Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eastwood attacks Japan war myths
The Observer (U.K.) ^ | 05/28/06 | Justin McCurry

Posted on 05/27/2006 7:18:26 PM PDT by Pokey78

Two new movies based on a bloody 1945 battle are stirring up memories and forcing both sides to re-examine their history


More than 60 years after it became one of the bloodiest battlefields of the Second World War, Iwo Jima's tragic history retains the power to overwhelm. As his plane prepared to land on the isolated Japanese island last month, the actor Ken Watanabe found he could not hold back the tears. Accompanying Watanabe, who shot to stardom playing a feudal warlord opposite Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai, was another hard man of Hollywood whose time on Iwo Jima would lead to something of a professional epiphany.

When Clint Eastwood's two films about Iwo Jima, one of the darkest periods of the Pacific War, reach cinemas this year, audiences could be excused for forgetting the man behind them was once the trigger-happy Dirty Harry.

The 75-year-old director has promised Flags Of Our Fathers and Red Sun, Black Sand will attempt to show for the first time the suffering of both sides during 36 days of fighting in early 1945 that turned the island into a flattened wasteland.

(Excerpt) Read more at observer.guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Japan; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: fivemarinesonesailor; flagraising; flagsofourfathers; iwojima; marinecorps; marines; mtsuribachi; redsunblacksand; threeflagraisers; usmc; wwii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-336 next last
To: Romanov
I've read some other articles about the film depicting the Japanese as showing very accurately the cruelity and degrading treatment the soldiers endured. I don't see anything wrong with showing what it was like for the Japanese as long as it doesn't try to rewrite Japan's history vis-a-vis WWII in a favorable light.

This is what I was going to say but I'm glad someone beat me too it. Until the movie comes out for at least the final product is reviewed, there is no way to know what it will be about.

World War II is my area of study as I work to complete my Masters. I don't oppose a movie showing the battle from the Japanese perspective so as long as it is historically accurate and does not attempt to make the Japanese out to the good guys or victims of the evil Americans.

21 posted on 05/27/2006 7:32:41 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (This Space For Rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

The problem is that when you're dealing with people who accept the fact that their lives are meaningless; when you're dealing with a totalitarian mind that sees the opponent as not worth living if he surrenders and who has a racist perception; when this enemy sees his leadership as Godly; when this person grows up in a society that does not have a lot of room for individualism- Well, it'll be curious how Clint try's to give this enemy a "human" twist. But I guess in revisionist and relativistic Hollywood it can all be possible.

A good book to read: Behind Japanese Lines by Ray Hunt.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0813109868/102-7870769-1122514?v=glance&n=283155 Of course this will not be the story that Clint tells. But it gives a little insight as to how the Japanese operated.


22 posted on 05/27/2006 7:33:12 PM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Romanov

If Germany or Japan want to produce movies that explain what their men went through, I have no problem with it. It comes from their perspective and is appropriate, even if somewhat off the mark by my standards.

We lost 6000 plus men on Iwo Jima. It was a hell hole. They were slaughtered by an enemy that was intent on imperialization. Those troops were raised to sacrifice themselves for the Emperor, someone they believed to be a god on earth.

Our men were there for no other reason than to stop them. If the Japanese hadn't set out on a plan to capture land and rule over it, our men wouldn't have had to die.

It really tweaks me to have someone explain how tough the Japanese had it. Imagine sitting in a foxhole getting your ass shot at, and having to expose yourself to enemy fire. Then realize that some puddin' headed nin-compoop is going to tell how tough those guys had it, that are shooting your comrads and may blow you to hell any second.

This is a disgrace, IMO.

Thanks for serving men. Oh by the way, do you mind if I humanize those who were raping and pilaging and taking your friend's lives?


23 posted on 05/27/2006 7:33:14 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: Petronski

[>snip<

"It's not about winning or losing, but mostly about the interrupted lives of young people. These men deserve to be seen, and heard from."~ eastwood

>snip<]

It would be good if those who wish to destroy America get 'it'.

Most Americans get 'it', to the point where we are unwilling to fight a war 'unfairly'.

Even though we have trillions of dollars worth of war supply, we refuse to just eliminate our enemies. Instead, we hold ourselves back even sacrificing our best young men and women so as not to offend the sensibilities of our enemies.

And so our gallent, innocent young people's lives are destroyed because some 3rd world idiots haven't figured out that war is a lose lose game.

If only they would quit attacking us, we would not have to defend ourselves. Until they stop attacking us we must kill them before they kill us.


25 posted on 05/27/2006 7:34:47 PM PDT by beaelysium (Paradise is always where love dwells.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
I hate to see people suffer on both sides. Usually the common soldier does the most of it. I am damn glad I wasn't in the infantry. But in a war, there is right and wrong and as far as I am concerned, we have always been right. I strongly believe it is immoral to kill innocent women and children, but it is less moral to let the enemy kill yours instead of us killing theirs.
26 posted on 05/27/2006 7:34:50 PM PDT by U S Army EOD (LINCOLN COUNTY RED DEVILS STATE CHAMPIONS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COEXERJ145
Ugh, I need to proof read better.

"Until the movie comes out or at least the final product is reviewed..."

27 posted on 05/27/2006 7:35:23 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (This Space For Rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

"This is a disgrace, IMO. "

He knows the formula required to make a box office hit and is applying it. Truth is a fatality in that process.


28 posted on 05/27/2006 7:35:26 PM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Americans are not allowed to compete. They cannot 'win' under any circumstances in the coming global society. American exceptionalism must be reduced to the ordinary, in the minds of the internationalists, who appear to have a firm hold on our government and our society. Otherwise the other ordinary countries will complain.
29 posted on 05/27/2006 7:37:36 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Arpege92

U.S. prisoners of war held by the Empire of Japan, 1941-1945 died at a rate exceeding 37% while in captivity. On the other hand, U.S. prisoners of war held captive by Nazi Germany died at a rate of less than 2% while held by the Germans. (Based on figures from Center For Internee Rights).
Japan's war prisoner guards were largely Japanese, however, Formosan (Taiwanese) and Korean guards were also integrated into the guard forces.

Escapes were rare. Unlike the situation in Europe, the mostly Caucasian Allied prisoners could not mingle among Asians without instant recognition. Furthermore, the local Asian populations were subjected to severe reprisals from the Japanese when helping Allied POW. There was at least one notable successful rescue attempt, at Cabanatuan in the Philippines late in the war [ Daws, p. 324.] Surviving U.S. prisoners-of-war almost to a man consider the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan as a successful rescue. Tokyo had issued orders to kill all prisoners-of-war by 1945 [ Daws, p. 324-325.].

All U.S. and Allied POW were subjected to slave labor, cruel and unusual punishments and medical experiments [ see Unit 731 ]. Many of the Japanese war crimes afflicted upon Allied POW were brushed aside by Japan and Allied governments following World War II during the headlong rush to stop Soviet expansion in Asia.

In 1997, former POW and civilian internees continued seeking redress from Japan for the war crimes. The U.S. State Department issued a watch list for Japanese war criminals. In the U.S., The Center For Internee Rights is leading the fight.

http://vikingphoenix.com/public/rongstad/military/pow/pwcmps-2.htm


30 posted on 05/27/2006 7:38:52 PM PDT by beaelysium (Paradise is always where love dwells.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

"The 30-day battle for Manila had begun.

The devastation that followed was not on the scale of the Rape of Nanking in China. But at least 50,000 Filipinos died, many in acts of deliberate atrocity by the Japanese.

Of the 20 million people living in the Philippines at the start of the war, an estimated 1 million were killed during the Japanese occupation. "

http://www.iht.com/articles/1995/02/03/edwarn.php


31 posted on 05/27/2006 7:39:18 PM PDT by atomicpossum (Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All


32 posted on 05/27/2006 7:40:13 PM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"Controversial"? What's Controoversial about it?

The controversy is about the photo. The famous photo is a reenactment of the actual event.

33 posted on 05/27/2006 7:40:51 PM PDT by SunTzuWu (Hans Delbruck - Scientist and Saint.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Red6

We shall see. It's a movie I won't be trotting out to see, but I won't be surprised if many others do.

I like Hedgetrimmer's comments in 29.


34 posted on 05/27/2006 7:42:05 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: atomicpossum
"The Japanese were every bit as genocidal as the Nazis, and were even more brutal and inhuman on the battlefield."

Very true. One of the major differences was that during the war trails, most German officials took responsibility for their actions and were executed. Most of the Japanese denied their involvement. If memory serves me correctly, Tojo was the only one executed. A lot of Japanese accused of war crimes became millionaires in the 1950s and 1960s.

But, because the Japanese are not Caucasian and the Germans are, revisionist history is permissible in the Pacific.
35 posted on 05/27/2006 7:42:19 PM PDT by BW2221
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

I think you make a pretty decent point there.


36 posted on 05/27/2006 7:42:26 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Hey Senators, what have you done with those Conservatives we sent to Congress? (CyberAnt Inspired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78

I doubt Clint will mention in his movie that what caused most of the Japanese dead in Iwo Jima was their culture of death (not that different from today's muslims) which preferred death to being captured. The crime against humanity that they committed was convincing the local Japanese civilian population that if they were captured by Americans they were going to be tortured, raped, and killed. Thousands of them committed suicide instead. Shame on Clint.


37 posted on 05/27/2006 7:44:24 PM PDT by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

You're missing the point. Nobody is expecting you to sympathize with the Japanese. But, you do actually shed light on the type of evil vile regime the Japanese were - to even their own people. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Eastwood showing that (if he shows it). It's a perfect opportunity to educate people what dictatorial regimes can force their own people to do. Better to know that history - lessens the chances of repeating it.

I served for 23 years and I don't have a problem with the movie as I understand it. Now, if it was a movie that was reducing the impact our brave men had on the world, I'd have a different point of view.


38 posted on 05/27/2006 7:44:44 PM PDT by Romanov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
"We were only fighting Japan because they attacked us."

A fact lost in the current situation.

39 posted on 05/27/2006 7:45:14 PM PDT by blackbart.223 (I live in Northern Nevada. Reid doesn't represent me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: blackbart.223

I suppose we should have been more "sympathetic" to their needs, after all Shintoism is such a "peaceful" religion./sarcasm off


40 posted on 05/27/2006 7:46:28 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 321-336 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson