Not a Critical Masterpiece, But....

Rating: Null/10 (26 May 2001)

I have just returned from seeing Pearl Harbor, and as an 'indie' filmmaker, I feel that I am qualified to critique this film from a director's point of view. The film critics who have bashed this movie are way over the top with their criticisms. Yes, Randall Wallace's script has more romantic cliches than a Doris Day film festival; and yes, the love story took away from what should have been more focus on Japanese preparation before the actual sneak attack; and yes, the film could have been cut down to two hours and fifteen minutes and still have been very good; but I was not offended by the sometimes dumb dialogue. The corny lines were not as numerous as I had expected. Making a film like Pearl Harbor in the manner that Michael Bay did can take the life and breath out of anyone who is a director. I am sure he had plenty of help. For that reason, I was very impressed by the look of the film. From a cinemagraphic point of view, it was beautiful. The battle scenes were first-rate. For the men and women who actually went through the attack on Pearl Harbor, I applaud them for their courage of enduring that horror. I was very impressed with the special effects. I look for flaws in CGI's and could hardly find any.
Two actors in the film who went unheralded during the pre-movie hype should be commended for their superb performances. Jon Voight played FDR so well, it was scary. His short screen time made a huge impact. The very reliable Mako, a veteran actor, did a great job as the 'hard-as-steel' Admiral Yamamoto. Though Ben Affleck and Josh Harnett gave satisfactory performances, if they had more realistic lines to say during the love triangle scenes, their performances would have been more credible. I understand why Randall Wallace wanted the Cuba Gooding, Jr. character in the film, but it easily could have been taken out, and it would have not affected the story. For that matter, the love story could have been taken out and replaced by the real story of sailors trapped in a ship underwater for weeks after the attack, perishing around Christmas. That would have made the movie more credible, then it might be worthy of an Oscar nomination for Best Picture at the 2002 Academy Awards. As it is, it will clean up the technical awards come Oscar time.
Pearl Harbor is a film that accomplishes one thing - it entertains. Could it have been better? Sure. But most people do not have a clue the amount of heart and soul that goes into making a Hollywood epic. Despite the script, the man power and creativity by the people who are 'above-the-line' makes this movie worth seeing. I guarantee you, no matter what your opinion of this film is or will be, Pearl Harbor will not be forgotten for a long time to come.