« Previous Entry | Main Page | Next Entry »
December 18, 2006
Flags of our Fathers Episode I: The Phantom Americans
LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA is a handsomely made war movie. For a film featuring mostly unknown actors, it differentiates between the characters effectively and easily. And it sure as hell is a lot more straightforward than FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS, to which it effectively functions as a prequel.
In my opinion, it's not as interesting as its predecessor.
If IWO JIMA is HAMLET, FLAGS is ROSENCRANTZ AND GUILDENSTERN, not so much in the comedic sense but definitely in the way that it deconstructs a traditional tragedy, using very peripheral characters only glimpsed the first time around. The huge irony is that FLAGS was marketed as a patriotic, flag-waving movie, when in fact the movie is all about how marketing war as a glorious flag-waving, patriotic thing is hollow and cynical, even when the cause is just.
IWO JIMA should have come out first, but the political reality is that Clint Eastwood would have been slammed for praising the Japanese soldiers' patriotism if he hadn't first primed the pump by showing our side of things. The practical reality, for me as a viewer, is that once you've had something deconstructed, watching it played again in straightforward fashion, even if from a different perspective, is not quite as interesting or complex. And maybe it doesn't need to be, except that these films are companion pieces and comparisons are inevitable.
There's no plot to spoil about IWO JIMA, really. A brave general prepares to fight a battle he already knows is lost, for leaders he has come to realize are liars, but he digs his heels in and determines to fight until every last man is dead. History has recorded the outcome; the appeal here, if one can call it that, is seeing what his tactics were, and experiencing them vicariously in a way that no documentary footage has permitted.
If you know your Johnny Cash songs, you know what happens to Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), one of FLAGS' three leads, but you probably don't know what happened to the Ryan Philippe character and the other guy who isn't Ryan Philippe. So already there's more dramatic potential there. But it's also both war movie and social statement, and the statement's a bit more in-depth than "war kills people." You get to experience the action of the battlefield, but you also get to see how the public perceives heroism, and how the old-school notion of stoic bravery comes into conflict with the ever-burgeoning media age in which the public wants to know every personal detail (also a major theme of THE QUEEN).
My only big problem with FLAGS is the final five minutes or so, wherein the narrator decides to explain the theme of the film to me. I kinda got it -- Clint Eastwood ain't exactly David Lynch, knowhutImean?
And I'd totally be down for a 4+ hour movie that splices both flicks together, preferably not in total chronological order. I'm sure an online fan somewhere will do just that, but here's hoping maybe Clint considers it too.
Posted by LYT at December 18, 2006 6:52 PM [Message Board]
Comments
A brave general prepares to fight a battle he already knows is lost, for leaders he has come to realize are liars, but he digs his heels in and determines to fight until every last man is dead.
Doesn't sound like too good of an idea. ;)
Posted by: David N. Scott at December 18, 2006 7:41 PM