Rating: 
Summary: Say what you have to say, but i liked very much this movie
Review: First of all let me tell you that i am a guy, and since i saw the trailers, i was telling to myself, a movie about the attack on Pearl Harbor?", by Jerry Bruckheimer and Micheal Bay?, this going to be good", i truly don't see why do people where expecting a masterpiece, i mean we were about to see a movie by the guys who brought us Armageddon, but Pearl Harbor is better than Armageddon, the acting was very good, specially by Josh Harnett, Kate Beckinsale, Cuba Gooding Jr. and Jon Voight, and the script was good, the love story was not as bad, as i was expecting, but it beats Titanic, the film is truly dramatic, and i almost cried, i am preety sure, it's because of what happened on September 11th, which in my opinion Pearl Harbor is another movie to push patriotism,in my opinion it was an excellent,with a few but non importants flaws,too bad that people keep misunderstanding Micheal Bay and J.B.
Rating:
Summary: Not as bad as some would like you to believe!
Review: You guys, this movie (Pearl Harbor) is NOT, repeat, NOT that bad!! I really don't see the need for all the criticism. After reading some of these reviews, you would think it was the WORST movie made in history!! Trust me, it's NOT that bad. Sure, it has it's romance, and it DOES have a love story, but it's basically like any other love story mixed with disaster. It's not JUST a love story though. Some say that this movie was all computerized. Oh, like "STAR WARS: Phantom Menace" wasn't?? That whole movie was basically made on a green/blue screen. Plus, the only thing computerized in PH were some of the attack explosions (like the arial bomb) and some of the zeros. They used a couple of the authentic zeros that they could find, but some of them couldn't get airborne since they were like 60+ years old. BUt most of the dynamite and explosions were REAL. Those were real people falling off the ship (Arizona). Unlike in the movie "TItanic". Besides, I think that a lot of people only see this movie as a LOVE story. Did anyone forget to mention how graphic and heart-wrenching that hospital scene was?? It really made my stomach turn. Imagine, some people ACTUALLY went through all that torture!! Seeing all those dead bodies and people getting blown up in mid air (those were REAL people in the movie by the way) really shocked me. I can't imagine how I would react today if I saw planes shooting down bullets right at my feet. SO, bottom-line, this movie DOES have a LOT of romance in it (so what?) but I think MOST people are missing the point, and are not seeing the WHOLE movie. It's NOT just a love story. YOU get a sense as though you're actually in the 1940's (which is hard to do). You have to actually put yourself in the character's shoes. And I think that Micheal Bay did a pretty good job of conveying this. Definitely WORTH renting/if not buying!!! :-)
Rating: 
Summary: This Movie Is A Stinker!
Review: I was sitting in the theater wondering "what is that horrible smell"? I finally realized it was the horrible movie on the screen I was suffering through. Very inacurate hoakey film.
Rating: 
Summary: Another puff piece from the master of puff
Review: Given the choice between producing a popular film and a great film, producer Jerry Bruckheimer (Armageddon, Top Gun, Beverly Hills Cop, ConAir) will always choose the popular film. He is nothing if not consistent. His films always make lots of money and seldom deliver much more than slick eye candy for the masses. Bruckheimer has a golden opportunity to depart from his blockbuster mentality with this film, but he goes with his business instincts rather than taking a chance with a filmmaker's approach. The result is another big budget crowd pleaser with a cotton candy plot and terrific battle scenes, aided by impressive digital effects. The script by Randall Wallace of "Braveheart" fame is the biggest problem. Wallace is clearly capable of writing an engaging script, but that obviously isn't what the boss wanted. It seems that Bruckheimer has Titanic envy and tries to use the same formula of wrapping a piece of history around a love story. Either that or he is trying to follow in the footsteps of "From Here to Eternity", the much acclaimed 1953 story that occurs as a prelude to the attack on Pearl Harbor. However, FHTE did not pretend to be a story ABOUT Pearl Harbor, and only included the attack as another disruptive event in an emotionally tumultuous story. While FHTE was a gripping and powerful story of love, hatred, lust and honor, PH is a trite and predictable love story that serves an interminable prelude to 30 minutes of terrific battle scenes. The inadvertent love triangle between best friends could have been predicted by a teenager (which seemed to be the target audience of this film, based on the PG rating and the sappy dialogue). And of course the resolution of the dilemma is just as neat and obvious. Personally, I would have preferred it if they had killed Evelyn (Kate Beckinsale) in the attack and given Rafe (Ben Affleck) and Danny (Josh Hartnett) an opportunity for some real soul searching as they went on their top secret mission. But such nuance is far too risky for Bruckheimer. Director Michael Bay (Armageddon, The Rock) isn't known for his subtle and insightful direction of human stories. Bay is known for his explosions, and predictably the human story is bungled while the battle is extraordinary. Bay directs a period piece without much regard for understanding and reproducing the 1940's. It seems all he cares about is the military angle. The costume design and hair for the girls costumes was merely good while the military costumes are perfect. Mostly, the '40's feel is missing. The music is all wrong. It should have been big band music instead of the standard blockbuster symphonic compositions which did not fit the period at all. Various details are overlooked, like the fact that well more than half of young adults of that era smoked. Not one character in the film smoked, nor was there a single cigarette to be found in the nightclub scene. Rent any film from the forties and fifties and notice how many people smoke. Everybody. Another thing that is incredible is the fact that Evelyn, who was having morning sickness on December 7 is not showing in mid April, more than four months later. Perhaps if she were 200 lbs I could believe that, but the lithe Evelyn would have shown more than a little pooch by then. Also missing are the colloquialisms of the day. Not a single "swell", "dame", "jeepers" or "ain't" in the whole film. No Brooklyn or Chicago accents. Everyone speaks perfect twenty first century Funk and Wagnall's College English. The battle scene is a marvel of action filmmaking. It is highly realistic as a depiction of the battle, but there was a lot of cheating that didn't escape the notice of WWII buffs. It is pretty amazing that Bruckheimer got so much cooperation from the US government in being able to film in the Harbor. The government even loaned the production company numerous mothballed ships. Unfortunately, a lot of them were ships designed and built after WWII and they didn't bother to clean them up in post production. They built a complete digital world and left post WWII ships in the picture. That is just poor attention to detail in a film that is all about detail. Still, by any standard, this is fantastic action sequence that could not have been more realistic than had one actually been there. The acting is mixed. Beckingsale is excellent as Evelyn. She creates a very appealing romantic figure. Ben Affleck is too moody and sarcastic in the role. Josh Hartnett is much better, coming across as far more sincere and relating to his character better than Affleck. Affleck seems content to play Ben Affleck in uniform rather than trying to actually flesh out a character. Cuba Gooding Jr. gives an excellent performance in a minor role. Veterans Alec Baldwin and Jon Voight do a marvelous job as Colonel Doolitle and FDR. I rated this film a 6/10 on the strength of the visual effects. It would have been much better if it had been about Pearl Harbor instead of being a schmaltzy love triangle story that coincided with the attack. The entire event that is Pearl Harbor is shrouded in intriguing questions. Did Roosevelt know about the attack in advance and allow it to happen to get us into the war? Many historical facts indicate that was the case (it is thought to be more than just lucky that the aircraft carriers weren't in the harbor that day). What was really going on in the minds of the Japanese? Were the diplomatic efforts of the US designed to force the Japanese into attacking us as a matter of honor? As much as I despise Oliver Stone, this film would have been substantial if it had been done in his docudrama style (without the historical rewrites of course). Instead we have another puff piece by the master of puff. Thanks Jerry.
Rating: 
Summary: Doesn't deserve such critisism.
Review: Now I have read some of the reviews on this movie and I don't think it deserves all the critisism it's received. For starters, I love historical movies and am a big fan of the History Channel. I didn't really know a whole lot about the attack on Pearl Harbor until I watched the movie. Sure it may not go entirely on fact and some things are exaggerated but isn't that how all movies this day and age are? As for the love triangle, sure it could have been better but I don't think it was all that bad. Many people, myself included don't care much for war movies, but when you add a little romance to the action it makes it worth watching. How many people can think of Titanic without thinking of Jack and Rose? Adding fiction with real events is what makes a movie. The acting didn't seem bad to me, I didn't find any difference in it then other great movies. The war scenes were great in my opinion, I was glues to them unlike other war movies I've seen before. As for the widescreen, when I got into the movie, I didn't even notice it was there. I have to say I hate widescreen movies. In my opinion, Pearl Harbor brought me action, drama adventure and romance all at the same time, and yes I do compare it to Titanic because its on of those movies that add to the tragedy of what happened, exaggerated and fictionalized a little or not. It changed my perspctive of what happened that day in 1941, and gave me more of a clue on how it changed the history of our country. Take this review any way you like, but don't not watch the movie because of the reviews. You never know, you just might like it.
Rating:
Summary: Just sit back and enjoy............
Review: If you want accuracy well I suggest that you visit your local library. The film is very entertaining with something for everyone, romance, action and excellent special FX. The 3 hours in the cinema went very quickly, it certainly will find it's way into my DVD collection.
Rating:
Summary: Historical Event + $150 million budget + Star Actor = zzz...
Review: If you ever want to waste 3 perfectly good hours of your life, don't even bother to waste them watching this. I don't even know where to begin, it's so awful. Drawn out visuals, wanting-to-be-moving music, a plot done so poorly it is almost satirical - and the few scenes that depict the Japanese side seem to be done just so the makers can say they had that in their film, almost like it was, "Action! (actors say the famous historical quotes - nothing more, nothing less) Cut! Print!"
If you must stoop to rent this, please save yourself the agony and skip to the scenes right before the attack begins, and as soon as the scenes of carnage are over - PUSH STOP.
Rating:
Summary: Not the war bluffs cup of tea!
Review: Don't expect to see the historical value of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as it was portrayed in the Classic Movie "Tora Tora Tora". This is a romance story that eventually gets around to Pearl. After viewing on VHS and having to change the tape to see the second half I feel that the editor could have done something to get to the point somewhere. This was a true dissapointment if you are seeking a real shoot-em-up action packed movie. It does portray the events well but is also a full length feature romance.
Rating:
Summary: Great entertainment even if a bit sappy
Review: If you can let yourself be entertained, this movie is exciting and beautifully done. If you have a decent home theater, you will find the effects (both sound and picture) are superb. I particularly liked the fact that facts were assembled from living witnesses and woven into the story. That added lots of interesting detail. Ok, the romance part of the plot was sappy and somewhat shallow. It wasn't that bad and was carried easily by the action and effects.
Rating:
Summary: I Hated This Movie!
Review: I love Ben Affleck. I love Ben Affleck in tank tops or otherwise snug shirts. That alone is not enough to make a movie, though. I thought this movie was dreadful. Abysmal. Hackneyed, trite plot mechanisms, historically off-base in many ways, and an insult to the memories of the people who really lived and died at Pearl Harbor to serve up tripe like this as "tribute." You want to learn about Pearl Harbor? Go to the library, or down to the VFW and ask someone. But save your money and do not bother with this stinker.
|
