I'm really not sure how I feel about this movie.

It succumbs to the typical Clint Eastwood cliches: heavy narration, long conclusion and gritty filmmaking, similar to his previous two works (Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby). The story is a bit hard to follow sometimes, but it really does provide an interesting look at the American recognition of heroes. I thought the closing line was really powerful, and definately made the film for me.

The acting is mostly strong, Philippe really surprised me as he was perhaps the standout of the entire cast. Overall it was a very good film, but I would not consider it a great film. It certainly wasn't up to the emotional impact of Million Dollar Baby (at least to me), but it definately is a film to watch.

B+

C-

A-

Well acted and directed, and the look and feel is extraordinary.

pssssp.... the oscar buzz for philippe and beach will start tomorrow....psssp.

Spoke to Arsi today about a fairly large continuity issue/narrative flaw involving Ira.

Not sure what my grade is for the film.

Clint's best film since Unforgiven, but it's still only a B+ for a few reasons.

First of all, it's wonderfully shot. The muted colours and doctored film grade used during the battle sequences was very effective and the actual camera work and staging was second only to Spielberg/Kaminski in Saving Private Ryan. I loved the intensity that Clint built up watching the Japanese ready their guns as the Americans begin moving their troops forward. I'm no war historian, so I found the story of the battle and the controversy around the flag raising to be quite interesting. However, I think the film loses its way in the sequences that see the three survivors getting showered with undue/unwanted attention. These sections are simply too repetitive and I found the flashing back and forth to be clumsily handled and too frequent. And up until his nice piece of acting in that bedroom outpouring, I really found nothing to like about Adam Beach's character or performance. The rest of the cast, especially Phillippe, were uniformly excellent. It's kind of mandatory to have those getting-to-know-the-soldiers moments in war films and I thought they were well done in this movie and it was enough for me to get attached to a few of the characters. It's because of this that the rushed flashback and forward sequence at Soldier Field, showing the deaths of like 4 or 5 of these guys in the span of about 30 seconds, annoyed me. In addition, I felt that the last 30 minutes was rather protracted and a tad too schmaltzy, but that is more forgivable. I loved the photographs in the credits though and that last shot panning from atop the island was a nice classy touch. I look forward to the other half of this undertaking.

Very well made movie. Clint again shows his mastery. The movie lacks the emotional impact of Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby. The movie seems very timely with several sequences resonating well with current events.

A-

Preliminary thoughts after seeing it last night.

Lots of older people went to the 1915 showing. It was probably 75-80% over 25. The story of the picture of the flag raising on Iwo Jima is an interesting one but I didn't connect with the film here. The split between a half war film and half drama didn't work for me. I didn't like the cuts and transitions from battlefield to the drama as it progressed. I didn't find anything wrong with the acting except for maybe Adam Beach. I guess I'm tired of heroes whining about not being heroes. The film doesn't let you care much for the people who die during the combat scenes except for maybe Pepper's character but even that was iffy to me. The CGI wasn't well done in a few scenes either which is surprising considering today's technology. I think this is certainly not one of Eastwood's best work but a decent film. I think it would have been best to either focus the story on the warfield or the three survivors during their time in a America but not both. I think that the Japanese counterpart to this film should have been released first since it appears that that may have a more emotional impact than this film. Another thing that I don't think worked was that I'm comparing this film to SPR and it just didn't have the same emotional impact nor even the display of wartime violence that SPR presented.

Grade = B

I can't see this winning best pic or even best director either.

I still can't believe this didn't open at one of my theaters. I couldn't wait til next week, though, so I made the 50 minute drive to my old neck of the woods in Kent where I used to see movies at the theater all the time. No big deal, I lived there for years and one of my best friends lives in the town next door, so I got to see him today, too.

Clint Eastwood's new epic world war II story, Flags of Our Fathers, is one of the finest looking pictures I've ever seen. Just a brilliant use of camera angles, wide shots, and color tints. The cinematography is just incredible, and should be a shoo-in to win all kinds of awards in that category, if there is justice in the world.

As expected, Eastwood got sensational performances out of his cast, with Ryan Phillippe being the standout. What did Reese Witherspoon tell him? Something about he should retire because he'll never make a better film? It was definitely a star making performance, and a perfect followup to his strong work in last year's best picture winner, Crash. I expect this to be a major impact on his career. Adam Beach was also strong, the whole cast was. It's nice seeing Robert Patrick getting some small parts in serious films like this and Walk the Line. Fans of the movies The Warriors, 48 Hours, and Commando, be on the lookout for David Patrick Kelly playing President Harry Truman! What a shocker when I found that out. Strong acting across the board, and really, nobody is better at getting the performance than Eastwood is.

The story is strong, and the characters are well developed. I'm actually glad that it didn't deal so much with the war itself (although it's well represented throughout), but that it dealt with the propaganda war that was being fought at home, and showed how government was manipulative when raising money, no matter what depths of deception they had to sink to. It was not about who died, it was about raising money to win (and to line their own pockets with, I'm sure) The reactions to the hypocrisy by our 3 heroes was both realistic and understandable, as the drunk native American Ira resents the insulting nature of the farce he's forced into, while Doc and Rene realize it's wrong, but for a greater good if they just be puppets of the propaganda.

I can't wait for Letters From Iwo Jima to find out what the hell those Japs did to poor Iggy. Sounds like one hell of a torture scene is on the horizon!

There are a few flaws in the film, though nothing major. The flashback scenes weren't jarring or confusing, but it was a little bit unstructured. It wasn't always clear that Doc's son was writing a book in the early scenes, that kinda came in full time later. I also didn't think the end was a big problem. Maybe could have trimmed 5 minutes, but it wasn't a major problem at all.

Flags of Our Fathers is a masterfully crafted picture with great performances throughtout. Only some minor flaws keep it from being a masterpiece.

A-

It will win and it will win cause Clint Eastwood made it and Hollywood and the Academy love Clint Eastwood.. It's a done deal..

some kinda silly performances, and really awkward handling of the war/flashbacks/son-author thing, but it's beautiful and many pieces are phenomenal. probably could have used another go through of the ol' edit-box. but pretty well done.

This movie was weird for me. Great acting and all that stuff. But it was weird because (i guess like munich) it was trying to send a message out to its audience. The story that I liked the most was that of Chief and the whole racism he dealt with afterwards. I was liking the movie as it was saying things like look at what we did in the past, we glorified heroes yet we discriminated against them, we used them for money and then completely forgot about them. So Eastwood shows so many layers to this story and no layers are given to the Japanese. On the contrary they are vilified everytime they're on screen. As a result, I lost a lot of credibility that I held when viewing the other layers of the story. What I guess I'm saying is that he made everything and everyone feel so human... except for the Japanese.

Still a good movie though. I'll give it a B-. Oh and the soundtrack sucked. I felt as if I was at a starbucks for some of the scenes.

What worked:

the muted tone of the beach invasion though I expected more carnage
capturing the era

What didn't work:
Adam Beach
the never-ending song
flashbacks (the best example is the Solider Field scene)
the structure of the story (I think it may be an issue with the book and not the screenplay)

Can someone explain the hitchhiking scene with Ira? I'm pretty sure (and Arsi confirmed it) that it was explained on screen that it was the last time Ira was seen. Then they proceeded to show Ira at the ceremony for the memorial, Ira working in the fields, Ira walking to meet the family of his dead friend.

I thought the idea that Ira was hitchhiking and disappeared off the face of the planet was an interesting one. Even moreso, the notion that the fleeting glimpse may or may not have even been Ira was a perfect note to close the book on his character.

But then they went on to explain that it definitely was Ira. Seemed counterproductive and redundant. I woundn't have minded the writers taking liberties with the story, in order to make it more compelling.

I'm giving it a C and would only recommend to fans of WWII films.

So what is it about Flags having more brutal battle scenes than Private Ryan? Not true, right?

It's not even in the same league of brutality.

But it's an issue of cinematography, in particular use of color and camera placement. There are however two shots that are worthy of Dawn of the Dead, with another shot hinted at and will probably be seen in Letters from Iwo Jima.

Was it a Cinemark Mav? I work at a Cinemark and it is a known fact that Dreamworks and Cinemark do not get a long. Movies in the past, such as Road to Perdition, didn't play at all because one company wanted more money than the other was willing to give up. All Cinemarks will get Flags though, kind of hurts there business I think.

Majorly disappointing.

The three main characters are underwritten to the degree that I can safely call Phillipe's character zero-dimensional. Beach, at least, had one (obnoxious) dimension. As a result, Eastwood can never really get us inside their heads. The narrative is choppy, with the inexplicable editing constantly pulling us from the story. Eastwood really let this one get away from him.

Nevertheless, there are moments of great power and the thing looks beautiful, so it's still worth a view, but.....disappointed.

One of them is Cinemark, but the other 3 are Regal Cinema.

[font=century gothic]How so?

I'm in the middle of reading the book and am going to see the film tomorrow. Right now the book is following a linear storyline.

Up to right now (Pg. 280 something) it's.........

Bradley and family visit Iwo Jima - talking about his father
Backgrounds on each character and where they come from
Basic Training
Iwo Jima

Right now I'm at the point where they're attacking Suribachi (Sp?) and are about to raise the flag. That on a side note is a criticism I have with the book. I'm on page 280 something and we haven't even got to the flagraising yet. Thankfully the last 50-80 pages or so have been on the island, but getting to the island is tedious. He's a little repetitive. Is the movie like that at all?[/font]

Certain aspects/scenes are wonderful, but the film is surprisingly lacking in strong emotional depth and I hated the way the film was edited (it felt like I was watching an episode of Lost, I think they needed to not pointlessly jump back and forth so often). Disappointing. C+

[font=century gothic]Okay, let me get my grade out of the way. A-

That saying, the film is flawed.

First let me begin by saying that halfway through the film, I tried to seperate the book from the film. It worked, but that saying, I think if you (Or Eastwood and company) wanted a perfect film, they would've included a couple of bits from the book.

I haven't finished reading the book yet. I'm still where I was when I posted. That saying, there are two major points to the book. The first and most obvious one is about the soldiers and their common bond/love for one another. The second and subtle plot is about the author himself, discovering through his reasearch while writing the book, who his father really was, what his purpose was, and then growing to love him and respect him even more as a person.

The first plot point the film gets perfectly. The second point, it kind of gets. I felt that there should've been more of a setup at the beginning between the two Bradley's. It's hinted at, but not really explored until the end. And for someone who hasn't read the book, there isn't much of a setup. I've read a good chunk of the book and I had a hard time who that person was supposed to be interviewing the soldiers. If it's kind of hard for someone who has read the book, what's it like for someone who hasn't?

The second is the film begins about halfway through the book. It makes since on one hand because the first half of the book is describing the six specific people who raised the second flag, and if you tried to translate that into the movie, you have an hour of possibly boring setup. That saying, the film easily could've benefited from just a little setup. The film runs 135 minutes. It easily could've been 175 minutes (Private Ryan's running time), and the film would have been better. Honestly, I believe it would've been the difference between a Best Picture nomination and where it ended up. Still though, it's a very good film.

The acting is strong from top to bottom. Ryan Phillippe delivers the performance of his career, along with Jesse Bradford. The stand out for me though is Adam Beach. His Ira Hayes is heartbreaking, just like the real person was. I also thought the war scenes were well choreographed. The editing during the attack is frantic, just like you would have to assume it really was. I also loved the cinematography along with the color saturation. The one stand out for me with the color saturation was the shot of the "second" American flag before it was risen. The colors are bright red and blue while everything else surrounding it is dark and muted.

Another thing I loved was the musical score by Eastwood. He delivered once again. Nothing about it is over the top and "epic". It's just simple and haunting. I wish there was more of it in the film though.

What really got me though were the closing 30 minutes between Bradley and his father. I understood what was going on, but since it wasn't played up in the beginning enough, for anyone who hasn't read the book, I would think it would seem somewhat random. For me, the ending was perfect.[/font]

The movie succeeds in terms of dealing with the dramatic aspect of the inner conflict experienced by the flagraisers' supposed heroic roles. However, the movie's battle sequences were underwhelming and the bookending scenes involving the old senior version of the veteran were incredibly cringe-inducing. B

D

I was expecting the possibility of disappointment, I was not expecting was to full on hate it this film.

No flow to this movie at all. Present day writing of the book, the war scenes, the flag raising scene, the characters on tour, and everything in between, all randomly split up at intervals and slapped together throughout the movie. There's no narrative or line to follow in the movie, and in the end all that means is that the movie is damn jarring and annoying as can be... just can't get into the stories of these characters, or the characters at all, with the way it constantly goes back in forht. Which brings me to my next point: No depth. Are we supposed to care about these people, are we supposed to give a fuck about the soldiers that die? Harlem, Hank, Iggy, all are just random names, we no further explanation we neither know who they are or care when they die. Even the 3 leads, there's nothing more than skin-deep characterization on them. Is Adam Beach crying ever couple scenes supposed to make us care about these people? There was nothing definitive about them at all. And then the son writing the book... you don't even know who he is until halfway through the film, then it supposed to pack a punch when he gives his last words to his dad? He's essentially a random character. Apart from all that, I was incredibly bored through the whole film... I do not need 30 minutes of random conversations on a boat to start off the film, I don't need useless conversation on Iwo Jima itself, I don't need Phillipe at the firework show having 6 flashbacks in a ROW about a friend that died, a bit excessive much there Eastwood? God, what a stinker. Minor plus points for great cinematography and authenticity to the whole thing, but that does not near save this.