Flags of Our Fathers (2006) and Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
CHRISTIAN ETHICS AND THE MOVIES
Reviewed by David A. Thomas,
Assoc. Prof. of Rhetoric, Emeritus, University of Richmond [xxi]
War: Flags of Our Fathers (2006) and Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
The nonfiction book, Flags of Our Fathers, by James Bradley, is one of the five best books I have ever read. The author`s late father was John "Doc" Bradley, one of the six men who raised the flag in the famous photograph taken on Iwo Jima. James Bradley`s book, written after his father`s death, is about several related topics. First, it is a biographical tribute to those six flag raisers themselves, based on an immense amount of research to track down old service records and to interview as many contemporaries who served with them as he could find. Second, it is a masterful account of the battle of Iwo Jima and its major significance in bringing a swifter conclusion to the war. And third, it is the best explanation I ever read of the symbolic role played by that photo in our American identity.
When I finally saw the movie, I have to say that I was disappointed. Flags of our Fathers received two Oscar nominations for sound editing and mixing, but it was otherwise shut out of the running. On the other hand, Eastwood also directed a companion movie called Letters from Iwo Jima, which is far better. Letters has been nominated in several major categories, including Best Director for Eastwood, Best Movie, and Best Original Screenplay, among others.
Letters tells the story from the Japanese side, with the spoken dialog in Japanese with English captions, which hindered its commercial prospects. So far it has attracted few viewers. Having said that, the movie is excellent. The cast features the distinguished Japanese actor, Ken Watanabe, as the island`s American-educated commanding general. The story is based on an actual discovery of a buried mailbag deep within one of the island`s fortified tunnels filled with the last letters home written by the doomed Japanese defenders. This movie shows clearly the chronology of the events being depicted, and the utter confusion of the Japanese Army and Navy leaders who never coordinated their plans with each other.
Letters makes evident how the sorely outnumbered and abandoned Japanese troops had honeycombed their barren little outpost island with an extensive network of tunnels, barricaded by solid steel doors. On the day of the American beachhead, the Japanese held back their fire until thousands of Marine infantry were on the black volcanic sands, completely exposed, and then they opened their battlements and "unleashed Hell." From their protected defensive positions, they were able to withstand the overwhelming rain of destructive air and naval bombardments from the American invaders for over seven weeks, playing out a lethal, prolonged waiting game. Laboring under a policy of no surrender, only a handful of depleted and starving Japanese personnel survived to the bitter end, to their everlasting shame that they had not also perished with their comrades.
What was the problem with Flags? My judgment is, Eastwood and Stephen Spielberg had conflicting visions about what the movie should do, and their collaboration never fully resolved their differences. Spielberg, who had won out over Eastwood in buying the movie rights, took on the job of producer. Eastwood, of course, directed. This may not be exactly correct, but to me as an outside observer, I believe Spielberg had his sights set on a Pacific war epic to go along with his earlier WW II masterpiece, Saving Private Ryan (1998). In contrast, Eastwood, ever since Unforgiven (1992), has framed his movies around a commitment to debunking and demythologizing.
It is plausible for me to imagine something like this: Spielberg was thinking, "Iwo Jima-massive beach landing, grueling air assault on Mt. Suribachi, warm human stories of humble enlisted men who heroically raised the flag." On the other hand, Eastwood was thinking, "This movie is really about these three surviving flag raisers, just some simple, naive kids still wet behind the ears, who got caught up in a rather cynical government PR campaign to sell bonds in the last days of the war." Whereas Spielberg wanted to build the guys up, Eastwood wanted to cut them down to the real flawed human beings they were. As a result, the sprawling story line seemed to be constantly fighting against itself.
Finally, I was disappointed that the book`s brilliant insights into the uncanny power of an image, the flag raising photo, got seriously neglected. The book was one of those "aha" moments about the subject, and it led me to do some deeper reading in a relatively new area of study in my discipline, the theory of visual communication. By rights, in my opinion, that Pulitzer Prize winning shot by AP photographer Joe Rosenthal (who just recently died) should have been the star of this movie.
Eastwood`s vision may be true. While our culture has mythologized the battle of Iwo Jima as one of America`s finest moments and the U. S. Marine Corps as a group of larger-than-life heroes, in fact the ordinary men in combat on that fateful day were not heroes and not idealists. He sees five of the six flag raisers as callow, inexperienced 19-year olds.
The cast was chosen according to Eastwood`s vision. Barry Pepper, the actor who played the super-religious sniper in Spielberg`s Saving Private Ryan, drew the role of Strank. He`s the one who was a true hero of the real story of Iwo Jima. Like thousands of others, he was subsequently killed in the ongoing combat that lasted well over a month after the flag raising.
The three surviving flag raisers were anti-heroes who happened to be caught by a photojournalist in a routine chore. The resulting photo conveyed a different impression. They were yanked off the line and sent around America on a whirlwind fund raising tour as "Iwo Jima heroes." The first of these three men "Doc" Bradley, the medical corpsman played by Ryan Phillippe. He is shown as a conscientious but callow care giver who exhibited uncommon bravery under enemy fire during the heat of the initial hostilities. He became a most reticent and reluctant spokesman for America throughout the rest of his lifetime, haunted as he was by his traumatic memories of the horrors he had seen. Rene Gagnon (played by Jesse Bradford) is another shallow, immature character. He was not to be trusted with front line duties. Instead, his commanding officer designated him to serve the office staff as a runner in order to keep him out of the way. On the fund raising tour, he is portrayed as being dominated by his brassy girl friend, who horned in whenever cameras came out.
Pfc. Ira Hayes (played by Adam Beach), the remaining important character, had the most tragic story of all. He was a Pima Indian from Arizona, who also happened to be an alcoholic. Beach is really ten years too old for the part, but his acting skills are the best of the entire cast. He should have been nominated for Best Supporting Actor. In life, as in the movie, Hayes suffered terribly from survivor`s guilt. He drank heavily (and publicly) throughout his temporary stateside PR duties. The movie portrays him as being frequently snubbed and offended by the American public on account of his race. Finally he was sent back to rejoin his unit in the Pacific shortly before his fund raising assignment ended, at his own request.
After the war was over, Hayes returned to the poverty and obscurity of the Gila River reservation. At one point, he hitchhiked and walked from Arizona to MacAllen, Texas, to visit the parents of his buddy, Harlan Block, who was one of the original six flag raisers. Block was never publicly recognized by the U. S. government due to a misidentification. After Hayes reassured Harlan`s father that Harlan was really the one in the picture, he then turned around and walked back to Arizona. Soon after that, he died prematurely, due to his drinking.
Christian Ethical Notions Suggested by These Movies. What is a hero? Encarta provides this definition, among others: "Somebody who commits an act of remarkable bravery or who has shown great courage, strength of character, or another admirable quality. Somebody who is admired and looked up to for outstanding qualities or achievements." What is an antihero? "Somebody who is the central character in a story but who is not brave, noble, or morally good as heroes traditionally are."
Based on these semantic boundaries, Clint Eastwood may be right in his campaign to downplay Hollywood`s turning everything into a grand, inspirational heroic epic-even including, sad to say, such revered stories as the magnificent exploits of the U. S. Marines in WW II. War movies are ideal for staging tales of super heroic feats and larger than life heroes. John Wayne made dozens of such movies in which our troops were not just heroes, but superheroes, with supernatural powers. Early in his film career, Eastwood did, too. But not lately.
Also important, this movie illustrates (or should have illustrated) the amazing power of the visual image. The flag raising photo is reputed to be the most reproduced, most requested, and most significant black and white image ever published. Of course it conveys a message of intrepid bravery and of military victory, no doubt far beyond what the actual event of that particular mundane flag raising chore that day deserves to carry. Even admitting that we have John Wayne to thank for our false assumptions about how that perfect picture came to pass, due to his totally fictionalized film and hyped up version of that obscure episode during a lull in the action, we must also admit that the image was responsible for selling an awful lot of Victory Bonds.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
