Flags of da Fathers
- Started
- Last post
- 11 Responses
- harlequino
Watched this last night. I was real reluctant as I am tired of both Eastwood's downer flicks and WWII flicks altogether. But I decided to give it a fair shake.
Overall, I really enjoyed it. I loved the themes about deception and exploitation adding to the horror of the combat endured by these men. It was a brave take on the war, especially in the way it dissected that iconic photograph of the flag raising, and went to sa far as to point out the whole thing being a sham. And I felt like it raised some great questions, rather than hammer home answers and opinions.
The ending however, got sappy and and turned into another film, imho.
Anyone else see it? What's yer take on eet?Why am I writing all this? God knows. I'm bored and I have an ear infection.
- letters0
This film was alright – not as strong as some of eastwood's other recent films...
Overall, I am thoroughly impressed by eastwood, he gets better and better, a genius these days I think.
- TheBlueOne0
I liked it...still need to see the 2nd part..
- rafalski0
Well executed, with a 60-70's feel to the picture, just lacking a story. A war picture was actually staged, with a bigger flag to look good - give me a break, that's not enough material for a decent film.
- alloyd0
I watched it last night too. After reading reviews, I was expecting more 'Saving Private Ryan', more action scenes. But, like you said, it started to become too sappy for me and more focused on those cheesy scenes about the flag and who posted it. The beginning was more focused on the war part, and little by little, it kept going back and forth with the whole flag thingy. I found myself fast forwarding to the war scenes. I get what they were trying to say but I thought it was a bit overkill to go into that much detail about that flag symbolism after spending the first 45 mins focusing on the war. I was like okay, I get it, now what? Now that I think of it, the war scenes weren't that great either, it didn't show much detail. You would only see what happened after a bomb or explosion, no in betweens. Also, if you think about how much time has passed during the war scenes, it feels like it only showcases an hour or so of the battle, not days or weeks. They preety much got to the island, overtook the hill, and that was it. Maybe I was just hoping for more Saving Private Ryan and seeing some faces getting ripped off by bullets.
- mattyd040
i thought it was alright. one thing that i didn't dig was that he de-saturated the film. all WWII movies have to be de-saturated i guess. 'saving private ryan' and 'band of brothers' were de-saturated because they took place in the gloomy european theatre. iwo jima was bright and sunny, it was a volcanic island. the colors should have been more vibrant. maybe he should have just used grainy film to get across the 'old' look.
- pr20
alloyd, you sound like 14 year old boy who hasn't lost his virginity yet.
- alloyd0
Thanx pr2. Yet another person on NT that has nothing good to say and is making this site less attractive to come to. Why are you so negative? Why make comments about someone personally when they are just giving an opinion on a movie? What point are you trying to get across? Anyways, I'm not on NT to get into fights on the interweb. Stay true to yourself. Nice work btw. Teh smyare geesh yak peeshda kuudva.
- harlequino0
I think pr2's comment was in jest, to be honest, not intended to be overly negative. And it was in response, quite fairly, to this:
Maybe I was just hoping for more Saving Private Ryan and seeing some faces getting ripped off by bullets.
alloyd
(Feb 13 07, 09:03)So let's not get all nervy dervy, eh?
:)
- jevad0
make sure to watch letters from iwo jima too
- pr20
harlequino got it totaly right... he can read my mind, you know.
- jevad0
Maybe I was just hoping for more Saving Private Ryan and seeing some faces getting ripped off by bullets.
alloyd
(Feb 13 07, 09:03)you're a fucking idiot