Reviews: Pearl Harbor

[JoBlo]

JoBlo's 5/10 review of PEARL HARBOR can be found here: http://www.joblo.com/pearlharbor.htm
Your past movie reviews from May 1998 - November 2001 can be found there as well.

And what did you think of the movie? Add your comments below.

GUIDELINES: CONSTRUCTIVE REVIEWS ONLY!

1) If you haven't seen the movie, don't post here, because it will be deleted.
2) If you add two-bit comments like "it rocked" or "it sucked the big one" or just a grade, it will be deleted.
3) If you insult anyone from the board in your post, it will be deleted and you will receive a warning from the board. A second warning and you will be banned altogether. You can disagree with others all you want but no putdowns are necessary to make your points.

In order for others to know whether or not you would recommend the movie, please click on the desired icon of your choice when posting:

Recommended = http://www.joblo.com/ubb/icons/icon7.gif
Not recommended = http://www.joblo.com/ubb/icons/icon8.gif
In the middle = http://www.joblo.com/ubb/icons/icon9.gif

[idealdiscountdude]

While watching the trailers, I was blown away...they were amzing and I was really looking forward in seeing the actual film itself........boy do I know where all the energy and work went in this film....to make a 2 minute trailer.

Pearl Harbor is a MESS!!!!! It is a three hour retread of 1997's Titanic set amongst the backdrop of the story of Pearl Harbor.

The screenplay and story was so laughable I was gagging. The dialogue was godawful and the chemistry between Kate/Ben and Kate/Josh was non existent. Kate Beckinsdale, Josh Hartnett and Ben Affleck are normally capable actors who I really like....here they are bombarded by such a putrid screenplay that they really had no choice. The editing was too fast paced and really seemed out of palce in this film. The film is not even very accurate....especially the ending.

The two things I did actually like were the CGI which were amazing and the beautiful cinematography but those elements were not enough to keep this flick from being a bomb.

Pearl Harbor was a total disappointment and a waste of three hours and three minutes of my life.

2/10 or 1/2 a *

[urbanlegend23]

Pearl Harbour

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0213149/img0024.jpg

I really liked Pearl Harbour the first time I saw it. I thought it was a very well done and endearing film. About 3 weeks later my opinion hadn’t changed but I thought after reading all the bad reviews and attacks on the love triangle that I might be crazy for enjoying it. So I decided to check it out again, and when I came out I felt exactly the same way. This movie has faults but I thought it was still a great event.

I’ll just get the faults out of the way because it’s the good stuff we want to get to. Reviewers and audiences have battered the love-triangle aspect of the movie to death. I didn’t think it was all too bad, it had some interesting ideas and doesn’t always take the easy way out. Even some of the cheesy liners actually helped the chemistry between the characters. However, some of them are way too stupid and melodramatic (“When I’m cold, the one place I can go to and be warm is to think of you” is a perfect example). There are also some very simple flaws that I noticed. In the scene where Danny takes Evelyn in the plane to look over Pearl Harbour at sunset has a couple of stupid little things that kind of annoyed me. They are talking really quietly in a very loud plane and neither of them have headphones on or are wearing belts. I no that with headphones and seatbelts on it may ruin the romantic atmosphere, but it got on my nerves.

Now, to the good stuff! The action! The action! The action! The action in this movie is truly amazing. The battle scene at Pearl Harbour is just truly unbelievable and you won’t believe it until you seen it. It includes some of the best special effects I’ll ever have the pleasure of viewing. The combat sequences are all very exciting and filmed well. Michael Bay uses his love of pyrotechnics and things being blown up very well in this movie.

The atmosphere of the movie was also excellent. The scene in the hospital when Pearl Harbour is being attacked almost brought tears to my eyes. Those nurses were trying to help everyone and there were so many people coming in with horrible injuries and they just didn’t know what to do. John Schwartzman (director of photography) brings across the chaotic and scary mood of the film across very well in that particular scene. The use of blurry and slow motion was great. Schwartzman also used his skills to a tee in the battle scenes, with one shot I noticed and being especially incredible – the shot where the bomb is dropped and we follow it from the sky right down to the ship. That was just incredible.

The acting in the movie was quite good too. Ben Affleck is a good young action hero and I think he has a good future ahead of him. Josh Hartnett brings Danny across as a likeable and sensible guy. MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR SPOILERS!! TURN AWAY NOW IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE BECAUSE THIS WILL RUIN IT FOR YOU! His emotions are great, especially during his death scene. END SPOILER! Kate Beckinsale was also great and probably gave my favourite performance of the movie, coming across like a young Bette Davis or Elizabeth Taylor. Jon Voight was believable and great in his role as President Roosevelt. Cuba Gooding, Jr. did what good he can with his small role. I felt he projected the sensitivity of his true-to-life character very well. Alec Baldwin was very corny and over-the-top in his role.

It’s hard not to laugh at the cheesy lines in this movie. Some lines like “I don’t think I can ever look at another sunset without thinking about you” are delivered badly. I’d say the scriptwriter, Randall Wallace is responsible. He has good knowledge of the events he writes about but he has trouble with his corny lines (I noticed this also in the overrated Braveheart). None-the-less, he has written an acceptable script that could’ve had shinier touches in some places. Luckily it doesn’t ruin this patriotic and entertaining marathon completely.

B+

[This message has been edited by urbanlegend23 (edited 06-23-2002).]

[SteveSzyk]

Pearl Harbor 2001
Directed by: Michael Bay
Starring: Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett, and Kate Beckinsale

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0213149/img0007.jpg

Pearl Harbor was easily one of the most anticipated films of the summer.It disappointed most critics, as well as most viewers. And after finally getting to see the film, I can understand why. Before I get to the review, let me just say that I think this film had a little more impact on me because of the events of September 11 (And also that I watched it today, on the day the Pearl Harbor was attacked).

The first hour of Pearl Harbor is terrible, and just so boring (Surprisingly, I think the only thing that kept me watching, was seeing the star of my favorite television show, "Alias," Jennifer Garner). I was laughing at the love story, and I don't think I was supposed to be. It is so underdeveloped, that I didn't care about the relationship between the two characters at all. I mean one second she's sticking needles up his ass, and the next there dancing together, and acting like newlyweds. Did I miss something? Also, the romance is just not romantic, which is also partly due to the fact that the characters aren't developed in the slightest bit. Who cares about a relationship, when you know close to nothing about the characters in love? Another problem with the first hour or so of the film, is that it seemed to attempt to add some comedy to the mix. And the comedy just wasn't funny. I thought that at times, the film seemed more like a parody of war films, than an actual war film.

Throughout the horrid first part, I sat and prayed that the attack scene would come. And when it finally did, I was not disappointed. The scene was perfect. It actually had some emotion in it (Although I don't think I cared for the characters - the scene reminded me that this actually happened, that thousands of people died. And it also reminded me of the thousands who died on September 11. And that got me sad, and upset). I got into the film for the 40 minutes, and I was on the edge of my seat the whole time (However one part of the attack scene seemed to come straight out of Titanic, and that bothered me). I also loved Jon Voight's performance as President FDR - It was right on the money. Was it just me, or did the second part of the film seem like a completely different film - a much, much, much better film. However the ending goes downhill. I didn't feel they gave us enough of the war storyline. The fight scenes seem to end, because something happens to affect the love story, not because the war is over. I think it should have dropped most of the first hour, and used the extra time to expand on the war.

As for the acting, I wasn't impressed. Don't get me wrong, the stars did fine, but nothing extraordinary. Josh Hartnett was my least favorite actor in the film. I didn't think he did the best he could for some reason. Something was missing from his performance. Ben Affleck did fine, but I also thought something was missing from his performance. I did, however, like Kate Beckinsale's performance. Alec Baldwin was annoying in his role. But that is thanks to the cheesy dialogue provided by the script. As I already mentioned Jon Voight was great, and stole the scenes he was in. Cuba Gooding Jr. was decent in his small role (I would have loved to learn more about his character). Now let me take a little time to criticize the laughably bad dialogue. My favorite line came from Ben Affleck, while writing a letter to Evelyn. He said something along the lines of: "It's cold here. But there's one place I know I can go to keep warm. That is to think of you." That line had me laughing the whole night. Does it get any worse than that. Alec Baldwin also had some unintentionally hysterical lines.

Overall Pearl Harbor is a disappointment. It fails as a romance, and fails as a war film. However, the attack scene was fantastic! Like I said before, it was perfect. Had that scene not been so well made, this film would be crap on a stick. I also think the film would have benefited from an R rating, and a shorter running time. Cut out the love shit, add some more of the war in the film, and we would have had a great, great war film. I know that I will not be recommending Pearl Harbor to many people.

Pearl Harbor: 5/10

[Cyclonus]

The filmmakers wanted to top Saving Private Ryan, but instead gave us another overlong rock video masquerading as an action movie. The first hour is a major bore, the second is actually pretty decent (if overlong), and the last part should have been a separate movie altogether. (kinda like what Roger Ebert said.)

4/10 or 5/10.

[bskutle]

"Pearl Harbor"- B-
The question I've been asking all year is- will Michael Bay muck up this depiction of the sneak attack that lead to the US's involvement in WWII the way he did the dizzyingly crummy "Armageddon?"

Thankfully, the answer- for me- is no, but that doesn't mean Bay can be let off the hook. What he and producer Jerry Bruckheimer (also guilty on the charge of bringing "Armageddon" to the screen) have essentially done is created a modern-day "From Here To Eternity" with the scope- and hopeful appeal- of "Titanic," setting a love triangle between Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett (as fighter pilots), and Kate Beckinsale (as a nurse where they're stationed) around the events leading up to and after the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor. Praise the Lord that Bay doesn't subject us to a scene as deplorably sickening as that wretched animal crackers nonsense between Affleck and Liv Tyler in "Armageddon"; the scenes between Affleck and Beckinsale and Hartnett and Beckinsale (whom fall in love after Affleck is believed dead over in Europe) have more of the young-love appeal of "Titanic" while not even remotely hitting the swooning, melodramatic heights of "From Here To Eternity." There's still a lot of homespun Americana corn in this epic (the beginning- showing Affleck and Hartnett as kids fantasizing about being fighter pilots- in particular; the patriotic "symbolism" less so), but the love story is what Bay wants us to focus on when he isn't blowing things up or laying on the American cheese.

Unfortunately, I found myself utterly UN-engaged in the hokey love triangle. I won't fault the actors- Affleck, Hartnett, and Beckinsale all fit snuggly into their roles; here's where I'll blame screenwriter Randall Wallace, best know for the underappreciated "Braveheart." The story progresses so predictibly even a moment that one might consider surprising in this sort of film- which is to say it doesn't follow the tradition "epic love" formula- was easily predictible an hour before the movie made it official (I will give the film credit though; it did throw me off at the end where "Armageddon" was painfully obvious). But that lone "surprise" matters not when the remainder of the three hours makes you feel very little emotionally for the characters, barely characterized other than a few simple facts. When audiences cared for Leo and Kate in "Titanic," they felt they knew those characters; here, I felt that Affleck and Hartnett's characters were interchangable, while Beckinsale's- whom does the voiceover at the end for no real reason (the story isn't told from her POV like it was in "Titanic")- is barely a cardboard cutout of "the girl" in other films. Too bad, 'cause all of these actors have the ability to make me want to care. But then again, what did I expect from the team who made "Bad Boys," "The Rock," and "Armageddon."

The characters on the perimeters don't do much better. Jamie King is a scene-stealer as nurse Betty (whom falls for a stuttering soldier (Ewen Bremner, also fine)), but she is gone for most of the movie. Cuba Gooding Jr. scores in what amounts to a cameo as real-life Dorie Miller (the first African-American awarded the Navy Cross for his bravery at Pearl Harbor), but he's also shortchanged, not to mention very vital to the main storyline. In other true-to-life roles, Jon Voight is solid as FDR (appropriately stirring during the famous declaration of war), and Alec Baldwin fills the rah-rah role of Jimmy Doolittle, whom leads the counterattack on Japan after the devestation at Pearl Harbor.

This brings me to the action scenes and the "day which will live in infamy." On this level, director Bay achieves his biggest success of the film and the greenlit budget of $135 million (the largest ever approved by a single studio at the outset) shows its stuff. Bay stages the carnage and edits the 40-minute sequence (15 minutes longer than the paralyzing D-Day scene in "Saving Private Ryan") with his typical flair (kudos to cinematographer John Schwartzman ("The Rock") for some spectacular arial work, especially the "bomb's eye" POV shot featured in the trailers for the film), with some great suspense leading up to the sneak attack and terrific special effects and sound work. Unfortunately, it's all for naught given Bay's deficiency as a dramatic filmmaker and storyteller and blatent ripping off of films like "Top Gun," "Titanic," and "Ryan" for some of the most dramatic scenes in the sequence (Bay would call them "homages"- which he neatly defines near the beginning as a sly in-joke). Plus, the combat scenes are crosscut with scenes of Beckinsale and co. treating the wounded at the hospital. Most of these scenes are shot with a deep blur in the camera, for no apparent reason other than to resist relying entirely on "cliched" slo-mo for drama (it's also a bit odd for the film to occasionally disolve in and out of black-and-white, as well as to conviently have a newsreelman there for some shaky "docu" footage). The above comments re: Bay and his ripping off are also true of the final firefight in the sky between Americans and Japanese, which has too much of a feel of "Top Gun" to it to be truly appreciated. Though to a red-blooded action film fan will probably find these entertaining, they don't hold a candle to the blood-curdling dramatic battle scenes in Steven Spielberg's "Saving Private Ryan."

Finally, we have the music in "Pearl Harbor," composed by Hans Zimmer. While not Zimmer's finest hour (and certainly a letdown after his brilliant orchestral work on "Hannibal" earlier this year), he does show some chops with a lovely, sweeping romantic epic score (the first he's done), even if it sounds equally inspired by his own "The Thin Red Line," "Gladiator" (during the dogfight scenes), "Beyond Rangoon" (the scenes depicting Japan's strategy-making), as well as James Horner a la "Braveheart," "Titanic," and John Williams a la "Saving Private Ryan," and last year's "The Patriot." As for the theme song performed by Faith Hill- "There You'll Be"- it's "My Heart Will Go On"-esque Oscar sap all the way.

So will "Pearl Harbor" win Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer "Titanic"-esque box-office and Oscar glory? Yes to the former, and "Lord help us" to the latter, though I'm sure they'd like to think so. Like "The Patriot," this is an ultra-sap machine from beginning to end and is too shallow dramatically (if only they'd spent some time developing the characters more a la "Ryan"); Bay and co. will just have to live with some technical awards for the way they put the combat on the screen. If you're looking for a "Ryan"-esque "recreation" of a historic event with a strong story and message, this ain't it. If you're looking for pure popcorn fodder, you should enjoy it. If only it went more towards the former...

[The1TrueFrog]

Pearl Harbor - 8/10.
Warning! Mild Spoilers ahead!

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/touchstone_pictures/pearl_harbor/strafe.jpg

Sorry folks, but I can't say that I was disappointed in this movie at all. The length is rather excruciating, at 3 hours and some change, but it does not seem like a copycat version of 'Titanic' at all. In fact, It seems just as oscar-worthy as the latter.

It has the perfect opening, the two future aces as kids. With a crazy father whose mind has been warped by war. They were too young then to understand it, but they will find out what it's like one day. But from the very beginning their passion was planes and becoming pilots. And they are determined to live out their dream to the letter.

The three-way romance story was attacked by a lot of people, including the host of this website himself. But it's not bad. It's a second story that ties in with the main story, and it makes you think about things a little bit. The different between this movie and Titanic, was that in Titanic, it was a fight for the couple to STAY alive. In this movie, the nurse chick (who is very hot by the way) thinks that he's dead and unknowningly tries to move on. Hrmm... a pretty original thought to be brought into this movie actually.

And of course, if you don't like anything else, you MUST love the special effects. Jerry Bruckheimer wasn't dicking around here, he meant business when it came to the realistic end of this movie. Serious enough to spend, what was it? about 190 million dollars? At any rate, DAMN.. very exhilirating. Makes Saving Private Ryan look like cub-scouts. It was simply terrific.

And then the mournful ending. It's eerie thinking about how this movie was made BEFORE the attacks on the World Trade Center, and released to video afterwards. And released on the date of the Pearl Harbor attacks. It's a very patriotic memorial and I would advise everyone that hasn't seen it to PLEASE go grab a copy. It's a worthwhile event.

[Roxy38]

Since I am into love stories, i loved pearl harbor. it was a real tear-jerker, and i love those! if u watch this movie, wich you should, make sure u have a tissue box right next to ya!! however, i dont know how factual this movie was...but oh well, its a good love story so i like it! hehe http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif

[dannywalker17]

PEARL HARBOR
Directed by Michael Bay
Written by Randall Wallace
Starring Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett, Kate Beckinsale, Alec Baldwin, and John Voight
Rating: 10/10

I've reviewed this before
but they have changed it to where the reviews are on the board so i'll do it again. Many of you guys probably remember me as the big Pearl Harbor defender and I continue to stand by that opinion. This was a flawless movie in my opinion. The acting was good, the battle scenes were amazing and heartwrenching. This movie is no different than Titanic in that it is an epic love story set in the backdrop of a cataclismic true event and although the true events are very important to the story, the love story is more predominant in the end. I dont see how anyone can criticise Pearl Harbor so much and like Titanic. I think too many people went in with preconcieved ideas of how this movie was going to be and when they didnt get what they expected the automatically said "Pearl Harbor is a BOMB! Hehe look at my pun." and proceeded to pick apart every tiny aspect of the film. I can understand why this film is not for everybody, but it is by no means the runner up for worst movie of the year!!! If you go to Rotten Tomatoes youll find that its not even on the TOP 25 worst reviewed movies of 2001. Hmmm...maybe the people that come to this site just hate Ben Affleck or something?

[paperboy]

I'm a die hard war movie buff, and when I watch a WWII movie I'm looking for historical accuracy, not a mushy love story! (SPR is at the top of my list on authenticity and credibility to the horrors of battle.) The Japanese have attacked Pearl Harbor! The United States has entered the war! Who do YOU want to fall in love with the pretty nurse? gimme a break! That whole love triangle thing almost completely overlooks the importance to the cause of the US entering the war. I realize every movie has to have a main character (or two) and a plot for that character has to be included, but there was just too much romance, heartfelt moments...etc etc. included in this film. A little is okay, but for me, it was a bit much. I will say that the attack on the harbor and not to mention the intense aerial dogfight scenes were awesome! There should've been more of that! VERY well done on that part! Watching the attack helped me realize what kind of hell the sailors actually endured. Sorry, but I was a little disappointed with Pearl Harbor. - too much romance. - not enough accuracy + great attack scene! 5/10.

[This message has been edited by paperboy (edited 04-20-2002).]

[This message has been edited by paperboy (edited 04-25-2002).]

[MovieFreak15]

Personally, I think that this film has a bit of a bad wrap. I really did enjoy this film. I will agree with everyone and say that it did run a bit long. However, (as opposed to most people) it wasn't the "love story" that I thought ran too long, but it was the battle sequence. I thought that the actual Pearl Harbor bombing sequence was way too long. I believe that it clocked in at about 45 minutes. On the other hand, the special effects were amazing and it was quite visually impressive. I was also impressed by the acting (considering I do not like either Ben Affleck or Josh Hartnett). Basically, I just thought that this was your basic fun, popcorn flick (I don't think It was exactly Oscar material). 7/10.

[Todd1700]

This movie was just awful. First I have no problem with a three hour movie if thats the amount of time it takes to tell the story. Pearl Harbor did not need to be anywhere near that long. Other than the attack there just isn't that much going on. The love story aspect of the film is lifeless. There was no chemistry between the main characters and some of the most painfully corny dialog that I've heard in a film in many years. The war story aspect is okay during the bombing of Pearl Harbor but quickly goes to crap afterwards. Our two main heros take off in their planes during the attack and shoot down at least 20 jap Zero's. (Hell, two more and we could have officially classified the battle as a draw.) The aerial combat sequences looked pretty bad and unrealistic as well. Then our heros land; cut people out of ships in the harbor; transport people to the hospital; and lend a hand in the emergentcy room. Wow thats a helluva day. It also begs the question.....WERE THEY THE ONLY FREAKING PEOPLE ON THE ISLAND? Then just when I thought it couldn't get more ridiculous they transfer our two hero's to another unit to participate in Dolittles Raid on Japan. Why is this ridiculous? Well our guys are fighter pilots. Dolittle and his men flew b-24 bombers. Why on earth would you transfer in two fighter pilots who have never flown a b-24 when there are hundreds of guys out there who fly them every day? Answer, there is no reason and it just took this movie from an already ridiculous level to the point of a pathetically funny joke of a movie. I give this movie 3/10 only for the cool footage of the bombing of the harbor.

[Snowboy]

What a ride! I have to disagree with Joblo on this one. (you still rock!) I thoroughly enjoyed this film, even the cheesy romance. I love Kate Beckinsale, she is adorable and in this film, she looked stunning. I'm not a big Ben Affleck fan, but in his defense, the script was kinda weak. His performance was good but nothing extraordinary. Josh Hartnett is definitely an up-and-coming actor. I always enjoy his performances. Other than those three, the rest of the cast just didn't do anything for me. One thing this film does provide is action, and GREAT action. There were some slick camera shots, my fave being the first torpedo launch. Smooth stuff! These were some of the coolest action sequences I've seen in a while. And when that ship fell over on its side..crazy stuff! This film is definitely not Oscar material, well, maybe visually, it did have excellent cinematography (I think it was nominated in like 2 categories, but who cares) and clean visuals all around. I think this film succeeded in presenting the sheer terror of that first attack, and I can't even begin to imagine being there on that day. And while this film is no SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, I enjoyed myself. Before anyone attacks my review, just remember that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and I TOTALLY respect everyone's opinion here. Anywho...I give it a 7/10.

[Dude]

I'm one of those who think Ben Affleck did a VERY FINE job in Pearl Harbor. I've seen Tora, Tora, Tora, and I KNOW THAT film is more accurate.. but never the less, I enjoy Pearl Harbor MUCH MORE... even knowing that some historical inaccuracies are present. MANY real life veterans of Pearl Harbor's attack admired the film. Some hate the film... I thought it was VERY WELL MADE and give it an 8/10.

I also have no problem with De Caprio.. and I LOVE Kate Winslet... I LOVED Titanic, and give THAT film a 9/10.. and am EAGERLY awaiting a SE version done in anamorphic!

[bankholdup]

I give Pearl HarBORE a 5 or 6/10.

[Fj x]

How can a film maker be so cruel to the viewers as to turn this way past dramatic and great war flick of a movie into a stupid love story with 2 of the stupidest actors I've seen yet? If I was a veteran of this real attack, I'd be outraged, but I'm merely a viewer so I'm just angry. This movie was a joke. It took away the suspence of the real thing and the only part I found remotely enjoyable was the way those planes looked in the air. That was pretty cool. Anyways, it sucked, don't waste your money or your time if you're smart.
2/10

[NotKeyserSoze]

First things first: I haven't always hated Ben Affleck. He was okay in Armageddon, but it was this big ugly mess that propelled him to superstardom. He was in this movie for the same reason Leo was in Titanic. Because he's a pretty face. So he can wave the flag, go on about what's right and wrong, get stuck in a "why do we care?" love triangle and save the day, but of course! Oh, and somewhere along the line Pearl Harbor, and the nasty death of many an unsuspecting sailor, enters into it. This isn't a big factor of course - our attentions are apparently directed towards Affleck and his womanly problem. Which is of course more important...

Hollywood has rarely been able to tell a historical story without relating it to a love story. But when your protagonists are Affleck (dyslexic, despite his love-letter writing later in the film), Josh Hartnett (Naive, irritating "younger brother" sort of character) and Kate Beckinsale (no more than a pretty face), it's difficult to give a monkeys about who does what with whom. There's simply a hideous perspective about this whole movie... this incident results in the death of so many, and we're being asked to devote our thoughts to three wooden artificial people. Give me Saving Private Ryan any day.

In essense, this does to the historical event what Independence Day did to world equity. I.e, "This is how the americans join the war." Not a lot of mention of who was bleeding and dying the several years previous. No, this is america's entry, this is when the war REALLY started. How about no, Hollywood.

Various people get aimless cameos. Cuba Gooding Junior is "guy on boat with gun." Rather pointless, to name one. And the story ends with an attack on Tokyo, to give American viewers their token happy ending. Well, it just wouldn't do to end the film with Hiroshima, america's proper retaliation, resulting in the death and mutilation of many, many more than at Pearl Harbor, for years to come...

Of course an attempt is made to humanize the "nasty" Japanese folk. One of them mutters something about "if we were clever we wouldn't be at war." But then he goes ahead with it and bombs the Harbor to hell and back. Lots of nice effects, lots of boats going bang... for about 45 minutes. It's excruciating. Then more love triangle nonsense, then the attack on Tokyo. Watches will be checked. Histories will be checked. Money will be requested back.

It's your traditional bastardization of history, in the favour of some gooey love scenes, Ben Affleck posing and some big effect for people who like to see big things go bang. It's hard to care about any of it, and the attack itself seems like a rather optimistic account anyway. Lots of retaliation happens that didn't, lots of guns are toted and lots of "Take that, varmint!" sort of lines are spouted. It's garbage. Incidentally, the most expensive garbage in many, many years.

Thank God a lot of people noticed and this nonsense flopped at the box office. Please Hollywood, leave war movies to those who can traverse a 12 rating. 2/10

[Hannibal21]

I don't think the film was bad as people said. I give it a 7/10 because (a). I loved the 45 minute action sequence (b). The love triangle between Josh hartnett, Ben Affleck and Kate Beckinsale were clever (c) The supporting cast were superb, especially Jon Voight, making a good comeback. Overall, I was satisfied, I enjoyed the visual fx and the story and that's that. Though I did have some problems with the pacing.

Now for the major con. I wasn't very impressed with the work of the three main actors in the film. Josh Hartnett and Kate Beckinsale are wooden actors in my opinion, they didn't do much for me in this film, even though I liked the love story. But the real person who got me to lower this film down to a 7 was Ben Affleck. This man is just SO boring to watch and he always acts so ignorantly in every one of his films. I hate that man with every bone in my body.

[Grim H.]

Yet another historical movie ruined by a false romantic plot.
I think I saw something like this the first time, when it was called Titanic. Only this time, it's a love triangle.
Boy meets girl
-insert historical tragedy here-
The end.

That pretty much sums up this whole movie.

4/10.:mad: