I saw the whole movie about 2 weeks ago. It is a good movie; not sure how accurate it is. Just a really good entertaining movie. Not many movies are entertaining anymore, just loud. Worth the time to watch it. Merry 4th July to all of you out there. Heltau
From what I know of Halsey's record and the Battle of Guadalcanal, it is basically accurate. For the style they did it (relatively low budget and mostly on the studio lot soundstages), they still managed to make you feel you were there--which says a lot on some careful editing and outdoor location shots to tie it together. I am not expert on the historical facts. They could not do all of Halsey's WWII service (at least not in a 2 hour movie), so they just focused on Guadalcanal.
The movie was exceptionally accurate, especially for a war movie made so soon after the war. It did not shy away from the machine gunning of Japanese survivors in the waters off Guadalcanal, a war crime at any time and one never mention by American histories although usually depicted in American movies by Germans or Japanese. The fighting was savage, probably the most desperate of the war, because it was here that the Americans and Japanese were most evenly matched. After this battle the issue was never really in doubt for the long run. Even the value the Americans put on Yamato was true, and how close it was. What was little emphasized was the brilliance of American intelligence and the rigid thinking of the Japanese, a flaw which they paid dearly. Cagney's portrait was brilliant yet restrained. The film was well paced, incredibly well directed, and told a complex story well. Onbe of the best war stories out there.
![[Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 1.0 feed")
ReplyDeleteI saw the whole movie about 2 weeks ago. It is a good movie; not sure how accurate it is. Just a really good entertaining movie. Not many movies are entertaining anymore, just loud.
Worth the time to watch it.
Merry 4th July to all of you out there.
Heltau
From what I know of Halsey's record and the Battle of Guadalcanal, it is basically accurate. For the style they did it (relatively low budget and mostly on the studio lot soundstages), they still managed to make you feel you were there--which says a lot on some careful editing and outdoor location shots to tie it together. I am not expert on the historical facts. They could not do all of Halsey's WWII service (at least not in a 2 hour movie), so they just focused on Guadalcanal.
DeleteThe movie was exceptionally accurate, especially for a war movie made so soon after the war. It did not shy away from the machine gunning of Japanese survivors in the waters off Guadalcanal, a war crime at any time and one never mention by American histories although usually depicted in American movies by Germans or Japanese. The fighting was savage, probably the most desperate of the war, because it was here that the Americans and Japanese were most evenly matched. After this battle the issue was never really in doubt for the long run. Even the value the Americans put on Yamato was true, and how close it was. What was little emphasized was the brilliance of American intelligence and the rigid thinking of the Japanese, a flaw which they paid dearly. Cagney's portrait was brilliant yet restrained. The film was well paced, incredibly well directed, and told a complex story well. Onbe of the best war stories out there.
ReplyDelete