PEARL HARBOR: I'd like to drop the bomb on this one for sure!

[Flangepart]

Intresting idea. However, the psycological factor is not to be forgotten. The French had been so exausted by WWI that they were not as willing to fight as the Germans. Hitler had used the (Understandable) resentment at the Versilles treaty to reach down into the German collective soul, and dredge up a collective anger that over came the memories of the war, at least enough, to get the Germans back on the path of Military might. The will to fight was in the Germans, more so then the Frenc and English, and i think that explains why they were willing to hold back, and give Hitler the time he needed to expand his base of power, and then move on his bigest european opponents, England and France. When Moral is weak, the metal, weither sword or gun, is poorly used.

[BoyScoutKevin]

I might as well toss in my 2 cents. (Here he tosses 2 pennies at the terminal screen.) The best way would seem to reply individually to the earlier comments, then make my own comments and ask a question or two. But, first, let me say, whether I agree or disagree with any opnion extpressed here or on any other board, I always treat them with the due respect they deserve.    Chris K.: My one regret is that I did not see "Tora Tora Tora," but, at that stage in my life, I was more interested in seeing films about battles we won--"Midway"--then battles we lost--"Tora Tora Tora." So, I cannot compare "Tora Tora Tora" to "Pearl Harbor," but if my memory serves me correctly, the criticisms then about "Tora Tora Tora," were much the same then, as they are now about "Pearl Harbor." I guess some things never change. I will respectfully disagree with your statement that the Japanese were stereotyped in "Pearl Harbor." And if they were, which I reject, you ought to see how they were portrayed in the movies about WWII made in WWII. Basically as fanatical monkeys w/ bad sight and overbites. We have come some way at least in that regard.                                                          Peter Johnson: Yes, we lost Wake Island to the Japanese, after a valiant defense by the Marine defenders of the island. Let's hear it for the Marines. But, we did not lose Midway. Excluding, the Battle of Coral Sea, which is considered by some as a draw, Midway is the 1st defeat suffered by the Japanese Navy in centuries.                                                       Ringneck: Yes, for the most part, Axis prisoners received better care from the Allies, then the Allied prisoners received from the Axis. Excluding, the Germans and Russians, who hated each other with a passion. But, it is not true that every Axis prisoner captured made it back alive. This was especially true for the Japanese who were capture. To back up my thesis, read "The Naked and the Dead" by Norman Mailer. True, a fictional account, but one based on the author's experiences, while stationed on the islands in the South Pacific, and what he saw and heard there.   Warren H.: How many war movies have you seen? I was thinking of how many war movies were more or less sanitized then "Pearl Harbor," and I came up with 7. Even if those 7 were less sanitized then "Pearl Harbor," they still make us less then 4% or 5% of the war movies I have seen. Thus "Pearl Harbor" cannot be considered a sanitized war movie, by my reckoning. And truly, not even Spielberg's movie was truly desanitized. Because without Smell-a-Vision, you cannot get that particular stink in the theater. The one that you'll never get out of your nostrils.
The one that you'll never forget. The one made up of blood, cordite, hot fuel oil, s***, and worst things. And that does not include burnt flesh. Of course, everybody knows what burnt flesh smells like. As for dessanitized war movies, "Glory" set the new standard for me.                                                 Now my comments. More of which can be seen at the earlier post under "A Knight's Tale." The romance did not bother me, as I have seen a number of war movies wrapped around a romance. For no other reason, then this shows what the womenfolk were doing at home while the boys were at war. And sometimes they were boys. When my father joined the Navy in "41, he was underage, so he lied to get in, but he wanted to do his part. Now, if you want to talk only about the romance, I have seen better, and I have seen worst. The ones I also feel sorry for in the film, were the Japanese and Germans who got shot. Our side. Their side. What difference does it make. Being shot, still hurts like a b****. What I liked about the movie was seeing eveyone trying to shoot down the Japanese planes with tommys, sawed-off pumps, and single action, bolt rifles, among other things. What I missed seeing, was anybody trying to shoot them down with a .45. Now that is desperation. It looks like one-man was firing at the Japanese, with one hand, but the scene was shot, so I could not see what type of gun he was using. One question: The "C" and "F" written on the foreheads of the wounded with lipstick, anybody know what they stood for.. I know the "M" was for morophine, but not the "C" and "F." Nothing good I am sure. As, I said more of my comments about "Pearl Harbor" can be found under "A Knight's Tale." Give "Pearl Harbor" 4 slimes. Enjoy.

[Chris K.]

The reason I can't give it four slimes is because of the slow pacing of the romance. Okay, the Japanese stereotype is a bit small in PEARL HARBOR and yes TORA! TORA! TORA! did recieve some bad criticism at the time of it's release just like PEARL HARBOR has. But now TORA! TORA! TORA! has become a classic because it is more historicaly accurate, their is NO romance love story, the incident is shown from both a Japanese and American viewpoint that has no sterotypes whatsoever (probably the only war film that portrays the Japanese as regular  human beings who do have souls after all, which is true to), and it shows the blunders made on both sides as well. In fact, one website that does let you post up your own reviews for TORA! TORA! TORA! had no bad reviews at all! Their were only good ones. Normaly their would be some bad ones on that site for films like FREDDY GOT FINGERED and PEARL HARBOR, but TORA! TORA! TORA! does not have any negative comments at all. Even the www.imdb.com has positive comments on TORA! TORA! TORA!. And you have to see TORA! TORA! TORA! to understand how it is better than PEARL HARBOR. Will PEARL HARBOR become a classic? No not really because the critics REALLY spoke on this one and their is no chance of it becoming a classic at all. Maybe in 30 years it might, but they will still call it a total cheese fest.

But back to the romance angle. The romance was so dreadfully dull that it could have caused the audience to fall into a state of sleep. I mean this film is three hours long, and yet the first two hours are romance and no action! Hey, if it says PEARL HARBOR then it should be about Pearl Harbor and World War II. It's not supposed to be some type of film with two characters arguing over a girl they liked and which one sleeped with her first! God, I was really hopeing for a Japanese bomber to blow up the romantic interests just so the film can go on!

The only good parts were the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the performances of Jon Voight and Dan Akroyd (and their performances are VERY breif). And even so, these upsides could not have saved PEARL HARBOR from being a complete bomb. PEARL HARBOR may have been entertaining for the last 45 minutes, but the rest could have been cut down to two hours.

So I still recommend TORA! TORA! TORA! (1977) and the Japanese film I BOMBED PEARL HARBOR (1960) for "true" World War II film buffs.

[Matt]

This movie was more like an afternoon soap opera! And its sad because it had such great potential!  To me Titanic was a great example of mixing Romance and a historical event!  But it fell really short of the mark in Pearl Harbor!

[BoyScoutKevin]

i have no problems with someone not giving "Pearl Harbor" four slimes or disagreeing with my opinion. As to the other comments made, I have not see the other two films, so I cannot comment on them. Though, I wish I had seen them before I had seen "Pearl Harbor," for reasons I will get to, later in my post. As for the romance, it did not bother me, as much as some people, maybe because my mother came of age at this time, and the stories she told me about her romance with her fiance--who was killed in the war--played out much like the romance in "Pearl Harbor." Of course, this was before she met my father. As to "Titanic" having the better romance, with all due respect, our opinions are flipped on that one. The romance in "Titanic" was ridiculous. One of the worst I have ever seen. Much worst then the one in "Pearl Harbor." As no young woman of her age, class, or time period, would act like the young woman acted in "Titanic." The 1953 version of "Titanic" and "A Night to Remember," both of which I saw before the later "Titanic" are (IMHO) superior films to the later "Titanic." Which is why I wish I had seen "Tora Tora Tora" and the other film before I saw "Pearl Harbor." If I see two films on the same subject, I am likely to compare unfavorablely the second film I saw with the first film. One more thing about "Tora Tora Tora," before I go. Chris K. is talking about opinions of the film now, I was talking about opinions of the film then, and I admit my memory is not too good, but opinions then and opinions now are two different things. As opinions can go from bad to good or good to bad from then until now.