sanejo
04-12-2001, 18:31
In defense of Pearl Harbor.
(Which is rather more than the U.S. managed.)
Was it last April we in the DVD community were getting all excitable about the biggest start-up budget film of all time?
Those tasty, teasing TV ads. Bombs eye views, screaming Mitsubishi zeros, Browning 50 cals spitting death, boy scouts ******* by their tent.
Then came the cinema release and horror of horrors, the film is a dud. Uninspired script, insipid acting, poorly researched and way long, way too long. Eager anticipation turned to bitter disappointment, and then, in turn to dismissal.
The reviews must have had Walt damning live action to the seventh level of hell, the Mouse house could hardly have imagined just how wrong a film could get.
The cinema release had been, in a trivial way, a parallel of that day "that will live in infamy". With the potential to have been the biggest and the best, poor preparation, failure to appreciate the signs and complacency had led to a film that failed to engage an audience as it should.
But, just as the Pacific fleets mauling, whilst a terrible blow, had ultimately been a failure, so a poor cinema release, has I think to a large extent been combated by a far more satisfactory DVD.
(The Japanese plan failed because the U.S. carrier fleet was not at Pearl on that fateful day, so instead of the 2 years free of U.S. intervention in the Pacific they had anticipated, the Japanese had exactly 9 months before the first U.S. counter offensive at Guadalcanal.)
I saw the movie for the first time on Sunday night, R2 rental for £2, those early TV ads, and National Geographic, had done their job. Lousy love interest and cheesy dialogue were not going to keep me away from that lovely CGI and 5.1, no sir.
You know what's coming, I enjoyed this movie, quite alot.
The first eighty minutes, which seem to be the main gripe most people have with this movie, are not good, but, they're not dreadful, not even bad.
This film certainly deserved, needed, a cracking opening, a hook to draw you in and engage your emotions, what you get, is a sort of coming of age, first love, lost love melodrama. I think this part of the movie is reasonably well balanced, it has a few scripted laughs, one or two unintentional laughs, the jolly banter of the RAF types spring to mind here, some romance, a little fore taste of the action to come, setting the time and place, and some character building, Top gun with propellers.
The leading trio are not method actors they are character actors, and I think they do as well as the script allows. Afleck I think is actually good, for me he pretty well carried this part of the film.
Of course Cuba Gooding jr. is introduced in this part as well, why we don't see more of him I can not fathom, that is one of the things this film is truly guilty of, wasting talent.
Long as this section is, I only felt that it was 10 or so minutes too much, my wife could have watched it, in all its soapy glory, for weeks.
When the attack begins this film really does become all it should have been, CGI, live action, total sound immersion, like SPR it is brutal, perhaps not quite as visceral, not quite as personal but more dynamic. The action is fast, slow, airborne, seaborne, in town and on airbases, it leaves you disorientated and drained...it works.
The fear and confusion, especially of the nurses, is well conveyed.
The heroics of the male leads is once again more Top gun than SPR,
but that fits with the tone.
The Doolittle raid is perhaps the least satisfactory section clearly a plot device to make 3 into 2 go.
I have one question, is that Jabba the Hutt playing Roosevelt?
Many have criticised this film for being inaccurate, it maybe that it is not an historical document, but its faults come from trying to simplify complex issues, not a desire to mislead or obfuscate.
As narrative this movie is more enjoyable than I was expecting, it is not a great movie and that is a great shame, it is however no worse than any number of action flicks we all sit through, indeed for much of its running time it is a stunning piece of work.
If you haven't seen this movie because of the bad reviews, at least hire it, you'll be pleasantly surprised. After all if you had spent $200,000,000 on this film being ******* at the result would be justified, for £3.00 it's a steal, even owning it for £16.99 is a bit of a bargain.
I ordered my R1 copy today, the attack scene will be my reference piece to display my setup to anyone foolish enough to say "What's this DVD stuff like then?"
(Which is rather more than the U.S. managed.)
Was it last April we in the DVD community were getting all excitable about the biggest start-up budget film of all time?
Those tasty, teasing TV ads. Bombs eye views, screaming Mitsubishi zeros, Browning 50 cals spitting death, boy scouts ******* by their tent.
Then came the cinema release and horror of horrors, the film is a dud. Uninspired script, insipid acting, poorly researched and way long, way too long. Eager anticipation turned to bitter disappointment, and then, in turn to dismissal.
The reviews must have had Walt damning live action to the seventh level of hell, the Mouse house could hardly have imagined just how wrong a film could get.
The cinema release had been, in a trivial way, a parallel of that day "that will live in infamy". With the potential to have been the biggest and the best, poor preparation, failure to appreciate the signs and complacency had led to a film that failed to engage an audience as it should.
But, just as the Pacific fleets mauling, whilst a terrible blow, had ultimately been a failure, so a poor cinema release, has I think to a large extent been combated by a far more satisfactory DVD.
(The Japanese plan failed because the U.S. carrier fleet was not at Pearl on that fateful day, so instead of the 2 years free of U.S. intervention in the Pacific they had anticipated, the Japanese had exactly 9 months before the first U.S. counter offensive at Guadalcanal.)
I saw the movie for the first time on Sunday night, R2 rental for £2, those early TV ads, and National Geographic, had done their job. Lousy love interest and cheesy dialogue were not going to keep me away from that lovely CGI and 5.1, no sir.
You know what's coming, I enjoyed this movie, quite alot.
The first eighty minutes, which seem to be the main gripe most people have with this movie, are not good, but, they're not dreadful, not even bad.
This film certainly deserved, needed, a cracking opening, a hook to draw you in and engage your emotions, what you get, is a sort of coming of age, first love, lost love melodrama. I think this part of the movie is reasonably well balanced, it has a few scripted laughs, one or two unintentional laughs, the jolly banter of the RAF types spring to mind here, some romance, a little fore taste of the action to come, setting the time and place, and some character building, Top gun with propellers.
The leading trio are not method actors they are character actors, and I think they do as well as the script allows. Afleck I think is actually good, for me he pretty well carried this part of the film.
Of course Cuba Gooding jr. is introduced in this part as well, why we don't see more of him I can not fathom, that is one of the things this film is truly guilty of, wasting talent.
Long as this section is, I only felt that it was 10 or so minutes too much, my wife could have watched it, in all its soapy glory, for weeks.
When the attack begins this film really does become all it should have been, CGI, live action, total sound immersion, like SPR it is brutal, perhaps not quite as visceral, not quite as personal but more dynamic. The action is fast, slow, airborne, seaborne, in town and on airbases, it leaves you disorientated and drained...it works.
The fear and confusion, especially of the nurses, is well conveyed.
The heroics of the male leads is once again more Top gun than SPR,
but that fits with the tone.
The Doolittle raid is perhaps the least satisfactory section clearly a plot device to make 3 into 2 go.
I have one question, is that Jabba the Hutt playing Roosevelt?
Many have criticised this film for being inaccurate, it maybe that it is not an historical document, but its faults come from trying to simplify complex issues, not a desire to mislead or obfuscate.
As narrative this movie is more enjoyable than I was expecting, it is not a great movie and that is a great shame, it is however no worse than any number of action flicks we all sit through, indeed for much of its running time it is a stunning piece of work.
If you haven't seen this movie because of the bad reviews, at least hire it, you'll be pleasantly surprised. After all if you had spent $200,000,000 on this film being ******* at the result would be justified, for £3.00 it's a steal, even owning it for £16.99 is a bit of a bargain.
I ordered my R1 copy today, the attack scene will be my reference piece to display my setup to anyone foolish enough to say "What's this DVD stuff like then?"