 |
Techtite's DVD Reviews! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pearl Harbor (2001)
A Techtite ReviewThe Film: Pearl Harbor is a victim of modern times, more than a portrayal of the victims of actual history. It is a film about a brutal moment in history --and therefore almost demands R-rated grittiness-- yet gets PG-13 simplicity instead. It wishes for an honest view of a major historical moment, yet must get further watered down, due to fear to upset those involved in staging the attack. Top all this off with a producer who, reportedly, was so against an unhappy ending that he wished a re-write to history itself, of who lives and who dies. In the end, you're left with a 40 second action film, flushed into 3 hours of saccharine sweetness. The story seems, at first, rather simple to accomplish; retell the events of December 7th, 1941, when the Empire of Japan staged an unprovoked bombing run on an unsuspecting Pearl Harbor. While it would have been better to have the foreground characters be based on actual people who lived during the time, we're instead treated to a fictional love story, not unlike the one thrown aboard James Cameron's Titanic. This time around, the fictional love triangle involves a nurse named Evelyn Johnson (Kate Beckinsale), and the Army boys Rafe McCawley (Ben Affleck) and Danny Walker (Josh Hartnett). The majority of the three hour film, in fact, is about them more than Pearl Harbor, with the historical event reduced to an insulting 40 minutes. I must admit, I did not live during the 1940's...or '50s, or even most of the 60's, for that matter. However, I think even I could come up with a better portrayal of history than this, which portrays the Japanese who planned the attack as people so philosophical, their reasoning for the attack seems even more puzzling than it already is. Get ready for battle banalities as bad as Star Wars' The Phantom Menace's "trade dispute," with Japan's unprovoked attack excused as merely retaliation against the U.S. reducing their oil supply. During other snippets of Japanese battle plans, Admiral Yamamoto shrugs off praise for his "brilliant" Pearl Harbor plan, saying, "A brilliant man would find a way not to go to war." If he was so much of a 1940's flower child, why did he massacre so many innocent, unsuspecting people in the first place? Later, he further shrugs off the successful raid, by musing that all Japan probably did was "awaken a sleeping giant." One wonders what philosophy this version of Yamamoto would use, to shrug off his Emperor Hirohito's alliance with Hitler. Admittedly, the 40-minute raid itself is spectacular FX galore. However, one can't help themselves when wondering why the cinematographer felt that each sinking ship in Pearl Harbor, had to be staged exactly like the one in the Oscar-winning film, Titanic. One ship's deck topples to one side, as the crew on deck starts sliding off, just like Titanic. Hordes of soldiers float at sea, both alive, dead, and dying, with cinematography just like Titanic. During the search at sea for survivors, the whole look and feel of the scene --right down to the blue, foggy mist-- looks too ripped off from Titanic to keep you from wondering if this film was meant merely as a cheap Titanic rip-off from the very beginning. After the raid, the aftermath of the attack seems almost insultingly overlooked. Instead, there's a retelling of Doolittle's April, 1942 bombing run against Japan. This would seem like an uplifting way to end the film, except that a mere hour left of film means this could only be a mere Cliff Notes version of the far superior 1953 film, 30 Seconds Over Tokyo. They didn't even bother to portray the mission the way it really happened, with the fictional heroes of the film (Rafe and Danny) chosen by Doolittle (Alec Baldwin) to help him lead the raid. A better film would have shown more of the Pearl Harbor attack itself, though action film producer Jerry Bruckheimer, and director Michael Bay (The Rock, Armageddon), apparently wanted to end on a "victorious" note. Some may say this was a good idea, in terms of box office appeal. In terms of movie quality, the nearly insulting summarizing of Doolitle's raid is almost as bad as their mere 40 minute snippet of the Pearl Harbor attack itself. As for how people who lived in 1941 think of the film: I saw this film with an actual, retired, registered nurse, who was a young girl during the time these events took place. Suffice to say, she was not amused at the watering down of history, yet was rather upset at the watering down of the characters as well. Registered Nurses in this film seem almost like giggling schoolgirls as they're shown a hospital patient with --tee-hee!-- a sunburn on his behind. These are military nurses, trained to handle injuries ranging from loss of limbs to excessive bleeding, yet seem more likely to be sipping a cappuccino with "Felicity" on the WB network. They are unrealistic, contemporary characters, right down to Evelyn's skin-tight, two-piece bathing suit, that, quite frankly, would have been considered quite "sleazy" in 1941. The surprise here, though, is that the film's story was written by William Wallace, who did such a gritty (even if not certifiably accurate) retelling of Braveheart. That film got its strength from its unabashed nature to tell a story that held back no punches, even if it insulted one or two Englishmen along the way. Looking back at that Oscar winner makes Wallace's version of Pearl Harbor even more puzzling, given how the story treats every Japanese scene almost like it was walking on eggshells. Apparently, dozens of WW2 films can be made with no care to Germany's feelings, yet Japan's feelings must be protected. Furthermore, nearly all historical dramas these days insult America at will, yet apparently, must not insult feelings elsewhere. I have no problem with views of history that acknowledge America's mistakes, provided that they are factual, and acknowledge the impact bad decisions make on innocent people, so they are never done again. This same philosphy applies to all countries; it's as fair as that. Pearl Harbor was a bad decision made by Japan in 1941, and its victims deserve a better film than this. The DVD: The best trait of this DVD will seem like many to be a flaw. After all, this is probably one of the few theatrical films ever offered on digital video disc, that asks you to "insert disc two" halfway through the film. Many may ask why this disc cannot include the whole movie on a single disc, when Titanic was able to be placed perfectly on a single disc. The answer is simple; in Titanic's case, no bonus material was offered at all, not even an audio commentary. Furthermore, there's a little controversy brewing, over the fact that the "widescreen" picture on the Titanic DVD is actually a cropped picture from the full-screen version, already available on VHS! So, maybe this is just an instance of an authentic widescreen picture, that needed two discs to include it all (I said maybe). There are two ways of buying this film: the DVD as-is, and the boxed set. The as-is DVD is a two-disc set, and includes an introduction by director Michael Bay, cast interviews, Faith Hill's Music video "There You'll Be," and three documentaries. The documentaries are truly the best inclusion, because they involve the Pearl harbor veterans returning to the USS Arizona Memorial, as well as a documentary of the real attack, and the unsung heroes that day. Sadly, there are no deleted scenes, though what is included is so respectful of the event, I almost feel like upgrading my rating of the overall film...almost. The Gift Set is also well packaged, and includes one additional DVD. This disc includes "beyond the movie" footage, such as "Japanese Relocation" (1943), "The Army Nurse" (1945), and a "Pearl Harbor Newsreel" (1963). This "gift set" is complemented by an included two-sided National Geographic commemorative map.
As I said in my original review (quoted verbatim in my "The Film" section above), this film's biggest flaw was being too fictitious to be a decent memoriam to the victims of the attack. These DVD sets seem to rectify that error somewhat, with some very well chosen added newsreels and historical footage. This is all well and good, though it still doesn't up my rating of the film. If historical footage is what you're after, there's the far superior National Geographic - Pearl Harbor: Legacy of Attack, among many other documentaries on VHS. Admittedly, even this documentary may be a bit too fair and impartial for some; when a sunken Japanese sub is found, it's alluded that this sub sank prior to the Pearl Harbor attacks...as if that could be "proven" via sunken debris. Regardless, if historical footage is what you're after, there's many ways to get it that do not include buying this film. If you liked the film, this is a great DVD set, though personally, I was very disappointed in the film, and cannot recommend it...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Burnout
Near
Miss
Small
Crater
Large
Crater
Deep
Impact
