What did you think of Pearl Harbor? Was it one of the worst movies or the best?

[brandon918]

What did you think of Pearl Harbor? Was it one of the worst movies or the best?.

In this you have to have seen the movie. 1 reply per person.

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

It was neither. I didnt like the film, but I would NEVER have put it on my Worst of 2001 list. I think the film is an example of mediocrity in film, and the very epitome of movie cliches. So really, it was merely very, very, very mediocre.

[dmdubie]

I really believe it had the potential to be a GREAT movie. The actual attack on Pearl Harbor was amazing to watch, but it would have been a lot better, in my opinion, if they hadn't tried to make it into a love story.

I don't think it was one of the worst movies, but it definitely falls well short of being one of the best movies.

[This message has been edited by dmdubie (edited 03-14-2002).]

[The Other]

Why do you keep posting in the wrong forum? Or the same forum actually when none of your posts belong in the Upcoming Movie Talk forum?

Anyway, it was a medicre film. I dunno, it wasn't terrible and I wouldn't put it on my worst films of 2001 list, but it wasn't great either. I'd rate it about a 5/10 or 6/10, something around there.

[James Logan]

Like everybody said, very mediocre film, full of cliches -- and for the last time, the only thing Michael Bay can do is eye candy...nothing else.

[sleekproductions]

Neither Best Nor Worst. Simply, In The Middle. Grade... About 7/10.

[Nate6]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dumb-Fokker-**:
It was neither. I didnt like the film, but I would NEVER have put it on my Worst of 2001 list. I think the film is an example of mediocrity in film, and the very epitome of movie cliches. So really, it was merely very, very, very mediocre.</font>

I'm in total agreement. I did not like this movie, too sappy and cliché-ridden. But it wasn't bad enough to go on my Worst of 2001 list.

[Zing!]

To quote MAD Magazine... "Blech!" I felt like I should go to the dentist after watching this sugary sweet melodrama. Never before have I seen war portrayed in such a sanitized manner. This movie could have been great, but the laughably cliche script never gave it a chance. The way Bay bookended the movie with the wholesome, downhome farmland milk and honey scenes made me groan with displeasure. It was a classic Bay moment. The filtered light, the amber waves of grain, the completely unecessary backstory... God almighty did I hate this movie! I would give it 3.5/10 simply because of the battle scenes.

[Muha]

it was my worst movie of the year... i despised the film greatly.

it wasnt pearl harbor

it was romance at pearl harbor

the girl was a trick... reminded me of the situation i was in at the time i saw it back last may.

not enough of cuba, sizemore, and voight


too much of josh hartnett... i cant stand him.

4/10

[arto_j]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Dumb-Fokker-**:
It was neither. I didnt like the film, but I would NEVER have put it on my Worst of 2001 list. I think the film is an example of mediocrity in film, and the very epitome of movie cliches. So really, it was merely very, very, very mediocre.</font>

I must also agree with every word here. If they cut 25 minutes from the beginning and the end, (and maybe change the director and producer, yeah right) it could've been a bit less bad. But it wasn't a spawn of satan, just not very good.

[thompsoncory]

You guys are being way too harsh. If you take it for what it is, a war ROMANCE, it's actually pretty good.

Grade: 7/10

[chinton]

hey thompsoncory

I did take it for what it was but I hated the dialouge and couldnt care about the characters. I felt it oozed with sap. I kept hoping the three leads would die at Pearl Harbor but noooooo

3/10 I gave it a three for it special effects

[urbanlegend23]

It was neither best nor worst, but a very good movie. 8/10.

[Kavan]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by thompsoncory:
You guys are being way too harsh. If you take it for what it is, a war ROMANCE, it's actually pretty good. </font>

See for me it didn't work as a war romance. Affleck and Beckinsdale had absolutely zero chemistry. She and Harnett were a little better but not by much. I thought the love story was silly and unneeded but if they were going to put it in then at least find an actress who had chemistry with the leads.

I agree with others it wasn't the worst or the best. Just an example of going for the lowest denominator. The actual attack scenes were terrific but otherwise it wasn't impressive.

[APzombie]

This is a terrible hollywood addaption of a true life event. I think they made the same mistake here as they did with Titanic...

They put fictional characters in a "true story" event, which, to the audience, we begin to think that it is not real because the people that we care about in the movie are not real, to top that off it is 3 friggin hours long explaining some characters that didn't even fucking exsist in the first place... i think doing that is very rude to the REAL people who survived it.

Plus, they made a HUUGE mistake with the Jap. planes, they were silver, not tan. THey did this on purpose to save money on the cgi of the plane, if it was silver, they would have to waste alot of time putting the reflections on the planes...

all in all this movie is a discrase to film making and a slap in the face to all those who were involved with the accual attack, leave this kinda fake action shit to th dogs.....

[ColinM]

I agree with those who say it's neither. It isn't a good movie, but it sure doesn't deserve it's Razzie nomination(s). (And, of course, the attack itself was extremely well done.)

I give it a 5/10.

[Congerking]

during this movie, my ass got numb and I was waiting for it to end. It was so incredibly terrible, the story sucked. Why make the love story bigger than the actual true part of the movie. the attack of the base was supporting to the love story. And the end, why did they add the stupid part of the chinese mission anyway. Did they have to kill off either affleck or hartnett? if they wanted to do that, they should have had one of them die during the battle, instead they prolonged the agony of me staying in the theater for 1/2 an hour to kill off one of the guys. just a poorly made movie and a huge waste of time

1/10 (if that, possibly a 0)

[ak]

It's strange so many people have been discussing this, and it's completely in the wrong forum.....

[ColinM]

I was wondering if someone was going to point that out. Usually everyone does...

[Mike Sampson]

Since this doesn't pertain to Upcoming Movies, I'm transferring this topic to another forum...

-MS