ORIGINAL: keystone
I definitely want to see this movie, and hopefully will find time. But after reading these posts I have some reservations going in. They were all heroes on Iwo, but the real heroes did not come home. I thought this was a movie more along the lines of the book. To just focus on the ones that lived is denying the honor the ones that died deserve. Saving Private Ryan, though not a true story, hits on this quite well. Iwo is a story of perserverance, not if i get hit but when, thats why those guys raise that flag, to show to the rest of their fellow Marines that they were going to take that Island and to buck up the rest of thier comrades. The Iwo Jima monument is a testament of American resolve. It looks like Eastwood only went halfway here in this movie, a sign of the times, we are only willing to go halfway now.
I fear you are right.
I am a long-time wargamer and military buff, and I have read tons of material and seen a lot of documentaries about Iwo.
The Battle sequences in the movie get 10/10.
The characterizations and story get 7.8/10.
Unfortunately, I am really of two minds about this movie. I went into it really wanting to like it. But the disjointed nature/flashback sequences were confusing and did little to help me understand what went on in the battle.
Most people who will see this movie will have little idea what Iwo was all about except for the fact that the US had tons of ships, that lots of soldiers died on the beaches, and that somehow taking this little piece of island saved lives.
While we see tons of US soldiers and ships, I really only saw about a dozen Japanese soldiers, 3 MGs, and two cannons on the island. The impression being that the BIG US was fighting a little helpless enemy.
There were no grinding fight sequences over days and weeks to show what the marines went through. For example, similar sequences as has been used in previous movies, such as "Hamburger Hill", would have spoken volumes about the nature of the grinding fighting.
We do not learn any background leading up to the battle of Iwo.
We do not learn that the Battle of Iwo Jima was the US Marine Corps biggest and bloodiest battle of the entire Pacific War.
We do not learn for example that in a period of 35 days the US Marines suffered almost 27,000 casualties, and won more Medals of Honor in these 35 days than in all their previous history!
The Japanese were tenacious and vicious fighters and they suffered 18,000 casualties.
The reason the island was taken? To help save the lives of American air crews after bombing runs on Japan. They could land their damaged aircraft on the island. In addition, Iwo gave the Americans a base from which they could launch fighter protection for the bombers. Tens of thousands of airmen were saved.
By focusing on the negative questions surrounding the flag raising, Eastwood seems to be trying to denegrate the only true and lasting symbol that came out of the Pacific War.
That flag raising; that picture; had nothing to do with the soldiers that raised that flag. To me, after reading so much about the battle, after hearing the many stories from WWII vets who fought on the island, that picture is a SYMBOL of the bloody cost and heroism and grinding bloody fight that was the Battle of Iwo Jima.
There are no faces shown in the picture of the flag raising. Why? Originally, it may have been by accident. But now, we can understand the faceless nature of the picture can best be seen as symbolizing ALL soldiers. Every soldier who fought is in that picture. That flag raising picture is not about the men who raised that flag; it's not about their characters or their emotions or their flaws; it's about the cost and courage of battle.
No one has to say those soldiers were heroes; no one HAD to say it: their very deeds, their actions, spoke volumes about their courage....
In this Eastwood's movie only goes halfway....