contemporary history right.

The Native American gal who was killed in the same convoy ambush in which Jessica Lynch was captured was named Lori (I had it spelled Laurie, sorry) Piestewa. I was correct that she was from Tuba City, AZ ... but she was not a Navajo, she was a Hopi who lived on the Navajo reservation.

Lori Piestewa, born and raised a Hopi on the Navajo reservation in Arizona, became the first American woman to die in the war, and the first Native American woman ever to die in combat on foreign soil.

Contrary to media reports, Lori did not go out in a blaze of glory, taking scores of Iraqis with her. She was the driver for the company's senior NCO, and she died of injuries incurred when the Humvee was hit by an RPG and crashed. Jessica Lynch was riding in the same Humvee and confirmed that Lori never fired a shot. Since the Hopi are by nature pacifists, her family were more upset thinking that she might have been shooting at people than they were when they finally learned the truth.

I don't know what Native American woman from the "Gila" reservation might have died in Iraq, harve, but it wasn't Lori Piestewa.

If you enjoyed reading about "Clint Eastwood film about Iwo Jima: Flags of Our Fathers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!