this film sucks!
-
Dantu00e8s — 18 years ago(November 19, 2007 10:26 AM)
The O.P. isn't too far off though; this movie is pretty awful. The DVD cover art is plastered with over-the-top superlatives about how amazing and earth-shaking, blah blah blah this movie is, but it's overlong and pretty sophomoric. This movie's not even as subtle as the Star Wars prequels. The constant long close-ups on Florya's face are such a weak and transparent device to show how the war is affecting him and it's just littered with so many ham-fisted metaphors.
There are piles of better anti-war films out there (Stalingrad, Paths of Glory, All Quiet On The Western Front, Joyeux Nl, Full Metal Jacket hell, even We Were Soldiers is more subtle than this).
But yes, Pearl Harbor was terrible. Come and See was better, but not by a whole lot. -
paulgeaf — 18 years ago(January 26, 2008 04:29 AM)
Dants says -
'The O.P. isn't too far off though; this movie is pretty awful. The DVD cover art is plastered with over-the-top superlatives about how amazing and earth-shaking, blah blah blah this movie is, but it's overlong and pretty sophomoric. This movie's not even as subtle as the Star Wars prequels. The constant long close-ups on Florya's face are such a weak and transparent device to show how the war is affecting him and it's just littered with so many ham-fisted metaphors.
There are piles of better anti-war films out there (Stalingrad, Paths of Glory, All Quiet On The Western Front, Joyeux Nl, Full Metal Jacket hell, even We Were Soldiers is more subtle than this).'
I prefer to reply to this than the moronic dribblings of the original poster.
How can you be so negative and critical of this movie? I can see what you are saying with some of your comments but you go way too far in my opinion.
The close-ups on Florya's face are not 'weak and transparent' but are one of the major devices in the movie that help to make it what it is:
a moving account of one boys war experience, from child to man in a few unnerving steps.
You can criticise it of course,
all films are flawed
but you can't say this film is
'pretty awful'
.
No.
Your point based on the DVD cover is weak at best - what relevance does the marketing style of the retailers have to do with the content of the movie? Everyone has experienced a DVD that has an irrelevant cover on it, it doesn't affect
my
opinion of the film. You shouldn't heed advertising if it affects you so deeply!
As for the metaphors being 'ham-fisted'well I beg to differ. I just need to think of this movie and it stirs emotions in my mind, it brought me more than a lot of films I have watched and, for sure, Full Metal Jacket and others are good but not quite
that
good.
GeaF -
ppeerrssoonnaa — 18 years ago(January 21, 2008 08:37 PM)
PEARL HARBOUR IS SUCH A PIECE OF MELODRAMATIC CRAP THAT I WAS PUKING ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FILM. GOOD SPECIAL EFFECTS THOUGH RED THIN LINE IS A VERY GOOD ONE AND SAVING PRIVATE RYAN BUT NOT PEARL HARBOUR. NO PLEASE
-
jeffandsarah-1 — 17 years ago(June 02, 2008 03:05 AM)
Was Matt Damon in Pearl Harbour I thoght he was connected to somebody called Bourne. How could he possibly be at Pearl Harbour when he probably wasn't born, or was that a special affleck like saving ryan's private parts.