Interesting...

Status
Not open for further replies.
(SUCKY MOVIE SPOILERS AHEAD) The FX do look neat... in the commercial. But in the actual movie the come off as very cartoonish -- very *obviously* done to garner a PG-13 rating and thus sell a movie to the most possible people. Armor piercing bombs can blow up 30 centimeter battleship hulls, and just sort of harmlessly throw the people on the ships up in the air. :)

And the story, oh, what a horrible story <G> It's a boring love story and the ultimate case of small universe syndrome... the movie spends an hour and a half on a ripoff Titanic style love story that it makes NO ONE care about. And the Ben Affleck somehow fights in the Battle of Britain, escapes occupied France, gets into the air and shoots down half a dozen Zeros at Pearl Harbor and then flys with the Doolittle raid... and kills a dozen Japanese soldiers on the ground... and then the movie ends with this horrible narration from the main female character.
 
Are you kidding? Pearl Harbor is a GREAT MOVIE...that is, after the hour-and-a-half love story is over. I couldn't see the point of that. The critics were right, it was a hackneyed piece of cr.., er junk. Still, the rest of the movie was great and I'd recommend seeing it. They even got some of the historical facts right :)
 
You know, through the movie I couldn't help but notice how Pearl Harbor was like the Kilrathi raid on McAuliffe in "Action Stations" and how the Dolittle Raid was like the Tarawa raid in "End Run." Now am I just crazy (don't answer that), or did anyone else think that too?
 
I just saw Pearl Harbor and thought it was a decent movie. Not incredible, but not bad. I'd rate it as average on my scale of movies.

(SPOILER, AGAIN)
I thought the Dolittle raid at the end was sort of pointless. The movie should have ended right after Pearl Harbor. They just kinda threw that in there.
 
Originally posted by Lunatic
You know, through the movie I couldn't help but notice how Pearl Harbor was like the Kilrathi raid on McAuliffe in "Action Stations" and how the Dolittle Raid was like the Tarawa raid in "End Run." Now am I just crazy (don't answer that), or did anyone else think that too?
Click to expand...
Doolittle raid was like the Tarawa raid in End Run? You don't say... :)

(read the dedication in End Run :))
 
The biggest problem I have with the movie Pearl Harbor is that the attack is portrayed as a cowardly (this is from hear say because I did not see the movie and don't intend to) attack. Let's be honest it was a smart move by the japanese, attacking the US before they could declared war. It would have been a stroke of genius if they actually had won the war, but I'm glad they didn't.
 
I don't think the attack came off as cowardly at all in the movie... it seemed rather "honorable" (which, honestly, was one of my problems... I either wanted a stupid patriotic American movie with big explosions or a historically accurate film... but it was neither...)
 
I've refused to see a movie by Jerry Bruckheimer for quite sometime now. Him making a film about one of the most important days in American history is heathenous. He's all style (if you call what he does style) and no substance. IF I could string up 3 people in Hollywood, rest assured he'd be one of them...and possibly Director Michael Bay.
 
Well i guess the only other person I can think of that id want to add to that list is producer Jon Peters.
 
Jon Peters? He's not THAT bad... I mean, sure Clan of the Cave Bear wasn't oscar gold, nor was Bonfire of the Vanities but he did Produce the '89 Batman and Rainman.

...There is a novel though, called "Hit and Run : How Jon Peters and Peter Guber Took Sony for a Ride in Hollywood".
The book suggests that despite Jon Peters' success as a producer, he is prone to violence and is barely able to read.

So, yes, he's an ordinary, average Producer. :)

Whats your beef with him?
 
He wanted to make Superman a Matrix rip off. It SUPERMAN for cryin out loud! He wanted Sean Penn to play Superman cause "he has that killer instinct"

He saw a show on the Discovery channel about spiders so he made Kevin Smith write a spider into the script. Well the movie wasnt made and Peters went onto another moveie. Wild Wild West. Remember what was at the end? A giant mechanical spider. Nothing to do with plot or character. Just something he thought was "cool"
 
Originally posted by Supdon3

He saw a show on the Discovery channel about spiders so he made Kevin Smith write a spider into the script. Well the movie wasnt made and Peters went onto another moveie. Wild Wild West. Remember what was at the end? A giant mechanical spider. Nothing to do with plot or character. Just something he thought was "cool"
Click to expand...

Actually, if you pay attention throughout Wild Wild West, the spider like the symbol of that Confederate guy. So, why not make a giant spider...
 
Im sure that was just a trick of the writer to make it seem like the giant spider didnt come out of nowhere.
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
He saw a show on the Discovery channel about spiders so he made Kevin Smith write a spider into the script. Well the movie wasnt made and Peters went onto another moveie. Wild Wild West. Remember what was at the end? A giant mechanical spider. Nothing to do with plot or character. Just something he thought was "cool"
Click to expand...
But... 99.99% of everything in movies is there just because someone thought it was "cool"...
 
Maybe 99.99% of really crappy movies. I would hope that writers actually have reasons for things being in movies that develope character (like a little Pilgrim heritage) or advance the plot. Good writers wouldnt say wouldnt it be cool if Blair all of a sudden had mystical powers? that would be cool. Let me just jam it in there. They didnt have Sonny shot in the Godfather because they thought it would be cool to kill James Caan. It let Michael become head of the family. In Fight Club they didnt create a club to fight in because the writer thought it would be cool to watch a bunch of guys beat the crap out of each other in the middle of a bunch of social commentary. Bruce Willis didnt spend all his time in Die Hard fighting terrorits because someone thought it would be cool if there were bad guys in the building for him to worry about while he was there. The spider thing was just the tip of the iceberg to the monument of Jon Peter's stupidity.
 
Originally posted by plan9
The biggest problem I have with the movie Pearl Harbor is that the attack is portrayed as a cowardly (this is from hear say because I did not see the movie and don't intend to) attack. Let's be honest it was a smart move by the japanese, attacking the US before they could declared war. It would have been a stroke of genius if they actually had won the war, but I'm glad they didn't.
Click to expand...

Bull. It was one of the top strategic blunders of the war. Admiral Yamamoto warned against it, saying, truthfully, that it would only "awaken the sleeping giant." He told the reigning militarists that "If there is war with America, I will run wild for a year. After that, I can promise nothing." I may not have that quote one hundred percent right, but you get the gist. Yamamoto didn't believe that the Japanese could beat the Americans. All Pearl Harbor did was piss us off, and bring us into the war that much sooner. They missed our carriers, which were the prime striking force of the war, and with which we kicked their butts at Midway, after which they could never go on the offensive against us again. Pearl Harbor was as dumb for the Japanese as Barbarossa was for Hitler.
 
Fenris: First of all I'd like to say I agree with your statement. However for the sake of discussion...

The problem is we're looking at this from the future where we know what has happened. What would Pearl Harbour look like if the Japanese had won the war? Bloody awesome. How did the Japanese know they were going to lose? How did they know they were going to miss the carriers? There's no way to know unless you try...

Secondly when the Japanese went after Pearl Harbour they were aiming for the battleships. Carriers had not established their reputation as of yet. Battleships were still considered the primary naval tool of war. That's why such large vessels like the Bismarck, Yamamoto and Iowa classes were commissioned. Why would the Japanese have bothered with Yamamoto in the first place if they already thought carriers would carry the day?

As for the Battle of Midway. That Battle had nothing to do with Pearl Harbour and realistically could've gone either way. Suppose the Japanese had spotted the American carriers before the Americans found theirs? Wasn't there also confusion among the Japanese over whether to bomb some land strip or naval task force, leading to their airwings constantly getting their ordnance swapped and slowing down their offensive?

The last argument that could be made is that the Japanese thought the Americans were going to enter the war anyway. They just wanted the first punch and got it. Can you seriously say that if Pearl Harbour never happened America would've kept its nose out of WWII entirely?
 
Originally posted by Penguin
Secondly when the Japanese went after Pearl Harbour they were aiming for the battleships. Carriers had not established their reputation as of yet. Battleships were still considered the primary naval tool of war. That's why such large vessels like the Bismarck, Yamamoto and Iowa classes were commissioned. Why would the Japanese have bothered with Yamamoto in the first place if they already thought carriers would carry the day?
Click to expand...
That's totally false, and you know it. The fact that Pearl Harbour happened indicates that carriers had established their reputation. Furthermore, while the battleships were bombed, Admiral Yamamoto was much more interested in the carriers. The lack of carriers was why he broke off the attack, in fact.

The thing to keep in mind about Pearl Harbour is not that it failed, but that it almost worked. There's no way Japan could have actually defeated America in the traditional we'll-invade-you way, but a total victory at Pearl Harbour would have been inevitably followed by invasion of Hawaii. This could have forced America and Australia to the negotiating table.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top