Letters from Iwo Jima

[blindzebra]

Just got around to seeing it...incredible movie.

So how did Clint get Letters so right and Flags so wrong?

I absolutely hated Flags of Our Fathers...way to much emphasis on the aftermath of the battle and not enough of the battle for you to connect to the characters at all. By the time the movie was 3/4 over I was sorry they made it off the island.

Letters on the other hand, you had that connection to the characters...all in spite of it being in Japanese, the history about how much we should hate these soldiers working against it, we cared.

[burmafrd]

Sadly, I think Clint has been hijacked by the anti war crowd and that was his main goal in Flags. Instead of just trying to tell the story, he wanted to make a statement; that usually screws things up big time.

[Big Dakota]

Sadly, I think Clint has been hijacked by the anti war crowd and that was his main goal in Flags. Instead of just trying to tell the story, he wanted to make a statement; that usually screws things up big time.


I guess you've gotta keep your head until this peace craze blows over.

[Cajuncowboy]

Sadly, I think Clint has been hijacked by the anti war crowd and that was his main goal in Flags. Instead of just trying to tell the story, he wanted to make a statement; that usually screws things up big time.

I agree. I really wanted to see this film but after seeing flags decided against it. If I want to watch something that is trying to pervert history or tell me I'm wrong about something, I'll watch a Michael moore movie or I'll go see al gores "the earth is Dying and man is the cause of it all" movie. They usually get things wrong anyway but at least I know they are trying to blow smoke up my tail pipe without any real facts.

[Cajuncowboy]

I guess you've gotta keep your head until this peace craze blows over.

Yeah, that whole Peace through strength thingy is way over rated.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Is it really so hard to figure out by now that we don't need the political mumbo jumbo on this board?

Honestly.

:bang2:

[blindzebra]

All I can say is Wow!

The close-mindedness of some is scary...it's down right sad.

First off, I suggest you read the book. Flags tells the story of the affects that being made a hero to sale war bonds had on these 3 men. Clint didn't make an anti-war movie, the trouble was he followed the book too closely.

You see back then our government did choose to tell the lie about a striking photograph, when the truth about the battle itself was ignored...sorry that some can't see past John Wayne getting shot as the TRUTH ABOUT IWO JIMA.

As for Letters...so we are to believe that the Japanese soldiers had no mothers, wives, or children wanting nothing more than to have them come home? That they did not bleed, have fear, die scared calling out for their mothers, the same as an American? I guess we are to believe that they weren't human beings.

We all are born, live and die the same. Human beings share much more in common than the few differences we have that seem to separate us.

Countries go to war for all kinds of reasons...sometimes those reasons are evil...that does not automatically make those fighting for that country evil.

[Cajuncowboy]

All I can say is Wow!

The close-mindedness of some is scary...it's down right sad.

First off, I suggest you read the book. Flags tells the story of the affects that being made a hero to sale war bonds had on these 3 men. Clint didn't make an anti-war movie, the trouble was he followed the book too closely.

You see back then our government did choose to tell the lie about a striking photograph, when the truth about the battle itself was ignored...sorry that some can't see past John Wayne getting shot as the TRUTH ABOUT IWO JIMA.

As for Letters...so we are to believe that the Japanese soldiers had no mothers, wives, or children wanting nothing more than to have them come home? That they did not bleed, have fear, die scared calling out for their mothers, the same as an American? I guess we are to believe that they weren't human beings.

We all are born, live and die the same. Human beings share much more in common than the few differences we have that seem to separate us.

Countries go to war for all kinds of reasons...sometimes those reasons are evil...that does not automatically make those fighting for that country evil.

Hang on. I meant after seeing Flags I didn't want to see this movie because I didn't like the way the picture was made, not so much because of the political content.

the rest of my post however was a political comment based on another posters comment and was made in general.

[Cajuncowboy]

Is it really so hard to figure out by now that we don't need the political mumbo jumbo on this board?

Honestly.

:bang2:


:tongue:
















:D

[blindzebra]

Hang on. I meant after seeing Flags I didn't want to see this movie because I didn't like the way the picture was made, not so much because of the political content.

the rest of my post however was a political comment based on another posters comment and was made in general.

That's just it though, Flags was not perverting history, it was telling what actually happened. What you knew about it was the perversion.

Most people thought that the flag went up after the battle was won, it didn't. They fought for more than a month after the flag raising.

But the picture stirred the American people to act by giving money to the war effort, the truth was unimportant...sounds vaguely familiar to Pat Tillman's death.

So basing your desires to see a movie on it not lining up with the old John Wayne version, is rather silly.

Always remember much of history is only based on a true story.

[burmafrd]

As a military historian, who has spent 20 years doing it, I can frankly say that Flags was a perversion. As it was initially reported, the story was correct. There is no doubt that the War Department PR machine used it- thats what they do. And it got changed and twisted. What happened to the flag raisers was no different in a lot of ways then previous hero's from the war were USED- and that is the correct term, USED- to raise money. One thing that the picture DID NOT MENTION- and deliberately so- and the book also did not go into (the book was pretty slanted as well) is that WW2 was NOT FUNDED by TAXES. WAR BONDS did a lot of it. We HAD to sell war bonds to fund the war. SIMPLE AS THAT. It was JUST as important as making the guns and ammo and ships and planes. When you have to SELL something, you need to make people want to buy it. Some things have not changed that much over the years.
By the way- people knew the battle had not ended with the flag raising. the casualty lists did that all too well. Do not take one book or one movie and think it tells even PART of the story.

[Cajuncowboy]

That's just it though, Flags was not perverting history, it was telling what actually happened. What you knew about it was the perversion.

Most people thought that the flag went up after the battle was won, it didn't. They fought for more than a month after the flag raising.

But the picture stirred the American people to act by giving money to the war effort, the truth was unimportant...sounds vaguely familiar to Pat Tillman's death.

So basing your desires to see a movie on it not lining up with the old John Wayne version, is rather silly.

Always remember much of history is only based on a true story.

I guess you still don't get what I'm saying.
From a theatrical point of view, I didn't like it. As a movie. And although you say it was presented on a factual basis, I do not believe that it was 100% accurate.

[blindzebra]

As a military historian, who has spent 20 years doing it, I can frankly say that Flags was a perversion. As it was initially reported, the story was correct. There is no doubt that the War Department PR machine used it- thats what they do. And it got changed and twisted. What happened to the flag raisers was no different in a lot of ways then previous hero's from the war were USED- and that is the correct term, USED- to raise money. One thing that the picture DID NOT MENTION- and deliberately so- and the book also did not go into (the book was pretty slanted as well) is that WW2 was NOT FUNDED by TAXES. WAR BONDS did a lot of it. We HAD to sell war bonds to fund the war. SIMPLE AS THAT. It was JUST as important as making the guns and ammo and ships and planes. When you have to SELL something, you need to make people want to buy it. Some things have not changed that much over the years.
By the way- people knew the battle had not ended with the flag raising. the casualty lists did that all too well. Do not take one book or one movie and think it tells even PART of the story.

So it was reported that it was the second flag raising huh?

It had the right names of the soldiers in the pictures huh?

I think your take on correct, leaves a lot to be desired.;)

[blindzebra]

I guess you still don't get what I'm saying.
From a theatrical point of view, I didn't like it. As a movie. And although you say it was presented on a factual basis, I do not believe that it was 100% accurate.

You want to know what a 100% factual movie is?

A documentary.

Actually there is no such thing as 100% factual anyway...unless you were there and it only dealt with exactly what you saw...I take that back, even that isn't 100%, because even your view is distorted by what is going on around you, time and other factors.

I didn't like Flags either, but that is because I thought he tried too hard to follow the book...He really needed to tell the story more chronologically for the movie to have the impact the battle deserved.

How much better would it have been if we got to know the men in the picture a bit before they landed? We see the entire battle start to finish...throw in a bit of the uproar the photo was causing to break it up a bit...and then we go on the bond drive?

Not only would the increased action make it less boring, we'd have a better feel for the guilt, confusion and anger they felt for being paraded around as heroes when they felt they weren't.

In other words we'd have had a connection to the characters and we'd have cared about their plight. What I cared about was just how much longer is this movie.

Letters does a masterful job of doing all of that.

And yes, you do connect with the Japanese soldiers on Iwo, but you also don't lose the sense of just how evil their leaders back in Japan are, nor do you understand the fanatical dedication some showed to die for their country...as if committing suicide with a hand grenade was better for the cause than retreating to where the fighting was still in doubt and fighting on.

Sure there is artistic license, which is understandable since there were few Japanese survivors...but what isn't a fabrication is that some truths of war are universal...there is fear, pain, bravery, compassion, and ordinary people doing unspeakable acts. And those acts are committed by all sides, not just the Nazis, Japs, Viet Cong, or Iraqis, because when survival mode kicks in, and you are fighting, killing and dying for the soldier next to you, the politics about which country is right or wrong doesn't really come into play.

I will finish with this...the best reason to watch Letters was if you didn't like Flags or were disappointed by it, because it is an extremely well made, beautifully shot film, with a compelling story.

[Cajuncowboy]

You want to know what a 100% factual movie is?

A documentary.

Actually there is no such thing as 100% factual anyway...unless you were there and it only dealt with exactly what you saw...I take that back, even that isn't 100%, because even your view is distorted by what is going on around you, time and other factors.

I didn't like Flags either, but that is because I thought he tried too hard to follow the book...He really needed to tell the story more chronologically for the movie to have the impact the battle deserved.

How much better would it have been if we got to know the men in the picture a bit before they landed? We see the entire battle start to finish...throw in a bit of the uproar the photo was causing to break it up a bit...and then we go on the bond drive?

Not only would the increased action make it less boring, we'd have a better feel for the guilt, confusion and anger they felt for being paraded around as heroes when they felt they weren't.

In other words we'd have had a connection to the characters and we'd have cared about their plight. What I cared about was just how much longer is this movie.

Letters does a masterful job of doing all of that.

And yes, you do connect with the Japanese soldiers on Iwo, but you also don't lose the sense of just how evil their leaders back in Japan are, nor do you understand the fanatical dedication some showed to die for their country...as if committing suicide with a hand grenade was better for the cause than retreating to where the fighting was still in doubt and fighting on.

Sure there is artistic license, which is understandable since there were few Japanese survivors...but what isn't a fabrication is that some truths of war are universal...there is fear, pain, bravery, compassion, and ordinary people doing unspeakable acts. And those acts are committed by all sides, not just the Nazis, Japs, Viet Cong, or Iraqis, because when survival mode kicks in, and you are fighting, killing and dying for the soldier next to you, the politics about which country is right or wrong doesn't really come into play.

I will finish with this...the best reason to watch Letters was if you didn't like Flags or were disappointed by it, because it is an extremely well made, beautifully shot film, with a compelling story.

So you are telling me there is no such thing as 100% truth???

Wow, that explains so much.

This is not a political forum and I have said too much on the subject however I will say this, it is this kind of view that has caused so much trouble. There are no absolutes any longer. Right isn't always right. Wrong can be right. 2+2 doesn't aways =4.

Sorry that so many people are like this.

[blindzebra]

So you are telling me there is no such thing as 100% truth???

Wow, that explains so much.

This is not a political forum and I have said too much on the subject however I will say this, it is this kind of view that has caused so much trouble. There are no absolutes any longer. Right isn't always right. Wrong can be right. 2+2 doesn't aways =4.

Sorry that so many people are like this.

This is beyond laughable...okay, I'll play.

I believe it says thou shall not kill...but killing the enemy in war is okay?

100% truth, right? So it's either you never kill or it isn't 100% now is it?

Speaking and acting in absolutes is why there are wars, people killing for their God, and why some like to talk the words, without living them.

[Cajuncowboy]

This is beyond laughable...okay, I'll play.

I believe it says thou shall not kill...but killing the enemy in war is okay?

100% truth, right? So it's either you never kill or it isn't 100% now is it?

Speaking and acting in absolutes is why there are wars, people killing for their God, and why some like to talk the words, without living them.

Obviously one needs to have a reasonable mind. What's laughable is that someone could argue that there is no absolutes.

Are you alive??? Or is it just your perspective of what alive is? I would say that since you just replied to my post you are ABSOLUTELY alive, unless you dropped dead right after typing that, in which case you just found out that there are indeed, absolutes.

[blindzebra]

Obviously one needs to have a reasonable mind. What's laughable is that someone could argue that there is no absolutes.

Are you alive??? Or is it just your perspective of what alive is? I would say that since you just replied to my post you are ABSOLUTELY alive, unless you dropped dead right after typing that, in which case you just found out that there are indeed, absolutes.

I really love how truth and absolutes are interchangeable to your argument...but it is to be expected from someone who must defend belief as factual truth.

I bolded the line I find interesting...so being reasonable only comes into play when it is used to explain inconsistencies in your 100% truth, but not when someone has an alternative view on how to live their life.

You are right about something though, you are proof that I can always count on something.:lmao2:

[03EBZ06]

I really enjoyed Letters from Iwo Jima, always like to get perspective from other side. Clint did a great job with this movie, again, loved it.

I didn't like Flags of Our Fathers. Not enough action too much focus was on politics of war and fund raising.

[Cajuncowboy]

I really love how truth and absolutes are interchangeable to your argument...but it is to be expected from someone who must defend belief as factual truth.


Well genius, I guess that's what makes it 100% factual now doesn't it? Otherwise, why would someone believe it and give their life for it?

And I know I can always count on your kind for a laugh and a head slap.

[blindzebra]

Well genius, I guess that's what makes it 100% factual now doesn't it? Otherwise, why would someone believe it and give their life for it?

And I know I can always count on your kind for a laugh and a head slap.

Ya might want to spend a little time in a dictionary...someone needs to look up the word belief...after all there are other books of value too.

Belief isn't fact, it requires a leap of faith...believing it is factual is why some will give their live...or take someone else's.

[Cajuncowboy]

Ya might want to spend a little time in a dictionary...someone needs to look up the word belief...after all there are other books of value too.

Belief isn't fact, it requires a leap of faith...believing it is factual is why some will give their live...or take someone else's.

Well there you go. One is right and one is wrong.

Or is the other right and the other wrong.

I guess it doesn't really matter since neither is right or wrong in your world.

I'm done with you on this issue because this isn't the place for this discussion as we have already gone against the wishes of the mods.

As for spending some time in the dictionary, maybe you should spend some time in another book.

Maybe that's why you are BLINDzebra.

[blindzebra]

Well there you go. One is right and one is wrong.

Or is the other right and the other wrong.

I guess it doesn't really matter since neither is right or wrong in your world.

I'm done with you on this issue because this isn't the place for this discussion as we have already gone against the wishes of the mods.

As for spending some time in the dictionary, maybe you should spend some time in another book.

Maybe that's why you are BLINDzebra.

No I'm a believer that EVERYONE'S belief has value, not just my own, and that not only means I can SEE, but it means I'm not a hypocrite.

But in any case, I'm not going to continue discussing mythology with a zealot.