Re: [LoGH] Pearl Harbor (off-topic about war movies)
Bob (gr8scott@airmail.net)
Mon, 28 May 2001 20:59:12 -0500
Oh dear.
Victor Xing wrote:
> Yep, I agree. Pearl Harbor messed up the history, and portrayed Japanese
> Americans as spies for the Japanese government, which is an foul act to
> justify what U.S. did during WWII - sending thousands of innocent Japanese
> Americans to desert concerntraition camps.
Ummm, there WERE Japanese that WERE acting as spies. There were a few
Japanese-American spies, but as the film did point out the Pearl Harbor
leadership were unrealisitically worried about Japanese saboteurs and
ironically deployed in an easy-to-destroy configuration. The film did
not attempt to even deal with the American concentration camps or
propagandize to justify them.
> Plus, the movie made it seem
> like U.S. fend off the assualt. In reality, the Japanese carrier air group
> cleaned the island before the Americans had a chance to defend themselves.
> Summing up: some hardheads want to believe that U.S. didn't lose so badly in
> that attack, and military brass want to save face and regain some pride from
> it... end result? Hollywood made Pearl Harbor to satisfy their need.
There WERE 29 planes shot down, which isn't a ringing American victory
by any means but they did fight back. I don't think the film portrayed
Pearl as a victory- way too many dead bodies and torn up battleships for
anybody to get that impression. Yup the Japanese squashed a bunch of
slow 21-knot battleships that would prove to only be good for shore
bombardment, but didn't destroy the logistical infrastructure that made
Pearl Harbor a valuable base.
Yeah, Hollywood always makes movies to satisfy their need, which is to
make money. The US brass want to regain pride and save face by making a
propagandistic film? Hmmm, if anything the US brass would want to put
out a film saying that we should rebuild the US Navy so there WON'T be
anymore Pearl Harbors.
