A legitimate point, but if you’re going to be put off by inaccuracies like this (I’m not being critical, you have every right to be put off), then DON’T see Braveheart. Or, at least, don’t read about what really happened in English/Scottish history at the time.
I loved Braveheart, but as history, boy did it suck. Pearl Harbor can’t possibly be any worse accuracy-wise, unless:
a) The Americans destroy the Japanese imperial navy on December 7th
b) Critics compare 1941’s historical accuracy favorably to this film
Finally, as sucky movies go, Star Trek V has set the bar pretty high.
I just want to say that True Lies was GREAT. If he had to do only one or the other, I’m glad Cameron is doing True Lies 2 over T3.
The action scenes in True Lies were just fantastic. Everything over-the-top, I wouldn’t have it any other way in an Arnold movie! The bridge sequence is one of the greatest things ever put on film.
It’s probably the funniest action movie I’ve ever seen too.
Schwarzenegger was in top form, and Tom Arnold!! Whoa! He was so good in his role. Who knew?
I’ll be the first in line for tickets to the sequel.
I only saw it on network TV, which I think makes it even worse. Since the network (ABC, I think it was… the network owned by Disney?) obviously had to pay a lot for such a “great” movie, they had to have commercials every five minutes. I swear, it’s VERY jarring to see five minutes of movie separated by five minutes of commercials.
That said, I liked Armaggeddon, mostly because I like Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, and Steve Buscemi. And, hell, the whole sequence with the Armadillo drifting through space was excellently done… although I found it a very large stretch to think that the things were so durable.
Somehow or another, the Armageddon guys and the Godzilla guys came into power at the studios. They can now make anything they want and get all the money they need. The studios know that you have to hear about a movie at least 27 times befor you’ll stand in line to see it. So not only are these idiots getting us to watch these horrible, horrible movies but we have to be bombarded with ads for them.
They make their money back because they advertise so much and the cycle repeats itself.
BUT, one big point in favor of these type of movies (Armageddon, Godzilla 1998, Starship Troopers…), is they should be required viewing for Nitpicking 101. I looove to watch a movie and see where they did it wrong (a The emperor has no clothes) type of attitude. Makes me feel better when these oh-so-important-in-their-own-mind people get interviewed and start talking about how good their new movies (* Yes, Return of the Son of Terminator goes to Jurassic Park is basically a story of the zeitgeist of humanity in the new millenium* WTF !)are.
You got it all wrong. We, the public, crave these movies. The studios, being such good sports, gladly oblige. People like me–the ones who realize that movies are fictitious stories designed to be entertaining, and not necessarily abide by artistic considerations or accuracy-driven scripts–actually enjoy the blockbuster flicks and, by virtue of our eager presence at the gates, provide studios with a non-capitalistic excuse to continue numbing our brains with even more mindless “crap.”
OTOH, people who have agendas conflicting with the ideal of having fun at the theater, criticize the studios for producing such inane material. Since such people constitute a minority–by far, who do you think studios will listen to?
FTR, I loved Armageddon and really liked Godzilla. Being well aware of their limitations, I did not allow that to detract from my enjoyment of their virtues.
That being said, I am dissapointed to hear about the dinamic duo of Bruckheimer/Bay being in charge of the production/direction of Pearl Harbor. Historical movies should strive to present as much factual strength as possible. History by itself is fun; it should not be tampered with to provide for an enjoyable entertainment package, nor should it be corrupted to enhance the collective misconceptions of the masses, when it can rather seize the chance to alleviate their widespread ignorance.
Everybody is overlooking the good that can come out of it, even if the movie is as bad as everybody says it’s going to be:
The real history is being brought to the forefront in anticipation of (in opposition to?) the movie.
I walked past Waldenbooks yesterday, and the display window was full of Pearl Harbor (and other WWII history) books, with At Dawn We Slept prominently featured. The History Channel will no doubt run a whole series of features on Pearl Harbor. Ditto Discovery and PBS. Many people will see the movie and become interested in learning what really happened. So no matter what a piece of crap the movie might turn out to be, awareness and general knowledge of the events will increase.
(but I’m still hoping it will be good. I really, really want it to be good. I want to be able to like it)
YOU like bad movies?!? Hell, man, I liked Escape From L.A.!!
By the way, if anybody wants a REAL laugh, head over to Yahoo! Movies and read the production notes from Armageddon. You get to see the development team brag about how closely they worked with NASA to make the movie.
Interestingly enough, Braveheart had this effect on me. It started with the somewhat ambigious ending, where the Scottish force, under the Bruce, attack the English. I wanted to know more about the events of that battle.
The more I learned, the more I thought of the story on film as a fantasy. It just happened to be loosely based on things that did happen(emphasis on the word loosely).
[Hijack]
I have to mention one flick that a surprising number of people missed the point of; Starship Troopers. This movie was, very literally, a joke. If taken seriously, it’s very very bad, but if looked at the right way, it’s actually funny. It’s almost a parody, but it isn’t forthright enough. So many bad sci-fi cliches are used, and the love story is so poorly dealt with that it supercedes logic and reason. [/Hijack]
I expected more negative replies to my OP. I’m glad to see most Straight Dopers have decent taste in film.
In regards to Cameron’s True Lies, that is the one film of his that was a disappointment to me. If there’s one word that describes James Cameron’s movies it would be intense, and TL was just too silly and light-hearted. It’s by no means a bad movie, but it just didn’t have the extreme intensity that the Terminators or The Abyss or (especially) Aliens or even the 2nd half of Titanic did.
Back to PH. I was wondering why the commercials showed a scene of FDR saying, “We must strike at the heart of Japan…”. So it’s going to end with the Doolittle raid. What do you want to bet that the raid will include a fictitius pilot who’s best friend died in his arms at Pearl Harbor. Ooh, pinch me…
By the final reel of Deep Impact, I was rooting for the asteroid to obliterate all life on Earth, because it was clear to me that those people were too stupid to live.
I like a good mindless action movie from time to time (hey, I thought True Lies was hilarious), but there’s a fine line between “mindless fun” and outright “mindless”. I’d rather take the rubber-suited Godzilla movies over Sony’s bastardized unfun version any day of the week.
If I could only believe that. But to be honest, I think Verhoeven was trying to be serious with a lot of it, and if you watch his other movies it’s obvious he wasn’t making as much of a joke as you think. Some stuff was obviously supposed to be over the top, but they really did mean the general story seriously. The movie sucked, no matter how much they were kidding.
Titanic was a love story with the historical backdrop of a sinking ship, and it made tons of money.
Pearl Harbor is a love story with a historical backdrop of a lot of sinking ships. Ergo, it will make many tons of money.
Yeesh.
BTW, I liked Godzilla. I was out of the country for most of the hype, which probably helped, but nevertheless, it had Jean Reno. There’s no question, he rocks.
For your edification, here’s an advance review from someone who calls himself a Michael Bay fan. 'Tain’t pretty.
Coupla other bits and pieces:
Actually, sources within the studio were describing it internally as Titanic meets Saving Private Ryan. And if that doesn’t make blood shoot out of your nose…
Not only does Disney own ABC, they also own Touchstone, the “studio” that produced Armageddon. In other words, they sold the movie to themselves, no doubt at a steep discount so they could stiff the actors on their percentage-based residuals. (Cf. Steven Bochco’s recent lawsuit against Fox re “NYPD Blue.”) Slimeball corporate tactics like this are of central concern to the Screen Actors Guild in the current contract negotiations.
quasar is right that the mass public is perfectly happy subsisting on a diet of cinematic junk food (one could make a comparison between our fat waistlines and our fat heads), and Hail Ants is also correct that the majority of Dopers are more intelligent and discerning than the average citizen. Hell, on another movie board I frequent, they’re arguing about whether Blade or The Matrix has the better martial-arts fights. :rolleyes: I stick with the SDMB for a reason.
As you might expect, us Hawaiians (that’s residents of Hawaii…and there are no pure-“blood” Hawaiians left, so don’t even start) have a particular interest in this movie, which premiered today. In Pearl Harbor, natch. Huge gala, stars from all over, interview with the leading man, Ben Affleck, and even some words from Hawaii’s own star (IIRC he has a 35-second cameo. Well, not everyone can be the quarterback…). Reportedly this extravaganza alone cost around $5 million.
Which is hardly a minor point, since this cost will be tacked on to the total costs of the movie, which reportedly will be around $300 million, and it has to show a profit before ANYONE…yes, including the director and producer…gets paid.
Should I be concerned by the fact that this movie’s being produced by Disney, which isn’t exactly renowned for protraying the violence and savagery of war? Or that the love story smacks suspiciously of the love story in Titanic (hated it, thought it was totally tacked on, would have preferred more real drama and less soppy romance), and we all know how well blatant ripoffs usually fare?
I dunno…I kinda want this to succeed, if for nothing else than an inspiration for children to learn about history, but the no-profit-no-pay clause strikes me as a COLOSSAL gamble, and if the war/love mesh doesn’t play out, it could blow up in everyone’s faces. It’ll almost certainly make money, but $305 million? Talk about infamy.