|
|
INTRODUCTION
Recently I was dragged
to the cinema by a couple of friends to see PEARL HARBOR. I didn't expect
it to be an especially good film, and it wasn't. Let me explain what I
mean:
PRODUCTION
PEARL HARBOR is the most
expensive movie ever made with a budget of over $150 M, naturally the producers
didn't want to take any chances with the production. The big problem with
this film is that it's played too safe. The film is made with one purpose,
and one purpose alone, to get the money back, with a fat interest. How
did the producers accomplish that? Here are a few useful pointers:
* Keep the plot simple,
very simple.
* Put popular actors
in the leading roles.
* The run time should
be about 3 hrs. (If it's expensive, it's got to be long!)
* Put a lot of weight
on romance. (More than 50% of the people are women.)
* Sugar-sweet and sentimental.
(Speaks right to the hearts of many children and
Americans.)
* The special effects
must at least equal the best ever done before.
* Good must defeat evil.
(Americans are always good, just if you were unsure.)
If you follow these guidelines you will wind up with something that looks a lot like PEARL HARBOR. You will also wind up with a film that lacks artistic values whatsoever, in the case of PEARL HARBOR anyway. It's been done before with impressive box-office results. (INDEPENDENCE DAY and TITANIC both have a lot in common with this blockbuster.) PEARL HARBOR is directed by Michael Bay, I suspect that he received very strict instructions exactly what to do and what not to do.
Now we're ready to take
closer looks at some of the production guidelines:
CASTING
There isn't a whole lot
to say about the casting. Ben Affleck is a solid, money-in-the-bank choice
for leading man while Josh Hartnett is good as his closest friend. The
problem is Kate Beckinsale as Affleck's and Hartnett's love interest. She
was ok 7-8 years ago, but there is no chemistry between her and any of
the two leading men. Someone like Renée Zellweger would probably
fare a whole lot better. The rest of the cast are unimportant, the only
exception being Alec Baldwin who provides a lift during a short time towards
the end of the pic. All the characters in the film are very shallow. We
don't get to know, or feel for, anyone.
PLOT
The story is kept as
simple as possible, so that it can be understood by anyone. Most of the
time is spent on a very thin romance involving the three leads. The actual
war is presented with a few minutes of old news reel footage and some very
short and simplistic scenes from the Japanese military quarters and the
the American war intelligence. This was to be expected, even though I hoped,
considering the length of the movie, that we would get an in-depth presentation
of this historical event. The way I see it there are two big problems with
basing a film on the bombing of Pearl Harbor:
1) The story is well
known, so it will be difficult to surprise the audience. This problem has
been completely ignored. There are no surprises romance-wise, plot-wise
or otherwise-wise.
2) The Americans are
the ones who get there asses whipped at Pearl Harbor. This is unthinkable,
and must be avoided at all costs, even if it means re-writing history.
But what the heck, if you spend $ 150 M on a picture you should have the
right to do a little history re-writing! The result is an American air-strike
on military targets in Japan that cannot be read about in history books.
An alternate ending could jump ahead about four years in time, and see
Affleck and Hartnett as bomber pilots over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where
literally millions of civilians were killed. But that's bad business.
To see how the Japanese
were portrayed on film back in 1945, about the time USA bombed Hiroshima
and Nagasaki, see OBJECTIVE, BURMA! where Errol Flynn and his boys goes
monkey-hunting in the jungles. (Yes, the Japanese people were referred
to as monkeys, and the epilogue read "The story will not end until all
the evil forces of Japan are destroyed.")
ROMANCE
Affleck spends the night
before he goes to Britain to serve as a fighter pilot, with Beckinsale,
and the memory of her is what keeps him alive. This love-at-first-sight
romance does not ring true. There is very little chemistry between
them. This might have worked if more emphasy had been put on the time they
spent together before he goes to Britain. More chemistry is definetely
required between them, and it must be handled with great finesse by a director
who knows how. None of this is true for this film. A prime example of a
wartime romance that works beautifully is the 1940 version of WATERLOO
BRIDGE. Actually the kind of artificial sentimentality that takes up an
awful lot of time in this film almost gets on my nerves at its worst.
SETTINGS AND COMBAT SCENES
The settings and combat
scenes look perfect, it's as simple as that. A fortune has been spent on
making it look perfect and it does. Pearl Harbor looks just the way you'd
think it did. A large number of ships are there, and the fighter planes
look great, even in the combat scenes. The only problem I have with the
combat scenes is that while completely surprised by the Japs, Affleck wants
to fight back right away and hurries to his airplane and teaches the Japs
a few lessons. This is typical for this kind of movie, and I don't like
it. (Remember when Will Smith welcomed the aliens to USA in INDEPENDENCE
DAY?) In reality, anyone would be in a state of shock and panic under these
circumstances. And if you decided to take on the Japs there and then, it
would be in a desperate attempt to save your skin.
SUMMARY
This film ranks below
average. Everything in the whole film is predictable for us who have seen
films in this genre before. The film has a golden surface with nothing
below. To much time and energy is wasted on a romance that is thinner than
vacuum. The film is not good as a history lesson either, as the story is
partly fictional. Overall performances are ok, and special effects are
superb.
Rating: 
/Erik Stahlberg
Here are some of the comments I have received:
"I thought it was the best date movie cuz there is action and romance."
"I thought it was a very well made film with an exceptional cast. Ben Affleck, Alec Baldwin and the highly watchable Tom Sizemore, give very good performances. The special effects are fantastic and the action sequences are mindblowing. Also, it was produced by Jerry Bruckheimer and directed by Michal Bay, one of the best film making teams ever. Anyone who gave this film a bad rating has been listening to Barry Norman too much and should be shot along with him!"
"this site is wack! Pearl Harbor is the best movie ever made! You have bad taste in movies if you don't think this one's a winner. Pearl Harbor was not meant to be educational. U SUCK!!!"
