Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Movie Review: "Flags Of Our Fathers" (2006)Film-makers Clint Eastwood and acting-producer Steven Spielberg take on a giant production for struggling label of DreamWorks Pictures LLC in season 2005/2006, nevertheless backed up by Warner Bros. Studios for first-hand distributions of this ultra-national U.S. American story on American boy soldiers, who raised a U.S. American flag on the south-bound Japanese island of "Iwo Jima" on February 23rd 1945, bringing home their tortured spirits in one of the deadliest battles in "The Pacific" most offensive efforts of the United States in World War II.Director Clint Eastwood, at age 75, coming out of his prime endeavor in directing actress Hilary Swank as female boxing champion in "Million Dollar Baby" (2004), travels onto location toward extraordinary landscapes of "Island" with fellow collaborators cinematographer Tom Stern and production designer Henry Bumstead, who are able to present some hyper-realistic, even gripping war-action scenes, which then get intercepted by editor Joel Cox's effort in post-production to make emotional sense with further leading, yet behind-expectation-character performance by actor Ryan Philippe, whose portrayal of real-life book-of-experience writing John Bradley is missing the heart-breaking edge of a splintered war-scared human spirit, when the 130-Minute-Editorial of back and forth cutting endeavors between endless "Saving Private Ryan" recalling D-day opening scene, here mainly painted grey to black, to hyped public relations in an war-victories-celebrating United States, where further media-stroke heroes, struggle throughout, as the character of Ira Hayes, performed by one-strong-scene-sharing hotelroom cry-out of getting fired actor Adam Beach, known for the more suitable portrayal of Ben Yahzee alongside Nicolas Cage in the emotionally forthcoming as fulfilling "Windtalkers" (2002) directed by John Woo."Flags Of Our Fathers" presents itself with conflicting scene work, which are skillfully capture, but at times integrate staggering computer-generated-imagery (CGI), when the picture, even with its sublime supporting cast from Barry Pepper over John Slattery, Jamie Bell and Paul Walker (1973-2013) does not want to come together to one whole war-movie-experience. But then again the two months later released brother-film "Letters From Iwo Jima" on December 20th 2006 seems to be like a silent gem in the pool of "World War II" films due to newly-receivable points of views in the South Pacific warfare of the 1940s, when the effort must have been to combine "Flags Of Our Fathers" and "Letters Of Iwo Jima" into one motion picture of a 200 Minutes including classic orchestral overture, an Intermission plus "Entr'acte" as worldwide event movie experience.© 2018 Felix Alexander Dausend (Cinemajesty Entertainments LLC)

I like WWII movies a lot, and yeah, Clint Eastwood is a real genius, but Homer sometimes nods, so does Clint. What he created here is a mish mash of wild wanton battle scenes, long, much too long sad flashbacks, inept editing, sick sepia tone and on top of that, dry as dust, didactic Told-You_so way of hammering these things onto our heads. The actors are awesome, and they do their best. I cannot say anything poor about Pepper, Patrick, Walker or McDonough, as well as younger cast who also tried to do their best. But all their valiant attempts were buried by sentimental syrupy attitude, prolonged scenes, unnecessary brutal shots, too much of a method hammering, too much of a moral telling, and an overall preachy message that war is evil. We know this. It is indeed evil. The slow tempo of the movie kills all our sincere desire tom like it. We failed. The film is way too boring and tiring and ...yes...obvious. The effort is worth 4, not more

I have always been ambivalent about most wars movies. They often claim to show the horror and agony of war, but revel in the excitement and carnage. Not so here! The film is about the six U.S. Marines who raised the flag on Iwo Jima's Mount Suribachi and were the subject of the iconic photograph. Eastwood's film follows the three survivors as they are feted as heroes and used to drive war bond sales towards the end of WW2. However, they have been traumatised by their experiences on Iwo Jima, and are bewildered by the insensitive treatment they receive stateside. Many of the scenes as they meet the parents and families of the men who were killed are almost as harrowing as the scenes on Iwo Jima. Eastwood digs deep for the truth in this poignant, thoughtful film.Overshadowed somewhat by "Saving Private Ryan" when first released, "Flags" in my opinion is the more complete of the two. Both films unfold as the reflections of an aged veteran, however, I feel "Saving Private Ryan" struggles to maintain the pace after its stunning opening 20 minutes, but then again what film wouldn't? Eastwood's cutting between events on Iwo Jima and the scenes in the U.S. keeps up the momentum more effectively."Flags" isn't the first film to feature the Battle of Iwo Jima or the flag raising. "The Outsider", which starred Tony Curtis as Ira Hayes, covered similar ground, but was heavier on the psychological overtones beloved of films of the early 60's.There was of course 1949's "Sands of Iwo Jima" with John Wayne, and although it suffers in comparison with this film, it was made just a few years after the events it portrayed, and featured cameos by real-life marine heroes including the three surviving flag-raisers. Eastwood on the other hand had to reach back 60 years to capture a feeling for the times, and life in America in the 1940s.But he did it and it looks convincing. The scenes on Iwo Jima are amazing. We are familiar with it from documentaries and photographs, and Eastwood's team captured that look, especially with Mount Suribachi looming in the background and the scenes of the fleet offshore. It is a classic example of how special effects can enhance the drama rather than dominate it.This is light years away from Eastwood's other film about the marines, "Heartbreak Ridge". Where that film was unapologetic in it's stereotypes, in "Flags of Our Fathers", the grim determination of the marines who kept to their task until they were either killed or wounded comes across without overstatement.This is Eastwood's masterpiece. Together with "Letters from Iwo Jima", the two films represent a powerful cinematic achievement, which is sure to be even more appreciated as time goes by.

The companion picture to the more acclaimed Letters From Iwo Jima is certainly the weaker of the pair. This side of the story isn't as interesting, though it has its moments. There's no doubt that it has great production, merging design with special effects seamlessly and hitting an astonishing scale. It mixes well with the saturated cinematography, but you can't help that it feels far too derivative of Saving Private Ryan's gruelling opening act, surely caused by perhaps the revisionist influence of producer Steven Spielberg. However, the real problem is that it struggles to find eyes to see the story through. Not choosing a protagonist isn't necessarily a bad thing, as it's been done well in The Thin Red Line, Black Hawk Down and Band of Brothers, but Flags Of Our Fathers is such a mish-mash of one dimensional characters that it ends up hard to follow. Given that creative choice, the nonlinear narrative was a mistake, leaving the film to meander to its point about heroism in war. It's a good point, but one in a grey area and doesn't seem to flesh out the iconic picture as much as it wants to. I should revisit Letters From Iwo Jima but I know it won't be a pleasant experience.6/10