Flags of Our Fathers

Plot synopsis:
There were five Marines and one Navy Corpsman photographed raising the U.S. flag on Mt. Suribachi by Joe Rosenthal on February 23, 1945. "Flags of Our Fathers" is the story of three of the six surviving servicemen, John "Doc" Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), Pvt. Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford), and Pvt. Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), who fought in the battle to take Iwo Jima. The picture became one of the most famous images of the U.S. winning a battle during WWII. However, the battle for Iwo Jima raged on for another month with three of the marines being killed in action. The other three servicemen were taken out of battle and flown back to the states. The photo made these men heroes, and the government used these new heroes to promote the selling of war bonds on the War Bond Tour. The three men did not believe they were heroes, even though the American public did. Douglas Young (the-movie-guy)

Tags: violence, murder, flashback

Review:
I've always felt that when you fictionalize a story about war, you dishonor the memory of so many people who have a compelling story to tell by choosing to make something up instead *cough*privateryan*cough*.The problem with war movies about real people is that you have to deal with complexities of character and plot that the genre simply doesn't lend itself easily to.So when the story at hand aims to pose questions like "what does it mean to do the wrong things for the right reasons" and tries to debunk the popular myth of herodom, there's very little margin for error.Enter Clint Eastwood.
The film tells three stories: first it is the WW II battle of Iwo Jima where thousands of soldiers (Japanese and American) died 'conquering' that island.
"Flags of Our Fathers" is the story of three of the six surviving servicemen, John "Doc" Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), Pvt. Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford), and Pvt. Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), who fought in the battle to take Iwo Jima.
What do you get when you cross an Academy Award winning director whose movies tend to follow the lives of individuals and their consequences of the violence around them, an award winning writer that deals with racism and the map of the human spirit and a producer that has a penchant for World War II history who is a master of telling epic stories on the widescreen canvas?
Well, you get Clint Eastwood, Paul Haggis and Steven Spielberg who have teamed up for the first time to bring to the screen the new WWII story of the six soldiers who raised the American flag at Iwo Jima and became media heroes in the new film Flags of our Fathers.Based on the true (and relatively unknown) story of six regular soldiers that raised the flag atop the isle of Iwo Jima and whose picture of the effort became synonymous with an impending victory of the war, Flags of our Fathers will be one of the most talked about films of 2006.Flags of our Fathers follows the lives of three surviving members who raised the flag in 1945 atop Mount Suribachi and how the government used these three individuals and the media in an effort to spark interest in selling war bonds to the American public.Ryan Phillippe, Jesse Bradford and Adam Beach play John "Doc" Bradley, Rene Gagnon and Ira Hayes respectively.
In a time where America is fighting two separate wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with veterans of Vietnam still being paraded on CNN every evening news to discuss comparisons, Flags of our Fathers is important in that it shows how a single picture or event can change an entire opinion over an effort that will cost young men and women their lives.But where Eastwood fails is in his attempt to drum up any emotional attachment to the three characters.
Haggis does his Crash best to have us 'tisk' at the consistent barrage of racial epithets thrown towards Indian descent Ira Hayes, but Eastwood fails to weave this sympathy and the sympathy for those left behind on the beach into an emotional punch that will carry us to the voting polls in the awards season.The biggest disappointment with Flags of our Fathers comes with the expectation that the three major players in the production bring to the table.
Instead, we deal with waving veterans, moments of tenderness between the soldiers and the families of the dead they fought beside and the emotional burden of the horrors that surrounded them in combat without any tear tugging or tissue pulling on behalf of the experiencing movie watcher.Flags of our Fathers was shot back-to-back with Letters from Iwo Jima which will shows the Japanese perspective of the battle and is scheduled for release in February 2007.
He had no idea what he had just done.That one picture is said to be the most reproduced picture in the history of photography.I toured Iwo Jima in 2000 with my father, a private in the 5th Marine Division, who, along with the flag raisers, landed on Iwo Jima on February 19, 1945 -- the opening day of what would be the costliest battle in the history of the U.S. Marine Corps.I can't say enough good things about the realism of Clint Eastwood's "Flags of our Fathers." Visually, the movie made me think that I was back on Iwo Jima, and emotionally, I felt like I was witnessing what I had been told by Iwo survivors and what I had read in Richard E.
Overton's "God Isn't Here: A Young American's Entry into World War II and His Participation in the Battle for Iwo Jima." James Bradley's book "Flags of our Fathers," is wonderful, and this movie of the same name is very faithful to his book.But, the editing of the movie takes the viewer through so many flash-backs and flash-forwards that it's hard to keep things straight -- even if you have read the book!The movie opens with Harve Presnel (I think it was Harve) playing the role of what I thought was a narrator.
I was expecting some corny things in the movie, like seeing the flag raising picture taking up the full screen in the theater while the Marine Corps Hymn played.
like it was Howlin' Mad Smith who was demanding, and not getting, additional bombardment of the island; like it was Secretary of the Navy, James Forrestal, who told Howlin' Mad Smith that "...the raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years." These events were in the movie, but the characters were neither introduced by name in the movie, nor were they described by "the narrator," who seemed to come and go at odd times.Ira Hayes is a tragic character.
I was not expecting the film makers to exaggerate certain scenes to make it more interesting or to make up stuff up that would add gore to the movie, but Flags was just as boring as the Da Vinci code at times.Then we have the trio who gets back to the states as heroes.
This movie is a set of flash-backs to the battle at Iwo Jima by the men who raised the US flag on the island and whose sacrifice was captured as one of the most famous and enduring photographs of the war.
The whole movie seems focused on the fact that the people captured in the photograph were not the first people to raise the flag, and this somehow makes what happened in Iwo Jima a great deception.
And the times I found myself even remotely interested in what was happening, the scenes looked like something right out of "Saving Private Ryan" (seriously, watch the beach landing and tell me you were shocked that Tom Hanks didn't come running out).
Haggis, Eastwood and Spielberg team up to tell a less known but poignant story about 6 soldiers who were the second flag-raisers of Iwo Jima and how an event that does not seem so significant is captured on photo and becomes one of the most crucial events in America during WWII.
Spectacular production design by Henry Bumstead in his last film , he worked for Alfred Hitchcock and Eastwood's habitual.Adding more details along with the largely described on the movie, the deeds happened of the following way: Iwo Jima battle was a hard-fought US operation, but like the navy, the Us army fought its way from island to island in the Pacific and was one of the most difficult campaign of the Pacific theater.
Especially as the same scenes (again) are re-used.I don't know how many times it's reiterated in this movie: "I never wanted to be a hero", but it's said as many times as many of the same shots are re-used.Clint Eastwood must think little of his audience, since he needs to repeat things so many times over.
Those looking for recreated battle scenes will probably not be disappointed with the level of detail shown in Flags, like the weapons, and the infamous use of flamethrowers to smoke out hidden troops in bunkers.But this movie is not an all out action film.
Not many can do that.Flags of Our Fathers is a must watch, and I'm already eagerly anticipating the companion movie, with viewpoints from the Japanese, fighting the same war, in Letters From Iwo Jima, and it should be equally powerful..
Shockingly Bad. It shouldn't be hard to create a good war movie about an epic battle to take a mountain like the mount on Iwo Jima.
Instead, Eastwood gives us a dull movie centered on nothing and with almost no drama.Hamburger Hill was a movie based around a difficult battle regarding a hill in the Vietnam war and gave viewers an entertaining and engaging film but Flags of Our Fathers was so awful that Hamburger Hill looks like one of the greatest war films ever made in comparison.This is not a movie - it is a collage of disjointed, non-linear, whoopy-doo scenes punctuated by redundant, maudlin moments and overwhelming PC preaching.
Ultimately, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS is not about the war proceedings itself, but how the war affected the men who fought in it themselves, and how they refused to be seen as heroes.It's hard to dislike any of Clint Eastwood's films and with this one, and the follow-up LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA, he made two films of epic proportions, that will undoubtedly compete for the Oscars.
Clint Eastwood does a masterful job in capturing the immensity of the battle of Iwo Jima with the human drama of the six men who were thrust into immortality by the simple act of raising the American flag on the island.
I have to say that this film was eastwoods better works of history.The ability to bring out the real feelings in people about how we view the human race in general.I enjoyed this film for the simple reason that WWII was a turning point in how we see each other.How to come together in the highest need to overcome obstacles in the darkest hour.As the flag was raised and having a photographer just at that moment to take a picture of the flag being raised,coincidence flew out the door.But the film goes further as we see each one remembering the pain it created,from a simple misunderstanding about who gets what flag and why.If anything the flag should have went to the soldiers who fought there at iwogima.But like the narrations pointed out,it was a forgotten past and the hero's also forgotten.It's sad to think that the human race no longer sees why war is not necessary,just as long as money is made in the name of war is what it's all about.They were right though,without the money it would have been lost to the Japanese at least that part of the world.But in reality it would still be Japanese soil.This film impacted on all sorts of levels,financial gain through war,the soldiers dying because of money being made,artillery paid for by millions of people,and the suffering going home without so much as a thank you for keeping the world safe.In reality the soldiers who fought and died i would like to call real hero's.No matter what flag was planted,and why today most of the yesteryear men and women are nearly gone.I have to say this film gave me a bit more understanding why war is becoming a thing of the past.We don't need it and don't want it,flag or not we need this world safe and i think Mr. Eastwood gave us a good vision of it becoming a reality.So go ahead make his day..
Nothing this ugly can be worth watching - even if the musical score had been other than thin and banal (it isn't), if the story had been about anything (it isn't), if there'd been a single moment or idea or exchange that had been well conceived or energetic (there isn't), the colours alone ought to be enough to make any self-respecting critic or audience member to say: "Sorry, I'm not interested." The fact that this film had an audience is a sad comment on audiences.To make my point, Eastwood's companion piece, Letters from Iwo Jima, is in principle a much better film: it isn't a kind of dour flag-waving exercise (people, this film is about a flag!
After tackling issues of human guilt in "Mystic River" and delivering a poignant tale with "Million Dollar Baby", Clint Eastwood decides to revisit history and helm "Flags of Our Fathers," the guy's cinematic translation of the Battle of Iwo Jima and the famous "Raising the Flag" photograph by Joe Rosenthal.
The Iwo Jima Photo Op. Very few films have impressed me lately as much as Flags of Our Fathers about the real story concerning the famous photograph of the flag raising at Iwo Jima.Iwo Jima was the bloodiest battle of the Pacific war with Japan.
The "heroes" in the photograph felt far from heroic.Clint Eastwood juxtaposes memories of the preparation leading up to and in addition to the actual events at the Battle of Iwo Jima with ceremony after ceremony of War Bond fund-raising and the different effects it had on each man.
The most gruesome scene, though, was left to the imagination.This was the first depiction of the Battle of Iwo Jima I've seen that attempts to divulge the mostly unknown faces of the men made famous by a photograph and the problems they faced at home.It was also one of the only movies I've seen where all (save 1) of the audience stayed for all of the credits and when the credits ended, there was a long, silent moment shared by all.In summary: Powerful.I'm looking forward to Eastwood's "Letters from Iwo Jima" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0498380/).
I like war movies, generally speaking, and this one is a disappointing dud.Wrong: The movie argues that the US was just about to give up in WWII when the picture of the second flag raising on Iwo Jima was published.
I was pleasantly surprised, Clint has managed to do a great job of retaining directorial integrity and Paul Haggis has managed to make the script reflect the fact that real heroes do not really accept that there is such a thing as a hero.The film is beautifully shot; using the actual island of Iwo Jima as well as the volcanic backdrop of Iceland makes the battlefield seem of another world, particularly when contrasted with the stadiums that our heroes go on to tour.
"Flags of our of Fathers" follows the amazing account of how the publics perception of war is manipulated by pictures(like the famous one the film examines) by showing us the actual event and that it was actually the 2nd flag erected on Iwo Jima in the beginning of the third act.
However, the traumatized trio has difficulties to deal with the image build by their superiors, sharing the heroism with their mates."Flag of Our Fathers" is a reasonable movie of war, entwining battle scenes with the personal drama of three privates that raised the American flag on the top of the Mount Suribachi, becoming one of the most famous picture of World War II.
Flags of Our Fathers showed what we are still living with to this day, with the war in Iraq, we are very quick to call every soldier a hero, but sort of like Ira said in the movie "I was just dodging bullets", I don't think we could ever understand what these men went through and what it must have been like coming home to everyone applauding them when they just lost their brother or best friend, then being forgot after a while.
Or the Sands of Iwo Jima.If you want a brilliantly told movie about image-making, hero-making, the effects of war on the human spirit and the price of man's inhumanity toward man, I cannot recommend 'Flags of Our Fathers' highly enough..
Whoever said "Truth is often the first casualty of war" must have had "Flags of Our Fathers" in mind, the powerful new film from director Clint Eastwood that vividly juxtaposes the reality of the battlefield with the fantasy of the home front.The movie tells the behind-the-scenes story of the picture-seen-round-the-world, the one showing the Marines raising the American flag triumphantly on Iwo Jima.
Clint Eastwood has fashioned a practically perfect film adaptation of James Bradley's and Ron Powers's best-selling book, "Flags of Our Fathers." Echoing the best epic moments from "The Longest Day," "Saving Private Ryan," and "Apocalypse Now," Eastwood avoids the flaws of those previous war films in his superb retelling of the story of "Doc" Bradley and two other soldiers who raised the American flag on Iwo Jima.
The story then continues to follow their lives after the war.Clint Eastwood did a great job of capturing the intense battle of Iwo Jima.
Interesting story of those service men during World War 11 who hoisted the American flag at Iwo Jima.Trouble is that some who deserved credit for this fete got it, while the opposite was true of others.The greater part of the film is the War Bond Tour that our alleged heroes made.There is a terrific supporting performance by Adam Beach.
The film is about the people in the photograph of the soldiers raising the American flag on Iwo Jima.
The rest of the flag raisers are dead but these three have been shipped back home to raise the morale of the American people and to above all, help sell war bonds.I feel that Eastwood has found a good balance between the different stories, by having just enough of each but not making either one very prominent (the third storyline, the one of one of the soldiers telling about his war days, is left quite in the background).
The movie summarizes the stories of the six men who were photographed raising the American flag over Iwo Jima near the end of WWII.