Cool News
Eastwood's FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS is set to invade the black beaches of Iceland!
Hey folks, Harry here... Well - it sounds like Eastwood is invading Iceland. Armored vehicles and all. Not only that but it seems he is going to black sand beaches - and that's just gonna look cool as hell. Based on James Bradley's book about the 6 men that raised the flag on Iwo Jima - and another script by Paul Haggis. Will this be a great film? Certainly has that type of potential. Here ya go...
Hi there
I live up here in the cold north, Iceland, and this summer we are lucky enough to have some movie making going on. Clint Eastwood is filming parts of Flags of our fathers. It seems he likes the black beaches that are avalible here in Iceland. Anyhow the production is hiring 400 extras and 20speaking parts (small speaking parts I belive). Now filming is due to begin in august and last til semptember. But on to the good stuff here (CLICK HERE TO SEE THE PICS & SEE TEXT YOU CAN'T READ!) you can find pictures of equipment that is to be used in the production. Sorry the page is in Icelandic (but it does explain my bad spelling). The article says that the budget is estimated at about 80 million dollers of wich 32 million will be used in Iceland. The article also says that the vehicles in the pictures are called DUKW, aka crocodile (or aligator, same word in Icelandic).
If you use this call me Hunter
-
+ Expand All
-
And it was the worst experince I've ever had. I was shitting my pants the whole time. I blew it big time.
-
I love the fact that this guy apologized for his bad spelling (attributing it to the fact that he's Icelandic), and there are talkbackers who speak English as a native tongue, and their spelling is atrocious. And he used punctuation...another plus.
-
...if nothing else, you have a bright shining future in German scat porn.
-
Jul 20, 2005 8:01:17 AM CDT
The Marines on Iwo Jima were more than patriots, they were heroe
by krullboy
and it is a slap in the face of the men, American and Japanese, that suffered and died in the Pacific, President Evil, when you call that battle "patriotic cocksnot". . . but they died, in part, for your freedom to say what you want, so go ahead and troll away. I would tell you to read the book, but I know you probably won't.
-
Jul 20, 2005 8:13:53 AM CDT
Elgordo...you really do not need to make up excuses....
by chickengeorgevii
Hell....I'm sitting in my own poo right now and it isn't even laundry day....And thus, vodka keeps me regular! - - - George, The 7th Chicken!!!!
-
i'm not into war movies so much but if clint is doing it, hell yeah! the man with no name, yummy
-
I had two great uncles who were in the USMC and fought bravely in the Pacific. Any film which respectfully honors the efforts of the marines during WWII has earned my ten bucks. On the other hand, you and everyone else who dismisses any patriotic American film out of hand because of Iraq can go eat a bowl of dicks.
-
I think Clint won't make the same mistake he made with `Heartbreak Ridge`, a stupid flag waver about a one-sided `war`.
I also don't think this film will resemble IDIOTIC war movies like `We Were Soldiers` and `Black Hawk Down,` movies which, although they justifiably celebrated American heroism, were totally without historical perspective, and declinded to see conflict from anything other than a `Americans brave, enemies evil` viewpoint (this particularly jarred in `Once Were Soldiers`, which was borderline Nuremberg rally).
`The Thin Red Line` is Clint's barometer - a thoughtful but realistic masterpiece. I think Clint - who excelled at questions of complex morality in `Mystic River` and Million Dollar Baby` recently - will redress his more simplistic world view of the 80's(with `Heartbreak Ridge`) and give us something incredible: A celebration of American fighting men, but not an unquestioning pro-war propaganda piece.
I'm excited.
-
Heartbreak Ridge, although mildly entertaining, was certainly cringeworthy at times. We Were Soldiers, on the other hand, was thoroughly ghastly. I couldn't believe what I was watching. When I heard some of the lines of the dying soldiers, I thought I was going to vomit from sheer incredulity. What a grade-A homoginized piece of shit that was. Jesus!
-
For starters, I think the film covered just the first half of the book. (Please correct me if I'm wrong) The battle which the second half of the book covered, I think happened a few days afterwards and was a disaster for US forces and even more chaotic than the one the movie covered. It's also spared a lot of the stuff people did not like in the movie. What I found remarkable was there were a few non-coms (maybe as many as 4) who were veterans of both WWII and Korea and also survived this despite being in the thick of the heaviest fighting.
-
I did read the book, years ago, and yes, the film does indeed manage to be both an anemic version of the events covered in the book as well as being atrociously offensive to just about everybody at some point.
-
I'm excited to see "Flags of Our Fathers." Clint's directed some great films recently, pulling solid performances from his actors, and I think "Flags" could be a great war film. I haven't read the book, but I've read other literature about The Pacific War and Iwo Jima. The soldier's stories are fairly harrowing, since many of these men had been transferred from other parts of the world (North Africa, Europe) to fight Japan in what many thought would be a brutal, drawn out conflict. Soldiers were ordered to forsake vacation time and home leave after fighting in points abroad for months and years without downtime. Also, none of the foot soldiers knew about the atomic bombs soon to be dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, so during the conflict there was no guarantee of victory. I guess most people know how this story ends, with the flag being raised and, later, the a-bombs being dropped to force a Japanese surrender. I predict Eastman will direct a stirring, memorable conclusion to this film.
-
Not even by Clint Eastwood. If I never see another movie set during WW2 it will be too soon.
-
(Some good thoughts there, Pazuzu.)
What a detestable, video-game, cheeseball piece of turd `Windtalkers` was.
There are movies some (especially certain Conservatives) see as patriotic (`Windtalkers`, and `To End All Wars`, which was recently showed at that `Conservative Film Festival). Such movies display how `we` are better than `them` without equivocation. We are noble, self-sacrificing, maybe rough around the edges bu essentially and uniformly the `good guys`. As it happens, I do believe `we` are the good guys in WW2 movies, on a national (not always personal) level - but it's the relentless desire of some to see everything shown in black and white, good and evil that I hate.
The most interesting World War 2 movies are the ones that show American, British, Allied heroism...but which also show internal politics, cowardice, brutality, bad leadership, anti-authoritarian (ie, chain of command) renegades...you know, all of the factors that constitute soldiering. Movies that show the enemy as human beings (which, you know, they were) are also vital. They had wives, children, careers, homes. This is more difficult to express in Pacific War movies - to show the humanity in the indocrinated is difficult.
The scene that moves me in `The Thin Red Line` above all others in the one which depicts semi-starved Japanese soldiers desperately and fearfully protecting their wounded comrades from an American assault. I remember being so shocked - I'd never seen the Japanese depicted as anything but screaming banshees ready to kill.
Another amazing War Movie scene: `Saving Private Ryan`, the sight of American Rangers killing a German soldier with his hands in the air, surrendering. My jaw was on the floor. I said to my dad, "you mean WE did that?".
That's all I want from Eastwood - balance, reality. The best way to honor the soldiers is to present the battle as realistically as possible, warts and all. That means less `Pearl Harbor` and more `Big Red One.` I have faith in Clint.
-
Pumpkinsboy, you wrote, "The most interesting World War 2 movies are the ones that show American, British, Allied heroism...but which also show internal politics, cowardice, brutality, bad leadership, anti-authoritarian (ie, chain of command) renegades." I agree, P-Boy. War films that simultaneously capture the best and worst of humanity are far more interesting, and far more dramatic, than good vs. evil war films. Among my favorites, "Three Kings," "Band of Brothers," "Hotel Rwanda," "Full Metal Jacket," and "Schindler's List" are war films at the top my list. Also, if anyone thinks "Flags of our Fathers" will be just another WW2 film, read the first few pages of the book on amazon.com. After reading these pages myself an hour ago, I realize this story focuses far more on its human drama than its battles. If done well, and based on Eastman's recent work I think it will be, this film won't leave a dry eye in the theater.
-
...I'm as anti-war as they come--unless it's an absolute necessity. Our boys HAD to fight in WWII, and God bless every one who did. Screw the bastards who say "if I ever see another WWII movie I'll puke," while the same dickweeds watch every recycled variation of Star Wars Hollywood can crank out. Our current administration--staffed by the King of Knobgobblers George "I Have a Special Seat Waiting for Me in Hell" Bush--have NOTHING to do with the true heroism of the soldiers in WWII, so shut your cakeholes and spend some time appreciating what those soldiers sacrificed for you.
-
Hehehe!!! Anyway, as good as Clint is at making movies, all his movies look just like that - movies. Never can transcend that framed by four sides of the screen, Hollywood work of art feeling, rather than transcend that, and leap off the scream and fell like genuine realism. I've never seen Mr Shaky hand held camera in his films either man. Dunno how this will look or be. Despite this, I still trust the guy, and think this should be a kick ass film, as long as it's done the way I want it. Million Dollar baby was brill too. Good 'ol Clint, and he looks like my dad anyway. Who wants a game of 'My dad can beat your Dad up' with me? Oh shit, I just remembered, Ryan Phillipe's in this!! Oh no, this WILL be poxy after all. Get rid of him. Someone phone Hayden Christensen's agent quick!!!
-
"Sorry the page is in Icelandic (but it does explain my bad spelling). The article says that the budget is"
Dude, your spelling (in a second language) is better than 90% of "educated" talkbackers and others that surf the net. That says a lot about the average eduation here and and the average education there. -
Iceland is a cool (no pun intended) country. Glad to see it's getting a little bit of Hollywoods coin. I also look forward to seeing this flick as I feel Clint is a pretty damn good film maker.
-
Does that mean the Japanese are going to be depicted devoid of political correctness? Before, on TV, I saw Clint Eastwood shaking the hand of today's Adolf Hitler, the governor of Tokyo, Ishihara, who has stated publicly that anyone not Japanese is "genetic pollution," I wondered how Clint was going to depict them after the governor told him to be "truthful" when making the movie.
-
you are also a spectacular asshole too. Anyways just be glad that the US did what we did back in the 40's. If it weren't for The Greatest Generation you'd be eating Wienerschnitzle and Sushi right now and working some dreadfully dreary job for the betterment of "The People"; but at least you'd have some good German beer when you got home to you one room hovel. The fact is we all owe our lives of freedom and comfort to that Great Generation of people. We really arn't worthy to wipe the shit off thier boots in my opinion. What is it about hardship and strife that brings out the very best in people, and comfort and excess that brings out the very worst?
-
...depicted devoid of "political correctness," just watch any almost Pacific War movie ever made.
Japanese soldiers were defending a brutal imperialism and were indoctrinated to sacrifice everything in its name, but they were men, with their own thoughts, ideas and families.
No-one is saying show the Japanese as misunderstood heroes, but perhaps Clint should make a film that rises above the image of a bayonet wielding, screaming Japanese soldier who is never shown to talk, interact or express anything more than blood curdling cry in Hollywood cinema throughout the ages.
`Tora Tora Tora` is the only movie of any note I can think of that actually gives the enemy a face. Can anyone poijt out a few more, I'm sure there's a few (a minority though).
As for that Mayor, do we judge an entire nation by one famous man's (say, Rush Limbaugh's) words? -
You don't expect me to proof read for typing errors, do you?
-
Jul 20, 2005 1:41:29 PM CDT
The Japanese and Germans are never shown a good face in movies
by spectrebeeyatch
-
Jul 20, 2005 1:47:05 PM CDT
Patriotic Cocksnot?--look no further than AICN Talk Back!
by www.valiens.com
Know what? I did bother to talk to a WWII vet: my grandfather. He started writing a book about his time in the service after seeing "A Thin Red Line" because he said he was there and it was NOTHING like that. He ultimately decided not to write the book because he didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings. The gist of his experience was that most of his fellow officers were inept, and why wouldn't they be? They were mostly rural farmers who didn't know shit about shit, never mind killing other people. As for the heroes fighting for our freedom...um...I don't think they saw it that way at the time. They served because their country made them. They had some sense that this Hitler guy was becoming bad news, but we'd been on his side through his rise to power. But then none of this is the point. The point is, WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER CLICHE GUNG-HO PATRIOTIC COCK SNOT MOVIE TO TELL US HOW TO FEEL. Wanna know why some people cringe at the term "patriotism?" It's because A.] it's a nonsense word used to control you. and B.] the thrust of human personal evolution is a move away from identifying only with family, only with clan, with race, with country, with globe and so on. So the "patriots" are stuck country and anyone who doesn't suffer this retardation is considered what? A snob? A traitor? Ungrateful? It's just evolution, baby.
-
besides Iwo Jima? What's the other half of the film?
-
www.valiens.com, you wrote, "WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER CLICHE GUNG-HO PATRIOTIC COCK SNOT MOVIE TO TELL US HOW TO FEEL." I disagree that any Hollywood movie has ever told you how to feel. Movies present stories or images about fiction or non-fiction events presented to entertain and occasionally make viewers feel something; not one of them has specifically told you how to feel. I'm sorry your grandfather didn't write his book, since I'm sure his side of the story would've been real and poignant, but I'm sure he didn't tell you how to feel about it. You went and did that on your own. If you don't like the current incarnation of what you deem to be American patriotism, that's fine. I'm also skeptical of our government and how it conditions us to think in certain ways. That said, I think you're being awfully dismissive of a very significant event in modern history - for American as well as every other country on Earth. You may not share this perspective, but I guarantee you historians, soldiers who fought in twentieth-century wars would shoot you down from all angles if you try to claim otherwise. In addition, you wrote, " [patriotism] it's a nonsense word used to control you." Bullshit. It's a word, but it doesn't control anything. It personally pisses you off due to what you think it represents, which is fine, but don't ever tell me a word controls anything. Leaders use words to influence people and push their agendas, but words aren't what control people. People and politics are. And if you consider being patriotic "retarded," then you you've lost all perspective on American history. Why do you think Americans fought British tyranny in the Revolutionary War? That's right. Patriotism. Not the Fox News patriotism we're spoon-fed nowadays, but the ideal of freedom to make their own laws, their own choices, and suffer their own resulting consequences. Ask your grandfather if he thinks patriotism is word used to control people. He may have suffered during the war, for which I'm sorry, but the underlying force holding most of the soldiers together in WW2 was an ideal, not a word.
-
God knows I've never seen combat like your grandfather, and what you're saying I agree with. It's just interesting, 'cos `The Thin Red Line` deals with what you're talking about, the inept officers and stuff, the idea of soldiers just following orders and suffering and not being part of some `freedom fighting mission`. In what way was that movie nonsense? (by the way, I'm just curious, not defending that movie or anything, for all I think it's a masterpiece, because how would I know if it's genuine and realistic?).
-
...for a more humanistic depiction of WWII Japanese military. This is one of Spielberg's greatest, and ironically, way underrated movies. Great performances by Bale, Malkovitch, and Joey Pants.
-
Words do control. The use of the very word we are discussing, patriotism, is often deployed as a force of control. You disagree with government policies? You express sympathy for communism? You are anti-war? You are not a patriot and must be slandered as such. Henceforth, people shut up, less they be called `un-patriotic` and condemned. That's just one example of words controlling peoples' actions.
-
Thanks Tremaine, forgot about that one.
-
I understand what you're saying, but I disagree with you. In my opinion, policymakers using choice words and spinning what the words mean are what controls people. If someone calls me "unpatriotic," that's cool. If someone says I'm "anti-war," I'll agree with them and shrug it off. So the word "unpatriotic" isn't the fulcrum on which control sits. In my opinion, it's the people who decide what they want certain words to mean, what certain words can hint at, who control people. If you think "patriotism" is a controlling word, then it controls you. If you don't think it's a controlling word, then it doesn't. If you look at what words mean in a larger context, say, in the Soviet Union circa 1944 under Stalin, you can examine Stalin's well-oiled propaganda machine. Words written on signs and on television screens conveyed Communist ideals to the workers; but the reason Russians took these words seriously is because the threat behind them was so frightening. Thus the words and the threat of death or exile kept Russians under control for decades. But these same words lost their power when Russia changed its governing system. Thus I contend that words are only given power by people who allow these words to have power.
-
Jul 20, 2005 3:27:00 PM CDT
Luckily, there is shit like fantastic 4 and lifetime television
by milton waddams
-
The thing about the IA Drang valley battles is not so much the "human" story. But of the evolution of warfare that leaped forward with that battle. For thousands of years, man walked to the battlefield. Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc. all fought their battles by having men march to the battlefield. Or were carried by horses and/or carts. Then in ww2, the us began to use motorized transportation to bring troops to the edge of the battlefield. There were german motorized units too, for the first time, but they weren't wholesale troops. They were specialty units. The first wholesale movement of troops by motorized transportation, was by the us. And then, for the first time in man's history of warfare, those men were brought to the battlefield by airpower, in the Ia Drang valley, in Once were soldiers. THAT is the true historical value to that engagement. The movie doesn't really pick up on that, but that's it's true significance.
-
Movies tell us how to feel all the time. I'm not even talking about the subtle cues of, for instance, 50's sci fi that acted as anti communist propaganda. By "tell us how to feel" I simply mean telegraphed, button-pushing movies that break out the cliches like Santa breaking out the gifts. Not movies that are meant to program us or condition us, but movies that overtly play to our conditioning that have been done to death. In this sense, most war pics have much in common with chick flicks. Ugh. I think I just gave some film student their grad thesis.
-
Can you imagine if someone made a movie about Nazis that were looked upon to be admired and the Jews out to be ugly? Look at what happened with Passion of the Christ.
-
er miniseries would be Band of Brothers. Doesn't really dwell much on the dark side, however, there's a scene where some french soldiers kill a surrendering nazi, and our guys look on with a look of "shit happens." But the interviews with the actual guys give an excellent insight as to what they were feeling at the time....
-
If someone uses the word "patriotism" in an effort to control someone, the word becomes a tool used in that attempt, nothing more. The word itself can never control anyone anymore than a hammer can nail two boards together without an arm wielding it for that specific purpose. Although I disagree with many of the policies of the Bush administration, I consider myself a patriot and nobody -- whether a right-wing zealot or leftie loon -- can "control" me by co-opting a word I proudly use to describe myself. Also, there is a difference between the word "patriot" and "nationalist" which all too many tend to ignore. A patriot -- in the traditional American sense, at least -- is someone who upholds the IDEALS of liberty which are the foundation of the USA and will defend them "against all enemies, foreign and domestic". A nationalist is someone who generally is loyal to an homogenous country, tribe, race or ethnically based group REGARDLESS of its shifting political ideals. Of course we have the "my country right or wrong" morons in America too, but I find intelligent patriotism much more palatable than nationalism since it's based on the IDEA of freedom and not the color of someone's skin, their religion or indeed the geographical boundaries of the country itself.
-
I think the ol' grandpa didn't like the flowery poetic direction of the film. I haven't seen it since the theater so I'm not quite sure what he disagreed with, content-wise. In fact, I don't even think I asked him. I'll tell you a story, though, since most of you seem interested in the WWII stories. He was on a ship carrying supplies (I think a month's worth) to the troops. They got word over the radio that german subs were chasing them. The guy at the base guided them...right into one of our own mines! The mine blew a large hole in the ship and the captain realized that the only way they had a prayer of not sinking was to put the pedal to the metal, stay on top of that water, and head for shore. It wasn't just their lives at stake but all the supplies. The officer on the other end of the radio gave him an order to stop but he disobeyed. He came roaring onto the land, saved the crew, saved the supplies, and got court marshalled for disobeying an order by the friggen guy who accidentally guided him into our mine in the first place! (Damn. Now there's your movie!)
-
I agree with you that movies often telegraph their intentions with cliches, thus pushing audiences to feel predictable emotions. You're right about this, in my opinion. But pushing viewers in certain ways doesn't ensure that all audience members will feel a predictable emotion. You wrote, "Not movies that are meant to program us or condition us, but movies that overtly play to our conditioning that have been done to death." A well-explained point, in my opinion, highlighting the fact "feel" and "control our feelings" are different perspectives. I got you. Thanks for explaining what you meant. But I still think there are many war flicks, hopefully including "Flags of our Fathers," that present perspectives about war that are real, non-cliche, and meaningful. I think dismissing Eastwood's new film out of hand as "Patriotic Cocksnot" is small-minded of you. Have you ever enjoyed a film about war or its consequences? I bet you have, on some level, at some point. I'm thinking "Flags of our Fathers" won't be a cliche-ridden gobfest, it'll be a poignant story about six soldiers and their role in a brutal and world-changing event that really happened, and the aftermath of that event on their lives. I don't think it'll glorify war or Iwo Jima in the way you believe, and in fact I bet it'll show how harrowing the psychological effects of such an event can be leading up to and during the battle of Iwo Jima, as well as years and generations afterward.
-
Jul 20, 2005 4:08:33 PM CDT
If u want patriotic cocksnot look no further than "The Grait Rai
by knugen
I love the line at the end of the trailer: "There is a price for freedom. A price some are willing to pay". Hmmm, what price would that be? A BUCK 'O FIVE PERHAPSE?! Conservatives are just a bunch of closet fascists that should be sent to the front lines wherever, whenever...
-
That's about as dumb as saying "Liberals are just a bunch of closet communists."
-
...in Spielberg's 1941, too. They were the most sympathetic and competent characters in that movie (which I watched again the other day for the first time in near twenty years and I have to say it isn't as horrible as I remembered). Obviously that's not a serious depiction of WWII, but it's about as credible as most John Wayne movies. If Clint approaches this the same way he did Unforgiven... deconstructing those Hollywoodisms that have colored modern Americans' perceptions of their own history in favor of telling an emotionally compelling story about people who are all flawed to greater or lesser degrees... this could have value. But if this turns into some kind of apology or good will gesture for the conservative backlash he caught on Million Dollar Baby, I'd prefer he just skip it.
-
Valiens, great story! Doesn't shock me at all (coming from a military family).
Uncle Sam - "Can you imagine if someone made a movie about Nazis that were looked upon to be admired"
Spielberg did that with `Schindler's List`. He showed a noble person who happened to be in the Nazi Party.
As for `Empire of the Sun`, I think that movie makes Japanese brutality pretty clear. I don't think there's anything to be admired in the Japanese military behaviour displayed in that movie. There is, however, a few flashes of humanity - the Kamikazee Boy pilot who actually shows a few flashes of boyish emotion being one. Which of course, is the problem. There is a school of thought (prevalent mostly amongst hardline Conservatives in my experience) that says any display of emotion, worth, humanity or nobility in the `enemy` in Hollywood films is a sign of treachery, or `typical Hollywood liberalism`. I think this ties in with what some of have been discussing: patriotism as a means of control. Mafu, your response was very interesting and made me think. I agree that there's no comparison with Soviet use of `Patriotism` and the way it's used today in America. Of course, we live a free society and have no risk of being deported to a Gulag. But I have to disagree about the idea of control. It's more subtle and appears benign, but you mentioned Fox News. Ok, hypothetical time. Say I go to the office tomorrow, and I work in an office where Fox News is the accepted news source of my co-workers. Imagine I express my anti-war views. I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility that I would suddenly find my promotion (covertly) denied me, that the guys wouldn't invite me to play poker anymore at their homes (`gee Pumpkinsboy, the table is full up`). Maybe a few Chinese whispers get started - did we see Pumpkinsboy with a lady of the night on Saturday? I get called into the office - my work has been shoddy. Maybe I even get fired (for `work` reasons of course). Now, as it happens, I really don't think things will ever get that bad. I really really don't. But who can say for sure, in this perpetual age of war we're about the enter (the war on terrorism will never end, I think), who can say the word `Un-Patriotic` won't become a form of control and (enforced self) censorship? However, I think your reasoning and ideas are very pursuasive. Maybe I'm just paranoid! -
Jul 20, 2005 4:49:57 PM CDT
Mafu - I've enjoyed a few war films but that isn't the p
by www.valiens.com
Really I was just responding to the flood of people bashing "President Evil," who ironically enough, probably hasn't come back to this thread. I have no idea what this movie is, obviously, except that it's an Eastwood movie so it'll probably be slow. It may not be patriotic cocksnot. Here's hoping. But do I really have to qualify everything I say or can you take it for granted that I don't really know anything about a movie that hasn't been released yet? I mean sheesh!
-
I suggest you check out "Stalingrad," "The Bridge," "Fire On the Plains" and "Das Boot."
-
Spielberg will want Eastwood to put a little kid in, and Haggis will want to dump on Catholics.
Just make a war movie with plenty of killing. Let's go, Easy Co! -
I've been wanting to see a movie about the Marines fighting up Mt. Suribachi for a long time. I hope they have a great composer play sweeping music as the 5 Marines and the 1 Navy Corpsman push the flag up the mountain. I wonder who'll play Admiral Nimitz?
-
Jul 20, 2005 5:55:04 PM CDT
re: The Japanese and Germans are never shown a good face in movi
by griff n dohr
check out Joseph Vilsmaier's Stalingrad. its a german film about a german defeat.
in many ways better than private ryan...
-
Die hippie scum!
-
See above post.
-
hmmm...
better hear some JOHN WILLIAMS in this one -
Were there black beaches at the actual site? Or is it just because it will look cool on film?
-
I've seen all those films but most of the time German's and Japanese are not shown in good light in US films. The only American film I can remember with a decent German soldier was that horrible movie with Nick Cage trying to be Italian. Anyway I like war movies and some people need to take deep breath and relax. It seems to some of you Americans should only be shown in bad light while everyone else should be given a textured look. Like Black Hawk Down after reading books about that battle I have no respect for the Somalian fighters. The movie did not show a lot of horrible stuff they did, like use women as human shields, to try and not look racist or one sided.
-
"Interesting it's not being shot at Iwo Jima!"
There are some very good reasons it's not being shot at Iwo Jima, and it's not because all Japanese are racist assholes as you imply in your bigoted post. First, there is a military installation on Iwo Jima and anyone who wants to set foot on the island, whether they are American, Japanese, or whatever, has to get special permission from the Japanese government. Second, I believe Iwo Jima is a protected historic landmark. So it's highly unlikely any film crew, no matter what nation they are from, would be allowed to make a movie there. Spielberg ran into the same problem when he made SPR. The Normandy beaches are protected historic sites, which is one of the reasons why he had to shoot the Omaha beach scene in Ireland. That being said, the Japanese government does allow people on the Island. American veterans of the Iwo Jima battle visit there every year on tours arranged through Military Historic Tours, Inc. A memorial service is held, attended by veterans from both sides, in remembrance of the battle. I don't think the Japanese would allow any Americans on the Island at all if they truly were the evil, racist assholes you depict them to be... and I don't care what Ishihara said, he's only one man and he doesn't represent the opinions of every single Japanese person. So, UncleSham, next time why don't you think before you type...do a little research first before you post stupid remarks. Or, if you prefer, you can leave your head up your ass. -
If you're looking for movies that give Japanese soldiers a "face", you might want to check out "None But the Brave" with Frank Sinatra. It's just an OK movie, but it does present a more well-rounded view of the Japanese. I don't think it's available on DVD, but sometimes you can catch it on one of the movie channels, such as TCM or AMC.
-
Nobody seems to remember this amazig film, all of the main characters are German soldiers in WWII, on the Russian Front. Great film, shows the hatred between soldiers on the same side, workihng class vs the rich, and Nazis vs the regular conscript who's only fighting because he has no choice. Far batter than Stalingrad.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts