Rating: 
Summary: Not worth it.
Review: This movie is long, cliched, and boring. Since the other reviews covered everything else, I will focus on my pet peeve: the final moments of the attack sequence.Now, in the -ACTUAL- attack, two American fighters -did- manage to get off the ground...but they were outnumbered and outgunned...and lasted all of 5 minutes. Michael Bay dispenses with historical accuracy here in favor for some Top Gun-like sequences to appease the audience after subjecting them to 25 minutes of US people and property getting helplessly blown to bits. Of course, the "Maverick" and "Ice Man" of this film end up being Affleck and Hartnett's characters, as the pair make their better-trained enemies look like this was their first flight in an aircraft. The fact that the Zero was more maneuverable than the P-40 was causally overlooked here as well. I felt this movie was rather disrespectful toward those who died in the attack, merely because it seems to throw the attack on the backburner in favor of the trite love triangle.
Rating: 
Summary: C'mon this is all you could come up with?
Review: Coming from the director of The Rock and Armaggedon, I was expecting a bit more from this highly anticipated blockbuster. But he just didn't come through on this one. The 20 minute action scene was spectacular, and these days that is what the majority of what movie goers are looking for. But to any sophisticated movie goer, this was a lame attempt at portaying the bravery and heroism of one of America's darkest hours. I'm sorry but this "day that will live in infamy" wasn't about the soldiers tellin jokes and then crying when the attack happened, as Ben Affleck did. Now don't get me wrong, I like Affleck, but in this role he truly blew it. The love story was uninteresting and improbable, and most of all trivial, which did not contribute any to the serious atmosphere of the time. This movie was definitely a failure in my book, and the DVD's million extras did not contribute to the quality of the film or the likelyhood of me buying it.
Rating:
Summary: people who give this five stars either:
Review: (...)The film is an excruciating bore almost all the way. The action was well done but that's it. Is it so hard to write a decent romance story? (...) Dialogue was the worst ever heard in a professionally-made, big-studio film. Truly a bad, big-budget film that has unfortunately entered the TOP 50 HIGHEST GROSSING FILMS EVER list.
Rating: 
Summary: If you are American you may like it
Review: This film is not historically correct and too patriotic in my view, but has some nice special effects.
Rating:
Summary: No!
Review: Are there any clichés left which this film didn't make use of? In fact, in time it may be considered to be 'clicking over' to be so bad it's entertaining. But I won't give it any stars for that.
Rating:
Summary: A Film That Will Live in Infamy
Review: "Pearl Harbor" should've been one of the best movies of 2001. The historical significance, along with the intrique of the subject matter, should've been enough to put it over the top. Unfortunately, this poorly scripted misfire could only muster the dubious distinction of being yet another big budget bore. Not only is the historically inaccurate "Pearl Harbor" the year's biggest disappointment, it is also a downright slap in the face of those who fought and died on December 7, 1941. While the Japanese attack is stunningly re-created, nothing else about the film merits even minimal praise. The first 90 minutes have NOTHING to do with the global aggression laid out by Germany and Japan between 1938-41. Instead of building up to the attack with historical background, the filmmakers torment us with the schlockiest love story in recent memory. Boyhood buddies Josh Harnett and Ben Affleck grow up to be fighter pilots and inadvertantly fall in love with the same woman (Kate Beckinsdale). Affleck's character is then presumed dead. Sparks fly between Kate and Josh when, all of a sudden, Affleck mysteriously re-appears in Hawaii on Dec. 6, 1941. Yeah, right. Even more embarrassing than the hackneyed plot is the overly-dramatic dialogue which would be perfectly at home in a 12 year-old's diary. In fact, the casting (particularly Harnett) seems to be aimed directly at the teenybopper crowd. The whole affair, which reeks of Harlequin Romance, is completely out of place in a war movie. As if bad acting and poor dialogue weren't enough, "Pearl Harbor" is bogged down with innaccuracy. Most offensive is the unintentionally funny farewell scene between Beckinsdale and an England-bound Affleck. The music swells, Beckinsdale's tearful waves are captured in dramatic slow-motion as the camera pans to Affleck, who looks mighty mournful on a train departing a station in New York. Yes, that's right -- a train from New York to England! Ugh! But, that is the essence of "Pearl Harbor" which seeks only to clobber the audience with contrived emotion while tossing aside any semblance of reality. In effect, the greatest American tragedy of the 20th Century has been shamefully reduced to disposable entertainment. Those seeking a good love story surrounding the events of Pearl Harbor would be better served by the classic "From Here to Eternity". Those seeking a historical portrayal of Dec. 7, 1941 should check out "Tora, Tora, Tora". Unlike "Pearl Harbor", "Tora" accurately re-creates not only the Japanese bombardment, but also the events which led up to the attack.
Rating:
Summary: Not a history movie
Review: Sloppily executed and hilariously stupid love story...wrong type of Zeros flying over Pearl...boy, talk about paying attention to detail...Disney-how could you?
Rating:
Summary: Big disappointment
Review: I was interested to read other reviews of this movie as I found it the most disappointing movie I saw this year. The love story (stories?) did nothing to endear the main characters to you (if you could even believe that such events transpired) and the actual attack on Pearl Harbour was, sadly, only a small slice of the film. The action scenes were well constructed but it wasn't enough to save this movie. Also - I don't really think personal attacks on someone who writes a review is necessary. There is room for everyone's opinion on this page, & no one logs in to read your opinion on another reviewer, just on the movie, thanks.
Rating:
Summary: junk!
Review: I can't believe that it says 60th anniversary commemorative edition. How absolutely insulting. This is action film/sappy love story (...) and nothing more. It is not a war picture. If it were true that Michael Bay used the events to tell a love story, they would not have put that stupid line on the cover. I guess it doesn't matter if you get the facts right in a historical story, or have good dialog or character development. In Hollywood, it only matters that the actors look pretty.
Rating: 
Summary: A look into real history
Review: I saw this movie in the theater and it blew me away. Never have I enjoyed a movie that was based on history more than I have this one. I realize some parts are embellished but for the most part, this movie is so real. I never fully understood the impact of Pearl Harber before I watched this film. I would recommend it to anyone! It was even better than Titanic! Ben, Josh, and Kate did superb acting jobs in this film and deserve awards for their performances.
| 
