Letters from Iwo Jima
Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:45 pm
Just saw this movie..I thought it was very well done. Does anyone know where the airfield scenes were shot? They used a Beech 18 in generic Japanes markings, but I noticed one of the Tora! Vals in the background (there were more aircraft further back, but they may have been 2-D cutouts..hard to tell on a TV screen.)
SN
SN
Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:25 am
These are the shooting locations of the film:
Iceland; Iwo Jima; Los Angeles; Odessa Canyon, Yermo, California; Sandvík, Iceland; Santa Clarita, California.
Iceland; Iwo Jima; Los Angeles; Odessa Canyon, Yermo, California; Sandvík, Iceland; Santa Clarita, California.
Sat Jun 02, 2007 3:26 pm
I took a look at the website and it looks interesting. I don't mind seeing the other side of the story, I just don't want to see the Japanese cause portrayed as heroic.
Sat Jun 02, 2007 4:49 pm
The movie mainly centers on an conscripted enlisted man, who is mostly just trying to survive to get home to his wife and the child he's never seen. I doesnt portray the Japanese soldiers as herioc, more as tragic victims of their government and high command. Gen. Kurubayashi is shown as a professional military man trying to do his best for his country and his men, but fully realizing the war is lost and he's been sent on a suicide mission. The junior officers are shown as brutal and fanatical, both to the "enemy" as well as their own men..in fact, Kurubayashi gets extremely frustrated when his juniors disobey his orders to fall back and regroup, and waste their men in futile suicide attacks instead.
Some Americans may object to the film, because it "humanizes" the Japanese, but all-in-all I thought it was very good.
SN
Some Americans may object to the film, because it "humanizes" the Japanese, but all-in-all I thought it was very good.
SN
Sat Jun 02, 2007 5:23 pm
When I seen the Beech 18, I wondered if they should have used a Lockheed 14 or similar instead since the 14 was used by the Japanese Army as transports. I don’t know if the Thelma would have been historically accurate for the time and event, but at least it would have represented an aircraft the Japanese used in WWII.
I agree with Steve, it was a good movie.
Brian…
I agree with Steve, it was a good movie.
Brian…
Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:57 pm
Ladie and Gentlemen,
Please don't give too much away...I received an early Father's Day gift of Flags of our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima DVDs. Have not watched either yet, but looking forward to both and seeing how Clint Eastwood did with these two movies.
Please don't give too much away...I received an early Father's Day gift of Flags of our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima DVDs. Have not watched either yet, but looking forward to both and seeing how Clint Eastwood did with these two movies.
Sun Jun 03, 2007 12:53 am
I hope I didn't post too many spoilers..just trying to give a brief set-up. The movie is definately a great companion piece to "Flags," and both are definately worth watching. I'm not sure it even matters which you watch first..both stand on their own merits pretty well.
As for the airplanes, they really aren't that crucial to the story, so It's not that big a deal that they aren't all that accurate. The Val is clearly in her usual airshow paint job..I can't blame them for not wanting to repaint her for 30 seconds of screen time (and parked at that.) I doubt there were any Vals on Iwo, anyway..they were largely gone from front line service by then.
SN
As for the airplanes, they really aren't that crucial to the story, so It's not that big a deal that they aren't all that accurate. The Val is clearly in her usual airshow paint job..I can't blame them for not wanting to repaint her for 30 seconds of screen time (and parked at that.) I doubt there were any Vals on Iwo, anyway..they were largely gone from front line service by then.
SN
Sun Jun 03, 2007 3:44 pm
I actually liked "Letters" better than I did "Flags".
Mudge the critic
Mudge the critic
Sun Jun 03, 2007 4:53 pm
Mudge wrote:I actually liked "Letters" better than I did "Flags".
Mudge the critic
I agree, actually IMO it was no contest, Letters was much better.
Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:27 pm
I 3rd that, Letters was much better, with Flags it was cut up.
They would both make a great box set...
Lynn
They would both make a great box set...
Lynn
Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:35 pm
I'm glad to hear I wasn't the only one who liked Letters better than Flagsand I wondered about that transport as well...
Cripes-the Japanese were heroic. Just becase a person or nation is debased and evil doesn't mean they aren't heroic. Or that individuals are debased and evil when most of the coutry, or even a minority, is. That's the same mistake America made with the terrorists of 9/11.
Cripes-the Japanese were heroic. Just becase a person or nation is debased and evil doesn't mean they aren't heroic. Or that individuals are debased and evil when most of the coutry, or even a minority, is. That's the same mistake America made with the terrorists of 9/11.
Last edited by muddyboots on Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:03 pm
muddyboots wrote:I'm glad to hear I wasn't the only one who liked Letters better than Flagsand I wondered about that transport as well...
Cripes-the Japanese were heroic. Just becase a person or nation is debased and evil doesn't mean they aren't heroic. Or that individuals are debased and evil when tmost of the coutry, or even a minority, is. That's the same mistake America made with the terrorists of 9/11.
I don’t care how heroic they were. They died for their emperor. It had little to do with heroics. The terrorists die for heaven and 70 virgins not heroics. The American G, I. died for mom, his girlfriend, the American way of life and his buddies. We never had mass exterminations. The rape of Nanking. The Bataan Death March. The execution of some of the Doolittle Raiders. The Nazi extermination camps that killed millions. Don’t sanitize it. Eastwood is only out to make a buck. It's not show ART it's show BUSINESS. It minimizes the sacrifices that millions made for all of us. The Japanese were ruthless and blood thirsty as were the Germans. Read the book Fly Boys and THEN go see Eastwood’s little film. The terrorist on 9/11 killed 3,000 innocent people. Don’t even THINK that they were heroes!
Dan
Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:59 pm
I read flyboys, Dan. And while I agree with you that they weren't good, I disagree with you that they weren't hero's. They certainly were to their people. They certainly were to their wives and children. It's all about perspective. As a corollary, many think that the pilots and crew of the Enola Gay were not heros but vilains. Again, all perspective. To the children they burnt up in a nuclear holocaust, I suspect they were not heros. To us, however, they saved civilization.
Which was what I was saying about the"19". Even a fanatic can be a hero. To somebody. And when we failed to recognize that and failed to respond appropriately in the middle east, we lost a lot. You don't need to like a trait to respect its power.
I certainly wasn't claiming that what the Japanese in general did as a nation was decent by our standards. But it was certainly heroic by theirs.
I don't have a lot of respect for people who go out and perfom great deeds in order to be heroes. I've got my fair share of V's. I never went out of my way to get them, I just bumbled through. The men I claim as my heroes went and did what they had to do because it was asked of them, not to win awards. The awards are nice recognition, and certainly a goad. But the truth is we get ordered and we go. And because we do, our mates do. And because they go we go... And in general we go to change the world, because we percieve an injustice. Just as the Germans and Japanese did.
That is precisely what the Japanese (and Saudi's) did. And if you think those men died for 70 virgins you are mistaken. (although I am sure they comforted themselves with the idea. They died to change the world. For the better, they thought. That fits your definition of heroic, I believe.
THAT is what Mr. Eastwood was trying to say. Most of those guys were just that: guys. And they died as wel they could hoping it would save someone they loved back home. That is pretty darned heroic to me.
Which was what I was saying about the"19". Even a fanatic can be a hero. To somebody. And when we failed to recognize that and failed to respond appropriately in the middle east, we lost a lot. You don't need to like a trait to respect its power.
I certainly wasn't claiming that what the Japanese in general did as a nation was decent by our standards. But it was certainly heroic by theirs.
I don't have a lot of respect for people who go out and perfom great deeds in order to be heroes. I've got my fair share of V's. I never went out of my way to get them, I just bumbled through. The men I claim as my heroes went and did what they had to do because it was asked of them, not to win awards. The awards are nice recognition, and certainly a goad. But the truth is we get ordered and we go. And because we do, our mates do. And because they go we go... And in general we go to change the world, because we percieve an injustice. Just as the Germans and Japanese did.
That is precisely what the Japanese (and Saudi's) did. And if you think those men died for 70 virgins you are mistaken. (although I am sure they comforted themselves with the idea. They died to change the world. For the better, they thought. That fits your definition of heroic, I believe.
THAT is what Mr. Eastwood was trying to say. Most of those guys were just that: guys. And they died as wel they could hoping it would save someone they loved back home. That is pretty darned heroic to me.
Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:07 pm
muddyboots wrote:Cripes-the Japanese were heroic. Just becase a person or nation is debased and evil doesn't mean they aren't heroic. Or that individuals are debased and evil when most of the coutry, or even a minority, is. That's the same mistake America made with the terrorists of 9/11.
I think you're confusing fanaticism with heroism. I generally equate heroism with goodness. I could never call the terrorists or Japanese military of WWII "good". But in the PC induced stupor that we live in today, I guess it's a matter of what the meaning of "is" is.
Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:22 pm
I am not confused, cripes. Nor am I suffering from a stupor.
From websters:
If you are attempting to change civilization for what YOU perceive to be "the better" then what is a nobler cause? Certainly a high purpose to THEM, as I said. Therefore the terrorists, although fanatics ti US, were heroic IN THEIR PEOPLE'S eyes. Which is all I ever said. Were they evil? I dunno. Were they effective? yes. did they change the world for the better? I think so, if by the better you mean we have dropped an awful lot of bombs on people who needed it
As for the Japanese, they were sacrificing themselves in what THEY percieved to be a noble cause: to protect the mainland, their families, Japan's pride, and their Emporer. It would be stupid to say they didn't think they were heroes. And I suspect, as Eastwood did, you could find a great deal of heroism in their struggle--if you were willing to get past your own indoctrination that claims we were innocent as virgins. And that is an almsot laughable idea. To wail about the haulocaust and ignore what the russians did in China, Poland, germany, and everywhere else they rolled --and that we welcomed them with open arms is silly.
And to claim that the japanese did anything more horrific than dropping the only two nuclear weapons ever used in war against them...well...We weren't virgins.
From websters:
her·o·ism
Pronunciation: 'her-&-"wi-z&m, 'he-r&- also 'hir-
Function: noun
1 : heroic conduct especially as exhibited in fulfilling a high purpose or attaining a noble end
2 : the qualities of a hero
If you are attempting to change civilization for what YOU perceive to be "the better" then what is a nobler cause? Certainly a high purpose to THEM, as I said. Therefore the terrorists, although fanatics ti US, were heroic IN THEIR PEOPLE'S eyes. Which is all I ever said. Were they evil? I dunno. Were they effective? yes. did they change the world for the better? I think so, if by the better you mean we have dropped an awful lot of bombs on people who needed it
As for the Japanese, they were sacrificing themselves in what THEY percieved to be a noble cause: to protect the mainland, their families, Japan's pride, and their Emporer. It would be stupid to say they didn't think they were heroes. And I suspect, as Eastwood did, you could find a great deal of heroism in their struggle--if you were willing to get past your own indoctrination that claims we were innocent as virgins. And that is an almsot laughable idea. To wail about the haulocaust and ignore what the russians did in China, Poland, germany, and everywhere else they rolled --and that we welcomed them with open arms is silly.
And to claim that the japanese did anything more horrific than dropping the only two nuclear weapons ever used in war against them...well...We weren't virgins.
Last edited by muddyboots on Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.