No, it isn't "anti-war hippie crap" -- read the eyewitness accounts!

Rating: 10/10 (12 February 1999)

I have in front of me (with other books) the Official History of the United States Army in World War II -- The War in the Pacific, the volume entitled Guadalcanal: the First Offensive, by John Miller, jr, put out by the Historical Division, Dept. of the Army, Washington DC, 1949.
What we saw on screen could come right out of it.
Although it is occasionally dry with understatement ("As the troops moved up the grassy, open slopes of Hill 31 they were halted by heavy machine-gun fire from well-concealed positions..." and "the batallion, temporarily without a leader, was partly disorganized and, in the words of one observer, its operations were 'obscure' ") it is well and clearly-written, and can hardly be dismissed as "hippie crap".
(Just think, carefully, about that oft-repeated phrase, "Pinned down by heavy machine-gun fire" and what it really means.)
The December-through-January '42 assault on Mount Austen is what is being depicted
It is also well illustrated, with actual photos as well as maps -- and I defy anyone, now, to point to anything in TRL that cannot be verified from the actual, contemporary, first hand accounts.
(The Japanese soldiers called it "Starvation Island" -- guess why?)
EVERYBODY screwed up repeatedly -- both land and sea commands. Perhaps 10% of the Marines had ever seen combat, starting in in August 42, and NOT ONE of the infantry relief units, like the regiment in the movie, had EVER BEEN BLOODED.
Time and again they were almost routed, beaten down past all belief, demoralized by lack of home-front support -- but they stood their ground.
It was a disorganized mess on both sides, with minimal real experience of jungle combat, or any combat, on the part of officers and unlisted men. "A learning experience" for the rest of the Pacific War on both sides.
From the unopposed landings to the terror of air-raids, to the wierd unrecognized planes on Henderson field, to the inexperience of officers and men alike, to the utter disorganization that characterized all of the Guadalcanal campaign, to the gross inadequacies of anything approaching accurate field intelligence, to the terrible omnipresence of the Jungle, to the starving and demoralized Japanese (by the December assault on the foothills of Mt. Austen, which is what is shown in TRL, one group of Japanese soldiers discussed surrender but gave up because most of them were too sick and starved to walk), to the mud- bugs- alligators- rains- snakes- rivers- &-kunai grass, to the gross incompetence of some commanders (some, but not all, REMFs) as contrasted with the superb leadership demonstrated by other officers with equal lack of combat experience, to the final withdrawals of troops in mouldering rags, bone-weary, bone-sick with tropical diseases, and haunted by their first blooding as they know they go to do the same elsewhere -- it's all there--but it was worse.
Those who think it just HAS to be inaccurate -- what preconceived notions of Guadalcanal are you basing it on? Sands of Iwo Jima? Other WWII movies? The assumption that if it was THAT BAD, we couldn't have won?
Guess what -- the Civil War started like that too.
Read some first hand source materials, before you start talking.