Tora! Tora! Tora!

Rating:
Summary: Put the reviews in the correct place!
Review: The June 13,2001 review by Fat Joe Tomas is clearly talking about the new flick "Pearl Harbor" and not "Tora! Tora! Tora!" Joe is correct in his comments. The new film is more a fairy tale, not a decent comment on the battle like the classic "Tora! Tora! Tora!".

Rating:
Summary: One of the More Great War Movies of the Past
Review: Unlike the past few Bastardizations that Hollywood claims to be "War Films," TORA!! TORA!! TORA!! ranks as one of the more Interesting War Films that approaches from both a Historical and an Action Movie, and rarely leaves you bored.

Althought it doesn't have facts that weren't avaliable at the time the film was made, it clearly displays avaliable facts and presents them in a nice format that plays out like some Tom Clancy Novel.

A great movie to watch, and a good way to teach the "younger Generations" about the start of WWII first hand.

Rating:
Summary: A Wonderful DVD Transfer!
Review: "Tora! Tora! Tora!" is a marvelous film that actually adheres to historical accuracy. The viewer gets an understanding into what was behind the attack. The special effects, for a film being 30 years old, are excellent. The DVD transfer is five stars. Unless you have no grounding in the history of the attack, however, you can skip the rather mediocre 20 minute documentary.

"Pearl Harbor" is so vastly inferior to this film, it is not even close.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent digitalization of classic Pearl Harbor film!
Review: I have always enjoyed this classic movie depicting the event leading up to and including the Japanese attack of Pearl Harbor. I especially like it because of its detailed portrayal of BOTH sides of the coin. The re-release onto DVD contains both high-quality picture and sound. I could not be more happy with this purchase.

Rating:
Summary: this movie... and is very boring
Review: this movie was very boring and pointless to watch Pearl Harbor is critisized because it is not acurate but it isnt supposed to be based on Pearl Harbor it just is a love story which happens to occur during ww2 at least in thet movie you are on your feeet this movie is not for entertainmen t but for study so dont whatch it for fun but if you wanna learn about every single detail of what happened during the historically insignificent time eccept that we entered the war even though we would have sooner or later anyhow than what this boring exact movie

Rating:
Summary: The real truth about Pearl Harbor
Review: Although I haven't seen the new film with Ben Afflek I am am sure that it will be entertaining as a story, but nowhere near the truth that this film is. I found it singularly ironic that Jason Robards, who played General Short, was a radio signalman on a ship in the harbor at the time of the attack. In narrating one documentary on the attack which was shown on PBS, he remembers decoding the message, "Air Raid Peral Harbor. This is no Drill!"

While I am not going to visit the controversay surrounding the attack and the various conspiracy theories that abound, it is clear that Admrial Yamamoto is clearly portrayed. A tragic figure in history, somewhat like Gen Robert E. Lee, he went into battle reluctantly and did his best for a cause he knew would be lost. He spent the 30's stalked by assasins from the Army, and when the Japanese Army took the government, he was willing to go to war with the Army. I find myself wondering how history would have changed if that had happened. For an interesting read I would recommend "The Reluctant Admiral : Yamamoto and the Imperial Navy" by Hiroyuki Agawa, also available from Amazon.

However, the video accurately portrays the events surrounding the battle. Historically, the Americans felt that the war would begin with a battleship conflict and an aerial attack in the Phillipines. From E. G. Marshall's portrayal of Col Bratten, to Martin Balasm's portrayal of Admrial Kimmel, the program displays almost the commedy of errors that led to American forces being so unready that they didn't have a single plane in the air at the time of the attack. The effects are spactular, given the technology of the time, and unlike the contemporary film, portray ships that did appear in the battle. Truely appreciate this truthful portrayal of the begining of the end of America's complacency .

Rating:
Summary: BETTER THAN PEARL HARBOR
Review: TORA! TORA! TORA! (Fox, ...)

If you were disappointed by the soulless "Pearl Harbor," you might take a look at the 1970 American-Japanese coproduction (a historic first) that examines the surprise attack from both sides. Richard Fleischer oversaw the elaborate 149 minute production (Akira Kurosawa was set to direct the Japanese sequences but he withdrew) that won an Oscar for Best Special Effects. The sharp widescreen transfer includes "Day of Infamy," a new documentary on the Pearl Harbor attack and a lively audio commentary from Fleischer and Japanese film historian Stewart Galbraith. Recommended. Rated G.

Rating:
Summary: everything you want that PEARL HARBOR did not
Review: tora tora tora was a movie made in the era of vietnam, and subsequently the movie has a tinge of social critique, but the social issues are kept tasteful and tactful in a way that does not obscure the movie. (for example, no usn officer is seen with the summer whites at pearl, but rather in dress whites, connotating a certain aura of ceremony in a combat situation) the movie is also made in part from a japanese perspective with directors and actors, and thus the japanese scenes are (combined with cross reference by the us counterparts) kept as authentic to history as possible. roles played by actors in Pearl Harbor are seen here, albeit in shorter context, while background characters in Pearl Harbor take the forefront. this movie is a beautiful historical counterpart to the dramitized Pearl Harbor.

Rating:
Summary: Takes precedence over the history of "Pearl Harbor."
Review: "Tora! Tora! Tora!" has been re-released on VHS and DVD to capitalize on the opening of Michael Bay's newest film treatment of the events of December 7th, 1941. This leaves it wide open for comparisons to "Pearl Harbor," while also showing the vast contrasts of the movie-making and storytelling techniques of the past and the present. I'm not too keen on war movies, at least not the ones long ago which seem to be made for war veterans alone, but this one is not that bad. It is a bit tedious at times, but not a failure.

The movie sticks solely with historical events, choosing to keep any ficticious plotlines for another film. It's a joint collaboration between the American and Japanese filmmakers in order to get everything just right in terms of accuracy, and it succeeds. The Japanese are shown making the plans to attack the United States where they are most vulnerable, while also keeping US government officials at bay with talks of negotiation and peace. It wastes no time in letting us know that Pearl Harbor is the place for the attack, and from that point on, the Japanese make their unsighted journey across the Pacific for the legendary "day of infamy."

On the opposite side of the Pacific, the United States is constantly in a frenzy, as we cross-cut between scenes at Pearl Harbor before the attack and Washington D.C., where various government officials run frantically around trying the decode Japanese messages intercepted on machinery that makes today's desktop computers look like pocket calculators. Once they start realizing that Japan is up to something, they take their findings, from translated messages to their own theories, to those in charge of making commands.

Of course, no one believes until it is too late that something could be brewing in the Pacific. As the Japanese close in, things begin to get faster as planes take off from carriers and the first intercepts of Honolulu radio are heard in their cockpits. The bombs start exploding, the ships start burning, and everyone comes to realize just what a mistake they made in not listening to the warnings.

Now, everyone has been comparing the way in which "Pearl Harbor" was concocted to the creation of "Titanic;" this is in terms of movie-making. In terms of what actually happened historically, the story of "Tora! Tora! Tora!" can also be compared to the Titanic tragedy. The Titanic sank because warnings of ice and dangerous seas were ignored repeatedly. It's the same case with the Pearl Harbor bombing: American officials chose to wave off the signs as mere fiction or coincidence (at one point, as the Japanese planes are flying towards Hawaii, one official shrugs them off as B-17 planes flying in from training). And just as the sinking of the Titanic was a great tragedy for many, so was the devastation of Pearl Harbor, which led American to declare war on Japan.

The attack portion of this movie does leave a bit to be desired, and perhaps this is because I'm a child of the technological era, where special effects do a lot of storytelling these days. This sequence, when put into the same arena as the effects-driven attack portion of "Pearl Harbor," pales in comparison. "Tora!" is mostly comprised of aerial shots of the attack, and the effects are really cheesy, just what you'd expect from a war movie of the past. "Pearl" has more technology to toy with, and certainly makes good use of it, pumping the scenes full of adrenaline and pulse-pounding action to blow you away.

But still, "Tora!" wins over. The history involved in its unfolding of events is superb, even if a bit long. It brings out the inevitable comparisons to the latest Pearl Harbor treatment, while also making itself known as a landmark historical film.

Rating:
Summary: A Very Well-Done Movie About the Pearl Harbor Attack
Review: Tora! Tora! Tora is a very well-done movie about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. While some events are not historically correct, and some roles and events could have been expanded, the movie overall is very good.

The movie does a good job of portraying the events prior to the attack, although it sometimes leaves the timing of events to the imagination. Some events occuring in quick succession in the movie actually occured over a fairly long period of time.

The attack scenes were well-done and fairly accurate. The special effects were done quite well, considering the technology available at the time. I would have preferred to have seen more story lines about individual acts of heroism, of which there were many, but that should not be considered a criticism.

Martin Balsam is superb in his role as Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, Commander of the Pacific Fleet. Jason Robards, Jr., comes off a little stuffy, but otherwise believeable, in his role as General Walter Short, commander of Army forces in Hawaii. James Whitmore deserves commendation for his role as Admiral William "Bull" Halsey.

Overall this is a very good movie and should be in the library of anyone with an interest in the attack. But it should be remembered by everyone watching the film that it is a drama, not a documentary.