Rating: 
Summary: don`t see this film as histry lesson
Review: well, I went to see this movie without any expectation. result? dissapointing. First, they should have more focused on one theme, love story or histrical war film.And there are several scenes not really important,made the entire movie too long. If the film is good, 3 hours isn`t too long.See "Longest day", "Gone with the wind","Das Boot".But this movie was notgood enough as those movies....And,It seems like quite a few hollywood movies are showing "Patriotic" plot these days.For example, "Independence day". In that film President of the USA says "today is 4th of july, our indipendent day,and today we gonna make it as indipendent day of the human being" or something like that.It is so embrassing! And I hope some people don`t believe that "Pearl Harbor" shows much histrical fact. Lately in some Hollywood films,they do not show exact histrical fact.("Blaveheart","U-571".....) So if any of you want to know more about Pearl harbor,go to Library and read the books by yourself. Anyway, I give 5 stars for the Special effects in Attack scene, but other than that, this movie is just out of plot. Oh, by the way, in Germany and japan, they have cut the dialog in the end of the film."How America has survived and won the war" is altered.Disney was worryed to hurt the feeling of ...-countries??? Since "Titanic" earned 20% of entire profit in Japan, they altered that dialog and sell this movie as love story,so they can make more money.. By the way, I have heard the rumor,that M.Bay has already the idea of next project,and it is about HIROSHIMA. I really hope it is just a rumor! He couldn`t even make good histrical film about Pearl harbor(well,as the love story, this isn`t that bad) I don`t expect that he can make good film about Hiroshima. there are many good japanese films about Hiroshima. Anyway, I actually wanna give 1 and half stars for this film. As the love story,maybe 3. for SFX,5 stars, as the war movie,half star.
Rating: 
Summary: If "Pearl Harbor" Differs from your Expectations, then...
Review: ...Please, for the sake of mankind, don't consider a job as either A: a Palm reader, or B: a Fortune Teller. You'd fit in a Lot more as a film critic. If "Pearl Harbor" is Any Different than what you Expected...What on Earth were you Expecting? I, like Everyone I Know, walked out of the film with my Expectations Perfectly Matched. This 3-hour Titanic sized Triumph was Exactly how I Imagined it to be and I Positively Enjoyed Every Minute of It. The real Pearl Harbor may not have been an Easy target for the Japanese, it was Supposedly Very well guarded, it was a Long way away and it's Waters were too Shallow for their Torpedos, but the Film "Pearl Harbor" is an Easy target for today's Critics and Audiences who seem to Delight in Bringing down the Big boys. Those people who walk into these films with their Minds already Made up, they'll Try to bring it down, but "Pearl Harbor" is Unsinkable. Of course, like All films (except "Die Hard" and "The Big Lebowski"), "Pearl Harbor" has its Flaws, but they are quite minor and hopefully the DVD version of the film will fix them. Firstly, Cuba Gooding Jr's and Tom Sizemore's Characters have been Cut down to barely Nothing. They are two of the Least Developed Characters in the Film. The Scene on the boat that is supposed to show the relationship between Cuba's character and his Commander (played by Peter Firth) runs for about 15 seconds. If a Directors Cut isn't released, or there are no Deleted Scenes on the DVD, I'm going to be Much less Forgiving than I am now. Tom Sizemore's role is handled a little better; at least he wasn't billed as a Star like Cuba was. The Treatment of these 2 characters is the One and Only Reason for my 4 star instead of a 5 star rating. And now to the Performances. Ben Affleck is a Hero and he is Quite a Good Hero at that. He is basically a More Likeable, Less-Cocky version of his role in "Armageddon". Josh Hartnett plays Second Fiddle and he plays that fiddle well. Tom Sizemore and Cuba Gooding Jr are Terrific in their Limited scenes, more of these two would have resulted in Far better Critical and Commercial Success, as Everyone I have asked rates them as the two most Interesting Characters. Kate Beckinsale is also quite good, but like many Female Reviewers have Stated, How Hard is it to Act like you're in Love with Affleck and Hartnett. Dan Ackroyd and William Fichtner have virtually Cameo roles, but they make the Most of them, especially Ackroyd who plays it Deadly Serious. Overall, its Alec Baldwin and Jon Voight who Steal the film out from under the Young Cast. Alec gets your average Flag-Waving Dialogue and makes it Memorable, Jon gets Better than average Flag-Waving Dialogue and makes it Equally Memorable. Both Actors show that these Young fellas have a Lot to Learn if they want to be Remembered one day. Other performers worthy of a mention are Ewen Bremner (as the Stuttering British guy), Mako (as the Japanese Voice of Opposition) and Colm Feore (as an Admiral at Pearl). This film Is the Definitive Telling of the Tragedy. Like with "Titanic" there will Never be a Pearl Harbor film to Top this one, they just Can't do it. "Pearl Harbor" is a Real and Worthy Recreation for the Survivors of the Bombing and those who weren't so Lucky, while it also serves as Great Old-Fashioned Entertainment for Modern day Audiences, well, at least those of us who don't go to movies for the Sole Purpose of Picking on them.
Rating: 
Summary: i loved this movie!!!!!
Review: i thought this movie was truly awesome. it shows the bombing on pearl harbor from many different points, from the men who fought, to the women who helped, to the couples who were torn apart. i was reading some of the other reviews and i saw that a few people had said that some things were not truly factual. well, i didn't go to the movie theater to have a history lesson. i was there to see a movie, and i was truly impressed with what i did see. it was filled with romance, sadness, laughter, and truthfulness. i cried my eyes out at the end, and for about a week after i had seen this, certain scenes just would not leave my head. it was a truly gripping movie, and i request that you see it if you have not already.
Rating:
Summary: Awesome
Review: I think that the movie Pearl Harbor was a killa great movie.. I loved it.. I saw it twice, and might go back for more some time.. I am for surely buying the movie.. I think it had an awesome cast, and the directors did great.. It was my most favorite movie of all time.. To me it was worth it.. I think those people who diss the movie are wrong.. But hey it's their decision not mine.. I just think it was totally great..
Rating: 
Summary: Good idea, but falls seriously short
Review: War films have enjoyed a recent renaissance, but as with those which immediatly come to mind, the WAR was the main show in the film. This picture strays from that formula, and instead [is an] unconvincing love triangle involving lifelong buddies and a nurse on the prowl for a man. In fact, the nurses in general are portrayed as ..., party-girls, just looking for a soldier. You don't have to be a feminist to take offense to the portrayal of women in this film. The men also seemed more distracted with finding nurses as opposed to receiving training or worrying about the onslaught of war headed America's way. I think this film gives the general public as very antiquated and stereotyped "bad boy/girl" image of our service members in uniform--just looking for the next port, looking for the next friendly face. Being forced to sit through this film twice, I can easily say the most engaging moments do involve the war itself, which sadly, doesn't come quickly enough. The war scenes in Pearl Harbor are right up there with the best battle sequences from other films, and they are telling and stunning. The Japanese are portrayed very humanely, and are not made as stereotyped barbarians (if only the rest of the script had been this careful!). From the acting standpoint, John Voigt as President Roosevelt and Dan Akroyd as a Naval Captain working on decrypting the Japanese radio traffic are the ones to watch. However, you want to see more of them in the span of three hours, and instead you are given three very capable lead actors (Kate Beckinsdale, Josh Hartnett, and Ben Affleck) who have such bad material to work with, they can't convince you of anything, especially the ...love triangle in which they find themselves. Writer Randall Wallace's script needed major rewriting. Hans Zimmer's score was moving, and the music was great until that horrible song over the end credits (written by the normally great Diane Warren--what happened here??), and the visual effects were tops! Editing would have been better had the four editors cut out the three leads! HA! My advice: wake yourself up one and a half hours into this film. Close your eyes when Alec Baldwin comes on, unless of course, you want to see some laughable overacting. Only see this if you have no other option. Don't expect to learn much history from this historical film; read a book instead.
Rating:
Summary: Why not Pearl Harbor ??!!
Review: Well, i have guessed that many would say that this film is boring, not romantic, unbelievable .... etc. Maybe, everyone has different idea about the film and different expectation before watching it. For me,its cost - 150 million dollars attracted me. After watching it, then i realize that the film included romantic love and friendship apart from the war part. The story among the 3 actors touched me. Well, maybe some will think that the love in the film was not romantic as the " boyfriend" is always changing, but for me, the film successfully showed the reality -- real life never ask what we want. For Rafe, he saved his life becoz of Evelyn, but when he came back , everything changes.. it was hard for him to accept this reality; But for Evelyn and Danny, they thought that Rafe died, so they were not giulty together -- everyone has to live. And did u realize that in the story, both Rafe and Danny experienced the similar incident: Initially, Danny lost a best, really best friend, and after that he met one who he loves the most , but after that he have to leave his gf again(dead) , but for Rafe, initially he lost his gf, but at last he lost his best friend. Finally, he with love with the one he loves again. The mechanism among this 3 actors, that is one of the characteristic of this movie. Besides, i'm glad that in this movie , there was no prejudice for both countries. Japanese fought for survival, US fought for reputation .... After watching 3 times in the cinema, i thanked for the actor/actress and Micheal Bay for producing this movie, a historical movie that is not bored, but romantic and touching. Well , for those who expect the movie to be purely historical or praising soldiers .... i would encourage him/her to watch documentaries .......
Rating:
Summary: An ambitious assemblage of elements that don't quite gel
Review: I have to admit, I went to see the film "Pearl Harbor," directed by Michael Bay, partially out of a sense of obligation--after all, the film deals with an important era in history. While I enjoyed PH, the film's many flaws do detract from it overall. This film takes place during World War II, and includes a love story involving two Army pilots and a military nurse. As the title indicates, a major part of the film involves the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. PH seems to want to be a cross between "Titanic" and "Saving Private Ryan" (they of the big box office and multiple Oscar nominations). There's even a throw-away scene involving a big ocean cruise ship to further the "Titanic-wannabe" vibe. Unlike "Titanic," however, the love story and historic destruction elements in PH never seem to convincingly mesh. The film struck me as oddly disjointed. And whereas the scenes of death and violence in "Private Ryan" struck me as solemn and respectful to veterans, I was made uneasy by the corresponding scenes in PH. The attack on Pearl Harbor goes on endlessly, and is filmed with an exploitative, "ain't these explosions cool" feel. It reminded me of the film "Armageddon"--an excuse to show off the latest special effects and sound technology, rather than an attempt to use this technology to dig at deeper truths. This film includes portrayals of a number of real historical figures, such as U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt. And herein lies another problem. One of the film's minor characters is Navy Petty Officer Dorie Miller, an African-American who performed a great act of heroism during the attack on Pearl Harbor. I found it insulting that this man, who really deserves a movie all to himself, is squeezed into this film as a minor element that could be cut out without affecting the main love story plot. The film barely acknowledges the institutional racism that Miller and others had to deal with. Instead, the script treats him as the sort of black character who is meant to make naive white viewers feel better about America. The scenes involving the Japanese are shot with a stiff formality that makes the Japanese seem cold and alien. Of course, there are some good points to PH. The performances are very good. Josh Hartnett deserves to become a major star. The production design is excellent. And maybe the film will inspire some viewers to explore the real history of this era. Give "Pearl Harbor" a try.
Rating:
Summary: PEARL HARBOR ROCKS!
Review: THIS IS THE BEST MOVE THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN! I THINK THAT EVERYONE SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS MORE OF A LOVE STORY THAN A WAR MOVIE!
Rating: 
Summary: Pearl Harbor? No!
Review: Pearl Harbor, a movie which people thought would be the best of the best, turns out to be one of the worst moives I've seen. First of all, the first one hour had nothing to do with the movie. It was just a story between two spring chickens loving one..nurse. At the same time, on the Japanese side, when the gerneals were deciding what was the best way to attack, you could see kids with kites behind them, Then when the battle began, yes, the animation was good, I will give that to you, but do you think it was possible for two, only two Amercan jets to shoot down SEVEN Japanese jets? Be real, think about it. And finally, the director made the movie looked like Americans were heros. Yes, I love USA, but I just can't stand how much this movie bragged about beening Americans.
Rating:
Summary: Better to have one good movie than two great ones
Review: I expected a lot out of this movie; between the hype from the previews and the high standard set by "Saving Private Ryan", I thought great things were in store. I really was disappointed. I came expecting a war movie. I found a movie that wasn't really sure if it was a love story or a war movie...a sort of love story with torpedoes. The love story was hackneyed, lifted from every two-bit war romance from "From Here to Eternity" to "Top Gun". The air combat scenes seemed like they'd been done before... In "Star Wars", actually. When one of the aircraft announced its call-sign as being "Red Two" I found myself whispering to my companion, "Luke, we got company!" The exploitation of FDR's disability for theatrical grandstanding was a bit much. FYI: FDR was wheeled into Congress only once, and that was after Yalta, in '45. True, the visual effects are very good. And the scenes of the attack--especially the U.S.S. Arizona blowing up--really sent chills down my spine. I cannot really recommend watching the entire three-hour movie. Show up one and a half hours late, and you'll be just in time.
|
