Can Anyone Recommend "Pearl Harbor"?

[Phantomfixer]

My thought is, if I want to see an utterly silly WWII movie (and I do, I love them) I will watch the Rocketeer. At least then I won't have to see Ben Affleck making strange faces as he exerts himself acting.

I loved The Rocketeer. Still have it and watch it. Pearl Harbor had some really cool flight jackets and a some great airplanes. Also a great Stearman, at least I think it was a Stearman.

 

[Mike K.]

The plot was somewhat cheesy and the historical accuracy a total joke.
I liked the period costumes and the visual effects.

But what really made the film a winner for me was KATE BECKINSALE! :arated:

 

[Silver Dollar]

I loved The Rocketeer. Still have it and watch it. Pearl Harbor had some really cool flight jackets and a some great airplanes. Also a great Stearman, at least I think it was a Stearman.

I agree. I liked Pearl Harbor and I also liked the Rocketeer. As far as Pearl Harbor goes, I spent 5 years at Hickam AFB in Hawaii and a lot of the scenery was familiar. As far as the rocketeer goes, you have to view it like you're looking at an old comic book. It's that kind of story with the same type of feel to it.

 

[BaggyPants]

Of course the first glaring errors are Ben Afflecks character joining "The Eagle Squadron" during the Battle of Britain.

1) There were actually three Eagle Squadrons, 71, 121 and 133, but the first of these was not operational until February of 1941, almost half a year after the battle, and didn't get a "kill" until July of that year.

2) Afflecks character travels to the UK and reports for duty wearing his USAAF uniform, which is complete rubbish that could not have happened for political reasons. No serving USAAF pilots flew in the RAF, as it would have caused deep crap for the US government, which was neutral at that time. Active USAAF aircrew could not just volunteer to go join the RAF. Of the thousands of pilots from the USA who flew for the RAF during WWII, only 244 were members of the Eagle Squadrons, and almost all pretended to be Canadian or European until the USA entered the war.

3) The Spitfires they fly are Mk Vb variants, not available until 1941.

The film makes me cringe. Not because of the errors, but the mushy hollywood script. The CGI is great, the action is good, but the rest is complete twaddle :eusa_doh:

 

[vitanola]

It was bad, but I don't think it was as bad as Memphis Belle. What a waste of film that was. They had all those B-17s together, and even lost one in filming, all for that cornball portrayal. A singing tail gunner? A navigator fearing his number up? Hot shot co-pilot and overly motherly pilot (reversing the real life characters). Awful, awful, awful.

I'm still waiting for that "Saving Private Ryan" caliber show for the air war in WWII. Until then I'll just watch 12 O'Clock High I guess.

I watched "Memphis Belle" just last week, and thought that the director did a fine job indeed. As for accuracy, well much of it was filmed under actual battle conditions.

A bit of a propaganda blitz, but then the purpose of the film WAS to sell War Bonds, wasn't it?

 

[Silver Dollar]

I still liked the movie. I used to tear apart movies the same way until I realized that it really doesn't matter. It's fiction and portrays a "what if" situation and not meant as a history lesson. There are a ton of movies that do exactly the same thing. One of the best war movies ever, Twelve O'Clock High was fictitious also. There was never a 918 Th Bomb Group. They didn't fly missions under 10,00 feet at that time which the movie had them doing. That was the B24's over Ploesti. There was a movie called Hanover Street with Harrison Ford where he was an 8th AF pilot flying a B25. The 8th Af never flew B25s. It was just a story not meant to be historically correct. Unless they advertize that it's a historically accurate movie, it's entertainment and that's all it is.

 

[KilroyCD]

I watched "Memphis Belle" just last week, and thought that the director did a fine job indeed. As for accuracy, well much of it was filmed under actual battle conditions.

A bit of a propaganda blitz, but then the purpose of the film WAS to sell War Bonds, wasn't it?

Methinks you are confusing the original documentary with the feature film of the same name which came out in 1990. It's the 1990 film that garners the derision.

 

[Silver Dollar]

Methinks you are confusing the original documentary with the feature film of the same name which came out in 1990. It's the 1990 film that garners the derision.

Preeeeecisely. The original one was done by William Wyler and really was accurate. Propaganda yes but accurate. The later movie was not liked especially by the 8th AF veterans I knew. There were a lot of liberties taken that never did or could happen. I personally liked the movie because of all the flying, the uniforms and some of the amusing parts. I watched it as a fictional movie set in WWII rather than a historic documentary. Again, pure entertainment. When I look at it that way, I get a lot less frustrated. I guess I'm a lot easier to please than some. [huh]

 

[BaggyPants]

One of the best war movies ever, Twelve O'Clock High was fictitious also. There was never a 918 Th Bomb Group.

In that case, I agree with you, because it is complete fiction, not a film based in facts.

It's fiction and portrays a "what if" situation and not meant as a history lesson.

But Pearl Harbour isn't a "what if". It actually happened, as did the Battle Of Britain and the Doolittle raids. The film Pearl Harbour is based in facts which they managed to get completely wrong. The films researchers could have found the correct information in seconds online. Why have the character travel to the UK in uniform when it would be a more interesting story and factually correct for him to travel as a civvy pretending to be Canadian? Why make it THE Eagle Squadron, which didn't exist at that time, when US flyers did fly with ordinary RAF and RCAF squadrons? The Vb Spitfires I can excuse, You use what real aircraft are available, I suppose.

The problem is that people no longer read enough history, and they're beginning to think films like this are accurate. I had an argument with an idiot last year who really believed the the US captured the first enigma machine!

 

[Kitty_Sheridan]

Visually, it's stunning.

But, like Titanic they forgot the script....

My great aunt was at Pearl Harbour, an Irish born nursing sister nun and she would never speak of it. Lots of missed opportunities.

I almost think, that an HBO Spielberg/Hanks 10 parter with little known actors (minus prosthetic chins etc etc) would have been better.

I'm sorry, I preferred Kate Beckinsale before Hollywood got her, have a watch of 'Cold Comfort Farm' where she actually remembered that she was an
actress!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywJmw72T_c0

 

[BaggyPants]

Visually, it's stunning.
I'm sorry, I preferred Kate Beckinsale before Hollywood got her, have a watch of 'Cold Comfort Farm' where she actually remembered that she was an
actress!

:eusa_clap That made me laugh, Kate lol

 

[Spitfire]

In that case, I agree with you, because it is complete fiction, not a film based in facts.



But Pearl Harbour isn't a "what if". It actually happened, as did the Battle Of Britain and the Doolittle raids. The film Pearl Harbour is based in facts which they managed to get completely wrong. The films researchers could have found the correct information in seconds online. Why have the character travel to the UK in uniform when it would be a more interesting story and factually correct for him to travel as a civvy pretending to be Canadian? Why make it THE Eagle Squadron, which didn't exist at that time, when US flyers did fly with ordinary RAF and RCAF squadrons? The Vb Spitfires I can excuse, You use what real aircraft are available, I suppose.

The problem is that people no longer read enough history, and they're beginning to think films like this are accurate. I had an argument with an idiot last year who really believed the the US captured the first enigma machine!

:eusa_clap :eusa_clap :eusa_clap
You are SO right. If filmproducers and filmdirectors want us to take them and their work seriously, the least they could do is serious reserach. And act upon it whenever possible.

 

[Corky]

"Pearl Harbor" is an example of what Hollywood calls The New Nostalgia...

...and The New Nostalgia is NOT a nostalgia for old times or the way things were, it is a FAKE NOSTALGIA or longing for the kind of movies people used to be able to make back in the old days.

These are not the kind of Movies That They Used To Make, movies that had real stars and some serious themes or ideas now and then, this New Nostalgia is like a bunch of high school kids raiding the costume closet at their school and getting all dressed up and re-enacting the scenes and great moments of the earlier films.

It is a fact that the Doolittle Tokyo Raid sequence ending was tacked on to the film after exit cards indicated that after the original downbeat ending of the film, preview audiences of young people left the screenings under the impression that the USA HAD LOST THE SECOND WORLD WAR.

 

[Silver Dollar]

The problem is that people no longer read enough history, and they're beginning to think films like this are accurate. I had an argument with an idiot last year who really believed the the US captured the first enigma machine!

I have to say that's a point I did not consider. You're absolutely right. I'll definitely be looking at this subject in a different light. Thanks BaggyPants for pointing that out.

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

I still liked the movie. I used to tear apart movies the same way until I realized that it really doesn't matter. It's fiction and portrays a "what if" situation and not meant as a history lesson. There are a ton of movies that do exactly the same thing. One of the best war movies ever, Twelve O'Clock High was fictitious also. There was never a 918 Th Bomb Group. They didn't fly missions under 10,00 feet at that time which the movie had them doing. That was the B24's over Ploesti. There was a movie called Hanover Street with Harrison Ford where he was an 8th AF pilot flying a B25. The 8th Af never flew B25s. It was just a story not meant to be historically correct. Unless they advertize that it's a historically accurate movie, it's entertainment and that's all it is.

I don't know whether this is true or not but I seem to have a vague recollection of reading somewhere that Twelve O'Clock High obliquely depicted the 306th Bomb Group who was the first BG in the Eighth Air Force to bomb Germany and the first to complete 300 missions from England. The fictitious 918th BG was simply 306 multiplied by three.

The problem is that people no longer read enough history, and they're beginning to think films like this are accurate. I had an argument with an idiot last year who really believed the the US captured the first enigma machine!

In addition to the fact that people don't read much history -- they don't read, period! -- there's also a generational disconnect. Most young people today are three generations removed from the World War II generation. While many of us over 40 have parents, grandparents aunts and uncles who had fought in the war the only family ties to WWII for most young people are perhaps a great-grandfather or great-uncle whom they've either never met or barely remember.

I'm sorry, I preferred Kate Beckinsale before Hollywood got her, have a watch of 'Cold Comfort Farm' where she actually remembered that she was an
actress!

The first time I'd seen Kate Beckinsale was in Kenneth Branagh's version of Shakespeare's Much Ado Over Nothing.

 

[Treetopflyer]

What about...

What about "In Harms Way"? A lot of what is said about Pearl Harbor could be said about that movie as well.

 

[Silver Dollar]

Hey V.C. Brunswick. You're absolutely right about the 918th being loosely based on the 306th. I did have an acquaintance who flew with the 306th on a B17 named Eager Beaver. I don't know if he went on the historic mission over Germany but I know he put in a bunch of missions.