'Letters from Iwo Jima' dvd (spoilers)

I watched 'Letters' today with the usual suspension of disbelief
that I give to all movies and books when I start watching or
reading them, and that suspension of disbelief lasted for a
good while. The movie was very well made, as expected,
and the characters were appealing, whether realistic or not.

There was a bit of a thrill too, in seeing the other movie,
'Flags of Our Fathers', turned inside out, so to speak. It would
be nice if more movies were made in pairs this way, showing
alternate visions of the same thing. One of my favorite plays
is 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead', by Tom Stoppard,
that presents 'Hamlet' from the viewpoint of the two minor
characters, and plays straight all of the Shakespeare scenes
that they are in. A great concept.

(Yes, there is a big 'but' coming.)

I could have gone along with this to the end, having given in and
rented it, seeing the Japanese presented as human, and not so
bad after all, and trying to look away from the killing of Americans
that had to be shown too. Some really bad Japanese mistreated
their own, and that tended to lend some credible balance to the
notion that there is some good everywhere, even in a brutal enemy.

But, three things ruined it for me: First, the one event that 'Flags'
and 'Letters' had in common, the killing of the American who got
trapped in a cave ('Iggy' in the other movie) was presented as a
nearly understandable expression of rage: "you're killing us, burning
us ...". It was shown as a violent killing, but that's all. In
'Flags',
it was shown after the fact as an atrocity reflected in the face of
his friend, who saw the results. In the book that 'Flags' was based
on, the atrocity was more graphically presented. Watering down
the event was dishonest, in my opinion, and disrespectful to the
many thousands of victims of Japanese atrocities.

Second, though Americans were shown close-up in only a handful
of scenes, one of these scenes was of Americans committing the
most heinous act in the movie, the cold murder of a surrendered
and held prisoner, holding a white cloth in front of him, begging for
mercy. This scene didn't affect my view of Americans because I know
better, but for the millions of young people, and anti-Americans who
saw this movie not knowing better, nor expecting better, it was
unconscionable of Clint Eastwood, in my opinion. It is true, no
doubt, that a rare American individual might have done that, but when
only a few American acts are shown, and that is one of them, then
the image of Americans in World War II is badly and unjustifiably
damaged.

Third, near the end of the movie Americans are shown, in effect,
robbing the grave that the young Japanese has not yet had time
to dig, taking a sword and gun from the body of the youth's
admired commander, and thus sending him into a justifiable-
seeming rage against the callous Americans, who for a while
he had thought well of after the reading of an American's letter
from his mother, but had later been horibly disillusioned about
after seeing what had been done to his surrendered friend.

The movie might have worked on some level if its aim had been
only to show humanity in the Japanese, but to do it by explicitly
trashing the Americans was worse than anything I had expected.

On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:35:01 -0700, Calvin <crice5 DeleteThis @windstream.net>
wrote:

>I watched 'Letters' today with the usual suspension of disbelief
>that I give to all movies and books when I start watching or
>reading them, and that suspension of disbelief lasted for a
>good while. The movie was very well made, as expected,
>and the characters were appealing, whether realistic or not.
>
>There was a bit of a thrill too, in seeing the other movie,
>'Flags of Our Fathers', turned inside out, so to speak. It would
>be nice if more movies were made in pairs this way, showing
>alternate visions of the same thing. One of my favorite plays
>is 'Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead', by Tom Stoppard,
>that presents 'Hamlet' from the viewpoint of the two minor
>characters, and plays straight all of the Shakespeare scenes
>that they are in. A great concept.
>
>(Yes, there is a big 'but' coming.)
>
>I could have gone along with this to the end, having given in and
>rented it, seeing the Japanese presented as human, and not so
>bad after all, and trying to look away from the killing of Americans
>that had to be shown too. Some really bad Japanese mistreated
>their own, and that tended to lend some credible balance to the
>notion that there is some good everywhere, even in a brutal enemy.
>
>But, three things ruined it for me: First, the one event that 'Flags'
>and 'Letters' had in common, the killing of the American who got
>trapped in a cave ('Iggy' in the other movie) was presented as a
>nearly understandable expression of rage: "you're killing us, burning
>us ...". It was shown as a violent killing, but that's all. In
>'Flags',
>it was shown after the fact as an atrocity reflected in the face of
>his friend, who saw the results. In the book that 'Flags' was based
>on, the atrocity was more graphically presented. Watering down
>the event was dishonest, in my opinion, and disrespectful to the
>many thousands of victims of Japanese atrocities.
>
>Second, though Americans were shown close-up in only a handful
>of scenes, one of these scenes was of Americans committing the
>most heinous act in the movie, the cold murder of a surrendered
>and held prisoner, holding a white cloth in front of him, begging for
>mercy. This scene didn't affect my view of Americans because I know
>better, but for the millions of young people, and anti-Americans who
>saw this movie not knowing better, nor expecting better, it was
>unconscionable of Clint Eastwood, in my opinion. It is true, no
>doubt, that a rare American individual might have done that, but when
>only a few American acts are shown, and that is one of them, then
>the image of Americans in World War II is badly and unjustifiably
>damaged.
>
>Third, near the end of the movie Americans are shown, in effect,
>robbing the grave that the young Japanese has not yet had time
>to dig,

He did bury his commander.
Thumper

>taking a sword and gun from the body of the youth's
>admired commander, and thus sending him into a justifiable-
>seeming rage against the callous Americans, who for a while
>he had thought well of after the reading of an American's letter
>from his mother, but had later been horibly disillusioned about
>after seeing what had been done to his surrendered friend.
>
>The movie might have worked on some level if its aim had been
>only to show humanity in the Japanese, but to do it by explicitly
>trashing the Americans was worse than anything I had expected.