generouspixels

I was very disappointed to learn that this movie was only going to have a limited showing in the US, only one or two theaters on either coast. My wife and I both enjoyed 'Flags' and were pleased when we learned that Clint Eastwood made a second movie, this time telling the story from the Japanese perspective. As luck would have it, we going to Japan for the holidays so we decided to try and see the movie in Tokyo during our trip. We went to the Ginza area of Tokyo and, to our surprise, the movie was completely sold out. We needed to buy tickets at least one day in advance. Further, we learned that the movie was currently number 1 in Japan. Wow – that's impressive that an American made movie would become number one in Japan! Way to go, Clint! After a little extra planning and some adjustments to our schedule, we bought advance tickets and came back the next day.
We completely loved it. We were moved and stirred with many emotions including anger, anger over the horrors of war. We actually liked it better than 'Flags of our Fathers'. The movie was in Japanese and, as near as we could tell, Japanese appears to be the native language of the film. There were brief moments of English, American solders talking, one flash back scene before the war during a foreign dignitary dinner, and of course the credits at the end. The movie would have to be translated and/or sub titled to English in order to have half a chance in the US. Frankly, I think translation would take away from the movie's beauty and meaning. I understand a limited amount of Japanese so I could follow most of the story. The theater was very big and packed. I was a little uncomfortable at first; I may well have been the only American in the place. My wife (who is Japanese) and I sat next to an older couple. At several points during the film, I thought I noticed the man from the couple crying. When the film ended, my wife talked with the couple and learned that the old man's father died in Iwo jima. Later during the trip, speaking with Japanese friends and seeing the Japanese news, stories of lost loved ones from the war were common and this movie for the Japanese people has brought many of these memories out in the open.
To the Japanese, Iwo jima was a part of their homeland where a foreign invader was going to land and begin its invasion on Japanese soil. Throughout all of recorded Japanese history, never had a foreign invader prevailed in war against the Japanese on Japanese land. The imperial Japanese government of that time used this when they sent fighters to Iwo jima. These fighters were to ordered to 'fight to the death' defending their country. That to loose and not die fighting would bring disgrace to self and family. They knew that America was planning to send an overwhelming force and they knew that they were being sent to die. For Americans, Iwo jima was just another far away place and different point in time where American boys were sent and where, unfortunately, some lives were lost fighting for freedom. My god, have we become that blasé about the wars our sons and daughters are being sent to fight in? My wife and I are unique, not typical American movie goers. I'm American, my wife is Japanese. Together, we've visited and cried together at the A-bomb Dome in Hiroshima, and again at the Arizona Memorial in Hawaii. I have relatives who fought in the Pacific, she also has family who fought in the war and who lived in Hroshima. I have two sons now serving in the US Marines. Together my wife and I watched and enjoyed both movies. The movies really didn't bring anything new, historically, to us about Iwo jima. But, the movies did do an excellent job reminding us that the ones who pay the price for war are normal everyday people. People who really don't understand the reasons or the politics behind why they are being sent to die. People who live, love, and are loved by family and friends. People with dreams and ambitions. But, for some reason when called by the leaders of the time, they go forward, obey orders, and do their duty. Sometimes, paying the ultimate price.
I've grown up with Clint Eastwood and it has been a wonderful entertaining journey. These two movies are, in my opinion, his best. Not because of the action, or the drama, or any of the other things that Clint Eastwood is known for, but because he's given us two interlinked stories about the affects of war on the people who are called to pay the ultimate price – people like you and me. We may be from different cultures, eat different food, speak different languages, prey to God differently, but we all have things in common. We all live, love, want to be loved, and we dream about and long for peace. And, sometimes we are called to serve and pay for the opportunity. Thank you Clint.

684 out of 745 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Did it really last two and a half hours? It felt felt a lot shorter than that.
No, this is not an action war film with nonstop blood baths. It is a film that pulls the humanity out of the monster that is war.
This is one of, if not the best, movie ever directed by Clint Eastwood. I usually have a hard time following plots with many characters because they make me lose focus on the general story, but this one is done well. Not only am I engaged, I also become attached to every character and feel and understand their conflicts.
It does not matter who fights on the right or wrong side of WWII. This film goes beyond that. It is about what is right or wrong for the individual human being. It excels as a story about the human heart.

381 out of 424 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

In the second half of 'Letters from Iwo Jima,' a group of Japanese soldiers find an American who has been badly wounded and take him into their cave. Their general speaks English, so he begins talking to this soldier, whose name we later find out is Sam. Although the two men should be sworn to kill each other, they are able to have a connection in the one conversation they have. A while later, the general comes back into the room only to discover that Sam's wounds have killed him. He searches him for a while and discovers a letter written by his mother. The letter is full of words that truly come from the heart of this kid's mother, and by the time the general finishes reading the letter, every soldier in that cave has realized that Americans aren't these savages; these hate-driven murderers. No, they all realize that Americans are exactly like they are, and that they don't want to be there and want to return home safely just like their enemies. I believe the point that Clint Eastwood is making with his Iwo Jima saga is just this: these two enemies were far more alike than they had imagined and they were both fighting only in hopes of returning home safely to their family.
As for the specific film itself. In just about every way imaginable, this absolutely brilliant film is a step up from 'Flags of our Fathers' (which is not something I say easily, as 'Flags' is a terrific film in my opinion). From the acting of the incredible ensemble cast (most notably from Ken Watanabe's Oscar-worthy performance), to the film's delicate but powerful script, to the beautiful imagery of the film (the color distortion could not be any more brilliant than it is here), to Clint Eastwood's absolutely perfect knowledge of film and what works in a film like this.
Many people are wondering whether this will be able to compete for Best Picture at the Oscars this year. It is true that just about all of the film is spoken in Japanese, but the truth is that Eastwood has created nothing short of a masterpiece with this work, and a foreign language doesn't even come close to making that extremely obvious. I think that this film is very comparable in quality to Steven Spielberg's (who is one of the producers of the film) 'Saving Private Ryan.' Although Spielberg's film has more entertainment value (as it features more action) and has an opening scene that cannot be contended with, Eastwood sends out an even more powerful message about war than Spielberg did, as it turns out that watching soldiers battle with no way out makes you feel the pains of war more than watching the soldiers on the invading side of the army. The fact that 'Ryan' was able to strongly compete for Best Picture (and just about win the award) makes me very certain that this film has great chances, even if Martin Scorsese seems to be tough to beat at this point. What I think allows this to compete with 'The Departed' is the fact that this film doesn't take the 'cool' route that Scorsese took, which isn't something that the Academy has honored in the past.
The score, written by Kyle Eastwood (Clint's son), captures the feel of the movie better than any score written for any movie this year. It is very quiet music, but listening to it makes you think about all the people that die as victims of war.
To sum it all up, 'Letters from Iwo Jima' is one of the greatest war films ever made, and is easily does the best job of depicting war as something that harms all involved that I have ever seen. Clint Eastwood has, with this achievement, engraved his name as one of the greatest American directors in film history.

272 out of 306 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Don't listen to the people who call this movie inaccurate or revisionist history.
The movie is accurate. There were people on both sides of the war who at times showed kindness.
Labeling all the Japanese soldiers as people who tortured POWS would be like saying all American soldiers in Vietnam killed and rape innocent Vietnamese. Or all American soldiers in Cuba tortured POWS from the wars in the Middle East. You can't group people together like that.
This movie shows better than any other film that there's really no good guys or bad guys when it comes to war. War is just pointless.
The movie is not supposed to be a documentary so the people who bash it for little details should go rent a documentary if thats what they want to see.
Also, Clint Eastwood deserves major credit for telling both sides of the war. Too many war movies always show the enemy as 'heartless monsters' when it reality its never like that.
This is without a doubt the best movie of the year. Make sure you go see it.

284 out of 324 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I have watched this film twice already this week (first week of release here in Japan). I am an American living in Japan for the past twenty two years and have yet to see such a strong performance from an (almost) all-Japanese cast. This movie draws you into the caves and makes you a part of the Japanese soldier's life. The main characters all have an interesting story to tell. But in the end the message is clear. War is futile.
The strangest part of all. Clint Eastwood has made a Japanese movie that the Japanese should have made. There is almost no way to tell it was a 'foriegn' production until you see the credits.

320 out of 376 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

It was worth it for producer/director Clint Eastwood to tackle on a second part to his now two-part duo of Iwo Jima movies. With Flags of Our Fathers Eastwood tried for very ambitious ground in covering what it's like for Americans to fight a war worth fighting for but with life's value undermined in the scope of preserving the 'grander' scheme of things like the flag on the mountain. Unfortunately, the screenplay with that film was also muddled and denied Eastwood's usually assured hand as a storyteller and conveyor of proper moods. But with Letters From Iwo Jima, a slightly radical departure from the usual American-directed war picture by showing the action totally from the side of the 'other', there's a stronger sense of what it meant for the Japanese to fight this war, and the nature of sacrifice and what it means to oneself in relation to one's society, national pride, and to one's mind-set. And, this time, the screenplay doesn't do TOO MUCH of a jumping-around method with the narrative. It's visceral in scope and personal in tone, and there's always an assured hand in dealing with the performances and characters.
We're also shown, unlike in other war films, how the home-field advantage doesn't always yield positive results. Even though the Japanese had Iwo Jima, and had the capabilities to defend it for a little while, without reinforcements it would be all for not (this is compounded with some of the most tragic irony when towards the end the General Kuribayashi listens to a radio broadcast of children singing a song meant for hope of success in a battle that those on the mainland have already abandoned). No matter what though Kuribayashi believes in his men, no matter how in spots morale is already low when the digging on the beaches begin. Saigo, a lowly peasant, is a part of the fight, and for chunks of the film we see the battle from where he stands, even as he doesn't look on it too optimistically. Plans are made, the General orders for tunnels to be dug in the center of the island against advisement (though under good thought to do so), and then even before the ships and huge fleet of troops land comes the bombs from the air. The desperation, as the battle continues and trudges on, becomes almost too crushing for the weakest of the soldiers, and soon all thoughts of cohesion within the ranks breaks apart.
It's in many of these scenes that Eastwood garners his most dramatically charged moments in either one of the Iwo Jima movies. Maybe it's almost too easy though- when seeing this movie, taking out of context what was shown in 'Flags', one might think that the Americans had the battle on a silver platter. But taken back into context there's a greater sense of loss on the enemy side, not just of life but of what it means to fight for a cause that is never totally explained, to an Emperor practically all of these soldiers wont see or meet, and that to kill oneself is a brave act against the odds. The scene where many soldiers in the cave kill themselves with grenades- and then with two of the soldiers finally deciding that this is insanity and fleeing from the bodies- is very affecting. Then added to this, we see the letters being written, how the humanity of these people can never be denied no matter how hopeless their situation seemed to get. Sometimes we're also provided with flashbacks for some of the characters (some, like a man talking to his unborn child in his wife's womb, are too atypical, but there is one that leaves a very lasting impression involving the murdering of a dog- a scene that left people in the theater gasping even after so much battle carnage already happened).
Though mostly we're stuck in these caves and tunnels with these soldiers- one of the exceptions of this, Shimizu, was in said scene with the dog- there are other small vignettes, like the lieutenant who decides to break away to strap some explosives on himself to blow up an enemy cannon, only to fall asleep, and once awakened forgetting the whole act. And, of course, the ones who could not think of any other way- in fact seeing it treasonous otherwise- than to not sacrifice oneself for the homeland. All the while the acting is always competent, sometimes even ranging into the brilliant, and with Ken Watanabe delivering some of the finest notes of emotion (and also holding back emotion or hiding a real emotion) that I've seen from him thus far. And as far as the technical side, Eastwood and his crew have created an appropriately very dark looking picture, with the color desaturated so as to look like it's not really black and white but as if the life has been sucked out so as to look terminally gray (if that makes sense), with the battle footage somehow even more convincing than in 'Flags'.
So in the end, the two Iwo Jima movies bring up a lot to ponder about what it is to fight in war, what it means to be akin to the varying degrees of nationalism, and how it affects the psyche of people who were plucked from very normal lives into circumstances of perpetual death and, if one lives, the memories. While one doesn't really need the framing of it being 2005 at the end and beginning of the film, there's enough here to mark it as a significant, fascinating achievement for the filmmaker.

134 out of 166 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The companion film to 'Flags of Our Fathers' shows the battle of Iwo Jima from the Japanese point of view. Starting with the building of fortifications, hiding from relentless bombardment, and fending off an equally strong attack as American troops land on the island.
'Letters from Iwo Jima' just like 'Flags of Our Fathers' is a first rate war movie with a relevant message with its critical nature. 'Flags' showed the selling of war and 'Letters' does the same, albeit with a different mind-set. Japan was an empire governed by a monarch back then so the military mentality was quite different, but it is also important to note the similarities. Especially at the base of the social pyramid where it is quite apparent that people are people no matter where you go.
Virtually all of the uber-patriotic tendencies that were rampant in Imperial Japan during WWII were also in Nazi Germany and, as both 'Flags' and 'Letters' demonstrate in the United States as well. People were used for the purpose of the government and were fed propaganda just the same. Maybe a different in a different form, but in the end it is all the same.
Ken Wantanbe is the film's highlight as a military man torn between his sense of duty and his inner feelings. As commander of the island he sees amongst his men the fanaticism, the pacifism, the 'just do our job' crowd, and many other configurations of thought in between and mixed with the others. Even strange that some men initially want to fight and are proud to serve in the military and what's shocking is that some of their wives and mothers believe the same.
That paints a landscape of war as something amidst all of the stereotypes that have been made of it. Since that is where the truth usually lies, amidst all the gray matter. --- 9/10
Rated R: war violence/carnage

111 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

After much anticipation I was finally able to see Letters from Iwo Jima. I had left Flags of Our Fathers with a smile on my face saying now that was a great war film and it would be hard to match. Letters from Iwo Jima not only matches Flags of Our Fathers but also surpasses it and went on to tie Saving Private Ryan as the greatest war film I have ever seen. I sat numbed after viewing this film and look forward to watching it again.
Unlike its predecessor, Letters from Iwo Jima follows one story line set on the island of Iwo Jima. Saigo is a baker who was recruited into the Imperial Army of Japan and is stationed on Iwo Jima. General Kuribayashi soon arrives and takes command of the poorly fortified island. Tensions develop between army commanders and Kuribayashi as he fortifies a plan to defend the island. Soon the battle begins when a massive American Fleet arrives planning to take the island within 5 days. Kuribayashi is determined to inflict as much damage and loss of life upon the American's before he will give up the island. The whole while Saigo and his comrades write numerous letters home in the hopes of getting some sense of what home is.
The film is terribly realistic and loaded with violence. However, in no way does Letters from Iwo Jima glorify warfare. Eastwood portrays battles for what they truly are bloody and horrific. We are shown everything from men being lit on fire to being blown to bits to suicides by grenades. We are shown the true futility of war and how each side understands so little about the other. The film is a great message of anti-war just through showing what war truly is: bombardments, death, destruction, and bloody.
Kazunari Ninomiya to my big surprise is a member of a Japanese boy band. When I went to read through the profiles of some of the actors I expected to see a long list of films but was amazed to only find a few films and the bit about him being a member of Arashi (the band). Ninomiya does a fantastic job. We really feel for him but he is not made out to be entirely sympathetic. He shows much disdain for some people around him and occasionally runs his mouth toward fellow comrades, especially Shimizu. Saigo is a very believable character and Ninomiya portrays him quite well. I applaud his performance.
Ken Watanabe gives perhaps the performance of his career. His stunning deliverance of lines and the sheer look of him on the screen is enough to make a viewer sit up and listen to everything he has to say. He gives off the true sense of a man who is a great military commander but also a human being. We are shown him writing home and also told of some of his past. It is quite moving to hear his views on the war, the battle, and of his men. Kuribayashi is one of my favorite military men in history and Watanabe did a great portrayal of him.
Ryo Kase closes out the lead actors. He is a silent fellow who is looked on with much disdain from Saigo. Saigo believes Shimizu to be a member Kempeitai (the very strict and often corrupt military police of Imperial Japan). This story is eventually expanded on later in the film. I felt the most sympathy for Shimizu for he had no intention of coming to the island, is not liked by anyone for an assumption by two fellow soldiers, and represents some of the ignorance that was put into soldiers back in World War II, viewing the enemy as savages though he later states 'he knows nothing of the enemy.'
What the movie does so well is its portrayal of humanity and the ignorance that is at the root of international conflicts. The film portrays both the good and the bad of the Imperial Japanese Army. The good side being Lt. Col. Nishi and the bad being Lt. Ito. We come to realize that most Hollywood films that make the Japanese Army out to be savages are dead wrong and that both sides on a war are very much human. The most poignant scene by far involves this when Nishi cares for and speaks with a dying Marine. It shows that understanding must occur for anyone to have peace with another in the world.
Letters from Iwo Jima is a powerful film. We are shown the good and the bad of both sides. The film is about 98% in Japanese with three or four scenes spoken in English. The cast is all Japanese which was a must for the film giving it a more authentic feel to it. The battles are gritty and real and will shake you up. By far a tremendous film with an amazing message of humanity and survival. The one message I got from it the most was, as spoken by Lt. Col. Nishi: 'Do what is right because it is right.'
5/5 stars

25 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Not since Akira Kurosawa's 'Rashômon' has anyone attained such exquisite insight into the human condition, having read 'Flags of our Fathers' and growing up, having veterans tell me of their experiences on Iwo Jima,I would look back at them in awe at the fact that they were here sharing their very own story,and many times they to could not believe they were alive.It is amazing to see the sensitivity that Mr.Eastwood imbued into both tales. The scriptwriter Iris Yamashita brought me to tears only at the end of the film with the conundrum we still live with today.Peoples dreams are both sacred and profane and lives are cheap.

130 out of 166 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This movie is so good. Probably even great. Like other movies it shows the horrors of war. Letters From Iwo Jima gives a real genuine feeling too it. You really feel scared for all the characters involved. By no means is it stating something new by showing the negatives of war but what it does have that other anti-war movies don't show well. It is realistic more than anything, it shows the past lives of the soldiers briefly yet it feels like you know so much about the character. This movie is the Platoon of this decade.
The directing was great in this movie. Clint Eastwood does such a masterful job here. Showing landscapes of the island, the incredibly large fleet of the U.S. He really is able to teach you some history in this film without having to state facts. Usually subplots of characters in these war movies spin out of control and just confuse or bore you. This movie is done just right because of the directing. Eastwood does not put too many characters yet he is able to show the responsibilities and feeling of certain ranks from the general down to a simple private.
All of this has to do with great editing. This movie could have easily fallen into a 3 1/2 hour novel/soap opera. Instead the movie jumps from scene to scene so fluidly and consistently that you want to see more and more.
The acting was great. Ken Watanabe led a pretty much unknown cast(at least to me) giving great conventional yet original portrayals to their roles. The acting made it so easy to get into this movie and the characters. Ken Watanabe was fantastic in here perfectly displaying the pressures of a general. He is able to show how their needs to be some sort of hope to survive, no matter how bad times can be.
The music was spectacular. It stuck out so much and gave me as mentioned before such a genuine feeling. Every part of this movie was great and in my opinion is better than some recent World War II such as Saving Private Ryan, A Thin Red Line or anything else that I have seen from the past 10-15 years.
You could see that this movie was done so well and with so much feeling. It was not made to impress people but too make a real statement. That is what makes the movie so great. You can see that well funded movies can still be powerful. This movie is a sign of hope from the movie industry that has seemed to become more and more commercial. I know I'am repeating myself but that is because this movie reminds me of such great war movies such as The Deer Hunter, Platoon, Born On the Fourth of July, Apocalypse Now and The Killing Fields. These were all powerful movies and this has go to be right up there. Just shows the power of foreign movies when they are actually noticed and somewhat funded. Remember this movie by no means had a big budget.

25 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

My family went to the movies every week back in the 1940's when I was a young kid. Before each movie there was a newsreel. One newsreel which made an indelible impression on me contained footage of the battle on Iwo Jima. It showed terrifying images of U.S. soldiers using flamethrowers, aiming them in the caves the Japanese soldiers had hidden in. When a Japanese soldier ran from the cave, his hands up, his whole body engulfed in flames, the audience in our theater applauded and cheered. I was horrified and have never forgotten the awful feeling I had then. I was only nine.
When I saw the same scene enacted in 'Letters from Iwo Jima', I was taken back to that time so long ago and I relived the extreme sadness I felt then, but even more so. Tears flowed during the rest of the movie. I couldn't talk for an hour afterward as I was grieving so.
This movie is honest and truthful, a must see for those who feel that war is the answer to anything.
I used to think Clint Eastwood was a 'crybaby' when I watched Rowdy Yates in the first episodes of 'Rawhide'. Now, I believe Clint is one of the best things to come out of 'Hollywood' ever!

35 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Because my late father fought on Iwo Jima, I have always been a student of the battle. I've studied the character and tactics of General Kuribayashi since elementary school and Eastwood's film and Ken Wanatabe's portrayal have embodied every notion I ever had of the general. I loved 'Flags of Our Fathers' and plan to own it when it becomes available, but 'Letters' is a better film. In spite of the English subtitles, 'Letters' flows on screen more evenly than 'Flags' and exhibits an equal dose of individual human emotions. The plight of the individual soldier in war is universal regardless of the evil or good his leaders exhibit. While some soldiers are unusually cruel, most just want to go home in one piece. This film teaches that beautifully.

19 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

At the conclusion of the film a person behind me said, 'Incredible,' twice. Another person followed with, 'A masterpiece.' I would concur. Perhaps it isn't a perfect film but it is a movie with great impact. I find that it is a testament to the skill of Clint Eastwood as a director and Iris Yamashita as screenwriter that some of the scenes that had the greatest impact were of minor things—a letter read out loud, the way someone saluted, a tear, a song..
There were no clear cut heroes or villains beyond 'war' itself. I'm reminded of that saying, 'No one wins a war. One side simply loses more than the other.' War diminishes us all. We must learn to turn our backs on such endeavors even if it means that the military/industrial death merchants take a cut in profits or that they truly learn to hammer swords into plow shares.
If the film were to depict the battle in a manner that was realistically experienced by the soldiers the film would be unbearable to any viewer. One must see the battle and history as a kind of allegorical backdrop to a story about the utter inhumanity and futility of war. As a film it had to illustrate the overall societal insanity of war through a human lens, and it did this in a deeply moving way.

21 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Letters from Iwo Jima
There is only one word to describe this movie: INCREDIBLE. I am a huge Martin Scorsese fan and I thought he deserved Best Director. However, Letters from Iwo Jima deserved Best Picture. This is one of the greatest movies I've ever seen. Anyone who has a heart will feel a bit of sympathy for the Japanese. This is one of the few movies I've ever seen that brings a tear to my eye.
Plot: This movie deals with the Japanese side of Iwo Jima. It shows how the Japanese army fought and shows how they suffered probably more than any military in the entire war. The Japanese were dedicated and probably the best fighters in the entire war. Except for a few scenes the movie is all in Japanese but that doesn't take away from the power and impact this movie has.
Acting: The acting is great. Ken Watanabe gave a fantastic performance as General Kuribyashi. The one who played Saigo gave just as good if not a better performance making a sympathetic character who just wants to go home.
Genre/Quality: This is probably the most emotionally effecting and powerful movie I've ever seen. Never has a movie effected me like this. Never has a war film shown the horror of war like this before. The music was the same throughout the entire movie but it had a great impact. They had a piano and trumpet version. It sounded like a funeral which fit perfectly because Iwo Jima was lost before it even started. The sound editing is great (won Academy Award). The battle scenes are very well done. The only flaw was that they didn't show a timeline. The Japanese held the island for 36 days but it seems like 5. The only other flaw is that they don't make clear exactly how many men there are.
This is probably the most emotionally powerful movie I've ever seen. It has a greater emotional impact than any movie I've ever seen. With a strong story, great acting, and a good message against war, this is a must see movie for everyone.
10/10

15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I know Flags of our Fathers sort of went out with a whimper and wasn't entirely well received by critics and audiences despite the hype and anticipation after Eastwood's last string of movies, but I personally liked it – a lot, even. I thought it was a brilliant study of heroism in wartime as the American people see it as opposed to what true heroism in the immediate reality of the battlefield. It served both as an intricate study of the affects of post-war heroism as imposed on three people just because they lifted a flag, and also as a detailed and fascinating account of US Army politics during World War II and a chronicling of the legendary battle on Iwo Jima and the subsequent media frenzy over the photograph taken there. I'll admit, though, the film suffered from some flaws, one major one being a total lack of deep and interesting characters, which in turn kept us the audience distanced from the events unfolding in the film. And then Eastwood hit us with his companion piece, Letters from Iwo Jima, which chronicles the same battle from the Japanese side. And with Iris Yamashita's beautiful and resonant screenplay, Eastwood makes up for all the flaws in the previous film and fills in the gaps – If anything, Letters from Iwo Jima completes and deepens Flags of our Fathers, but also, and perhaps subsequently, improves upon it greatly.
Truly the greatest asset of the film and the one that really separates it from Flags of our Fathers is its emphasis on the human angle. The film truly is a fascinating character study, with emphasis on General Kuribayashi, Saigo the baker, and others. Their characters are so well rounded and fleshed out it's practically impossible not to feel an immediate connection, which, as I mentioned, I felt was the biggest flaw in Flags of our Fathers. These aspects come out in full force in Iris Yamashita's brilliant screenplay. Eastwood and Yamashita take such delicate care to develop these characters and round them out, it's impossible not to be affected by them. We are treated with flashbacks that further detail how some of the characters arrived on the island and what they were like before, and we see perfectly just how deteriorated they are after being sent to war. Alongside the characters' stories, though, we are treated with the chronological unfolding of the battle on the island from the Japanese perspective. As an educational tool and an historic chronicle, the film also works wonders, as it taught me a lot about the Japanese side of the battle and just how they were prepared and conducted.
The acting is truly phenomenal. All of the actors do incredible, extraordinary work, although I must single out two actors in particular who really blew me away. The first is Ken Watanabe. I haven't seen any of his native work, but I can safely say based upon his American studio work (The Last Samurai, Memoirs of a Geisha and of course this film) that the man is a force to be reckoned with. I simply hope that he is not reduced to roles in vain of Chow Yun-Fat or Jet Li in their American films. He adds such an atmosphere of wisdom, intelligence and determination – quite the opposite of how the Japanese enemy is usually portrayed in WWII films. His character is entirely human and not reduced to a suicidal, angry general type, which is probably what many people would expect. The second is Kazunari Ninomiya, who plays Saigo. What a heartbreaking performance this actor provides. He is small, scrawny, not built for war. He has trouble fitting in. His expression is that of constant exhaustion. But his determination to live and to honour his general over himself is touching and fascinating to watch. His delivery and performance in general is absolutely stunning.
In terms of themes, the most intricate and important aspect of the film is its examination of the psyche of the warfare itself. In Flags of our Fathers, like in his earlier films such as Unforgiven, Eastwood portrays an examination and dissection of heroism and what it meant both for those who are labeled heroes and those who did the labeling. With Letters from Iwo Jima, Eastwood studies the exact opposite of the spectrum; glory. It's almost as if Eastwood is more fascinated with the Japanese comprehension of heroism than the American one. The Japanese soldiers in the film don't have such a thing as heroism to begin with. What they do have is glory and honour. They accept their clear and present defeat with humbleness and modesty, perhaps too much so as they rather take their own lives than fall into the hands of the enemy. If Flags of our Fathers was a criticism of wartime splendor and heroism, Letters from Iwo Jima is a modest glorification of these elements.
In all, with Letters from Iwo Jima, Eastwood creates a new kind of war film that stands quite apart from its counterparts both because it portrays the side of the enemy but also and especially because it takes extra special care in emphasizing the human aspect of the soldiers it depicts, humanizing and characterizing them to endless extent. As a psychological study of warfare and as a history lesson, Eastwood has crafted a truly masterful and meaningful piece that's riveting and fascinating as it is intricate and complex. One of the best films of the year.

14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

…… the entertainment aspect.
While 'Letters from Iwo Jima' is truly a great achievement is several ways, the script is powerful, the production is superb, all the technical departments almost perfected their jobs, there is some really good acting as well, and Eastwood's touch as a director is very visible, and its beautiful, it flaws almost flawlessly in this regard.
Well, what's wrong then? It simply lacks what makes it a really interesting movie. 'Letters' starts with a present day scene of excavators digging up remains of the war in Iwo Jima, and finding letters in a cave that were written by Japanese soldiers and officers during the war on Iwo Jima island, it then travels back in time to WWII and story revolves around those whom their letters were found during the dawn of the American invasion on that island. Slowly, the movie loses its grip over its audience, becoming something closer to an audio book, and survival becomes a repetitive process!!!
Everyone seem to be praising the film for being told from the other side, and its true you don't see that many American film makers do that, and although the film didn't just speak Japanese, it lived and breathed Japanese, it couldn't escape the limited framework of Hollywood, this is very visible through the 'good' characters, all the good, honest or lovable Japanese characters were either American sympathizers who lived in the US for a while and kept saying how a great nation the US is, or are Japanese people that do not care for the Imperial system and would not mind handing over the island to their rival Americans. On the other hand, all Japanese loyalists were mean American haters. Even the resolution of the strict Imperial soldiers was that the Americans were not as evil as they were told. But still, everyone was very fond of the fact that the movie was told completely from a Japanese point of view. However, just because Eastwood is an American film maker making a Japanese-point-of-view movie, doesn't make the film any better than what it really is, the film's ratings seem to be getting higher just because there is an American film maker behind it and I disagree, it is what it is regardless who the people behind it were.
The film was also highly praised as a companion film to 'Flags', and while together they form a great duo, on its own, 'Letters' does not achieve greatness.
Why did Eastwood and Spielberg decide to make 'Letters from Iwo Jima' this calm instead of making an adrenaline-pumping film? My guess is that they did not care about the average audience and the commercial success as much as they did care for the story's integrity.
Majd Selbi

46 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I wanted to write that 'Letters from Iwo Jima' was the perfect bookend to 'Flags of Our Fathers' only it isn't. It's MUCH better than 'Flags' (even though I liked most of that too).
Buster Keaton knew 'The General' would be a better movie and he would get more sympathy if his character was on what we knew was the losing side and that goes for 'Letters' as well. All along as we meet these interesting characters (well played and well directed) we know that in the end, despite all their efforts they are doomed to failure and most of them will die, with very little chance of survival (the Japanese casualties on Iwo were some 95%). One can't help but sympathize with the baker and other characters whose culture values death before surrender.
Eastwood does a marvelous job telling his story with pictures, subtitles and occasional flashbacks. Ken Watenabe is terrific as the island commander. I don't know if a lot of people will see this film (not that many saw 'Flags') but they should. It's a great war movie, told from the side of a doomed but courageous enemy.

26 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

If ever you needed any confirmation on the lack of collective wisdom the AMPAS has, then you only need to see this film and wonder why they let that overrated, overwrought Scorsese gangster flick take home the Oscar for best director.
Perhaps there's something exotic about watching a film that veers away from a culture that we are so habituated to watching, well.. especially in the context of the POV of a war film.
LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA, just like 'Flags of Our Fathers' excels in portraying humanity in the context of the perils and desperation of war, but this time from the Japanese point of view. It even has one of the most powerful scenes Eastwood has ever put to film in his career, call it 'hand grenade hara kiri' or whatever; but that scene is probably what puts the nail in the coffin in my decision to call IWO JIMA a better film than 'Flags.' Combine that with his minimal but effective use of CG in capturing the epic scope of the battles, and IWO JIMA is an instant masterpiece. Like most of Eastwood's films - IWO JIMA is ultimately a tragedy.. a tragedy of human frailty and our limitations, our need to reach out.. and perhaps our need for salvation. But it is not a sour-tempered tragedy because it portrays humanity very accurately and matter-of-factly.
So indeed Eastwood, despite the AMPAS giving him more than one win of that golden trophy - was still robbed of the Oscar this year.

13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Despite how embarrassing and condemning it may be, I am going to honestly explain how I felt while watching this movie.
About a half hour through, I realized, with some horror, I really didn't care about any of the characters. It wasn't that they were portrayed poorly, they were plenty convincing and even interesting. I was certainly curious about what was going to happen to them, but curiosity is where it stopped. I shared no emotional or sympathetic bond with any character, I did not need for any of them to survive, I did not suffer when any fell. I'm not entirely sure why this is. Is it because of cultural differences? Is it because they were speaking another language? I think it must be that somewhere in the back of my mind, I knew I was watching the enemy. These people were in situations, at least sometimes, I could sympathize with and displayed extremely admirable qualities, I just couldn't invest emotionally in anyone. It wasn't until an injured American made his way onto the screen that I could feel my heartstrings being pulled. Granted, that may be because it was the most amazing scene in the movie, but I think it's really because they started speaking in English and talked about places I had heard of before.
The film is truly remarkable what it put me through. I've never watched a war movie except through a Western set of heroes and they are generally the victors. Eastwood made me examine myself more thoroughly by being placed somewhere so foreign. I'm not saying my default attachment watching the Japanese is necessarily wrong or immoral (who knew I was so patriotic?), but it was certainly there with me in the theater. I thought myself more enlightened, more a member of the global village. This movie revealed that perhaps I am not. A lesser film, I don't think would have allowed for so much introspection.
It is an American that commits the most heinous acts in the movie. The most amoral thing I might have ever seen done on film, and I'm shocked how quickly I thought, 'Well war does terrible things to people.' If the Japanese had done something comparable (as they do in the companion piece FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS, I probably would have thought instead, 'What a messed up culture.'
Why none of these fine actors were nominated for an Academy Award, I don't know.

15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Letters was brilliant. Letters was almost entirely in Japanese. Letters starred Japanese actors, including the excellent Ken Watanabe. But it was an American production, directed by Clint Eastwood. Set as a Japanese view of the invasion of Iwo Jima, it is the companion film to Flags of Our Fathers. Though Flags was very good, it seems like Eastwood got a better grasp of the setting when he shot Letters. The story was far more convincing, dark and moving. Letters captured the horrors and even boredom of warfare masterfully. The film worked best because it didn't gloss over the Japanese Bushido Code of Warfare, but it also didn't make you feel any less for the main characters. To me, it seemed that the mission of this film was to get western audiences to understand the Japanese view of the Second World War, without apologizing for it. Letters succeeded in this with magnificence and showed the true terror and hopelessness of the Japanese cause by the time the invasion of Iwo occurred and yet had a poetry to it. It was almost as if Eastwood channeled the spirit of the late master of Japanese film, Akira Kurosawa and directed more than a movie, he directed a bleak yet beautiful film. This film was more than just a war film, it was a work of art. It demonstrated the oneness of humanity in our most barbaric and tribal setting. Mr. Eastwood, this was your finest hour.

13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I'm trying hard to recall the war movies I've seen that offer a balance between the humanity and atrocity of two opposing sides the way 'Letters From Iwo Jima' does, and I can't think of one. That is where the film excels, and if one has trouble calling it an anti-war movie, at least it's a pro-life one. The film surpasses Eastwood's tandem effort, 'Flags Of Our Fathers' in my estimation, but then, they are two quite different films, even though they have the same historical battle at their core.
What's difficult to understand, even as the movie makes clear, is the average Japanese soldiers' willingness to die in battle for honor and duty to the Emperor and homeland. My summary line above was spoken by a Japanese officer, stated without reservation or with intimation of victory or defeat, but as a matter of fact. It's hard to imagine that an entire nation operated on that principal just a little over a half century ago.
The vignette pieces of Eastwood's film serve the story well, as the backdrop of the invasion creates a realization that Iwo Jima will fall without additional Japanese troops or air cover to provide reinforcement. Perhaps wisely, the statistics of the thirty six day battle in March, 1945 are intentionally left out. They are grim, of twenty two thousand defenders on Iwo Jima, only 217 prisoners were taken, the rest fell in battle or to suicide to avoid the humiliation of capture by the enemy. American casualties topped six thousand, with another nineteen thousand wounded, requiring the use of whole blood and plasma on a scale never utilized in combat before. Reflecting on those numbers is a totally inadequate exercise and virtually impossible to comprehend, and yet this was a single battle field in the Pacific theater.
If you care to learn more of this battle and the war in the Pacific, an excellent resource is the documentary series 'Crusade In The Pacific', utilizing film footage from cameramen on both sides of the War. One of the episodes deals with 'Bloody Iwo', and the viewer will be stunned as I was to see how closely Eastwood's depiction of the landing, invasion and ensuing battle resembles the real thing. Both the documentary and 'Letters' will leave you with the impression that our global leaders still haven't gotten it figured out yet, that war is devastating and senseless, and we never truly learn from the mistakes of the past.

9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Usually we see American made films and they follow a certain pattern, while foreign films seem to us being from 'left field.' This film was more foreign, not because of sub titles and language, but of HOW it was made. We are seeing the characters though eyes that we are not used to seeing from. This is quite similar to 'All Quiet on the Western Front' in how we are sympathetic to the principals.
One is glued to the screen from EVERY scene. The 'reality' of the action is very strong and moving. We almost feel what it is like being Japanese.
The sound quality is superb! When the bombs are falling from planes it is like being there, having been a veteran myself.
This movie should be nominated as best picture at the Acadmy Awards. Clint Eastwood steps out of good into greatness in this effort.

9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The film concerns about General Kuribayashi(Ken Watanabe)who takes command of the troops on the island of Iwo Jima, he's responsible for the defense of the island from the US army , one of the most difficult campaigns of the Pacific theater. While a young soldier named Saigo(Ninomiya) faces the war horror. When the battle starts , both Kuribayashi and Saigo encounter courage, bravery, and honor.The picture is magnificently directed by Clint Eastwood(Flag of our fathers), and his son Kyle Eastwood realized an atmospheric musical score. Appropriate and colorful cinematography by Tom Stern. Spectacular production design by Henry Bumstead in his last film , he usually worked for Alfred Hitchcock and Clint Eastwood. Splendid screenplay by Paul Haggis(also producer along with Steven Spielberg). Rating : Above average, well worth watching.
Adding more details over the largely described on the movie, the events happened of the following manner: Iwo Jima is a tiny island of volcanic rock and black sand. It has no natural water supply and covers just 8 square miles. Its capture was vital to the US war effort , however. It was one of the inner ring of islands protecting mainland Japan. It also lay almost halfway between the Japanese home island and the Marianas which had been occupied by US forces in mid-1944. The island was defended by 21.000 Japanese. The commander , Major General Kuribayashi had worked hard to add to the natural defenses , especially around Mount Suribachi and in the North. He had built one of the most formidable defensive complexes of the war. It had miles of tunnels and trenches , hundred of underground emplacements, antitank ditches and mini-fields. Kuribayashi knew that the garrison had no hope of any outside help and could not withdraw from the island. He ordered his men to fight and die in their trenches. They should kill as many enemy as possible, using the network of tunnels to get destruction squads, joining a squad meant almost certain death. Kuribayashi chose not to oppose the initial landings on the beaches. He would lure the US troops inland into the web of defensive positions in the interior. The US invasion was code-named operation detachment. When US bombers began attacking was bombed every day in what was the longest and heaviest aerial bombardment of the whole Pacific war. The landings involved 800 warships, manned by a total of 220.000 crew. About 110.000 troops were to take part in the initial assault of follow-on landings. The landings themselves were responsibility of three Marine Divisions under the command of Major General Harry Schmidt. US Marines took cover from Japanese fire on a beach of volcanic sand, March 5,1945 and Mount Suribachi rises behind them. The island was declared secure on March 26, the 36 days of fighting had taken a terrible toll on both sides. Some 5.931 Marines had been killed and 17.372 wounded. There were also about 2.800 naval casualties. The precise number of Japanese dead is not known. Only 216 men surrendered during the fighting, although another 900 or so surrendered later. The rest of the 21.000 troops died. The intensity of the fighting for Iwo Jima worried US commanders and politicians. The Japanese had been willing to die almost to a man to protect a tiny part of their homeland. They had inflicted severe losses on the US forces.

4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Clint, you have done it again! Letters from Iwo Jima is a different war film that separates itself from any other war films that is a guaranteed terrific rating. In high school, I wrote a paper on Iwo Jima, it's a war that is very over looked, especially by Americans, all we mostly know is that Iwo Jima is known for the famous image of the American soldiers planting the American flag in victory. Unfortunately, due to the monstrous image that we have created of the Axies powers in WWII, I feel that we have overlooked their history as well, Letters from Iwo Jima captured the 'in the other person's shoes' perspective perfectly.
Japanese soldiers are preparing for a strong battle to come onto the land of Iwo Jima, defending their land that is about to be invaded by the American troops. It's not a matter of taking sides, but what these soldiers were going through, knowing that they were sure to have a strong chance of death or extreme injury. For a country where pride is extremely precious and if you come off as a coward, you are a traitor to your land, we realize the terror not only from where the Americans were standing, but also the utter feeling of helplessness that the Japanese soldiers were feeling. Wanting to survive, some feel that they may have to just swallow their pride while watching their best friends and family die in front of their eyes.
Clint captured perfectly how every side has a story; I am an American, I have extreme pride for where I come from, just like the Japanese did and still do. Both sides have extreme sympathy and hatred from the audience, showing human emotions that everyone could relate too. This film has terrific acting, beautifully disturbing scenery, excellent sound, and just a heart wrenching story that I guarantee if you enjoy history, you will be very proud of this film.
10/10

12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This is quite simply one of the best movies i have ever seen. It left me speechless and in tears. A genuine masterpiece, beautifully shot, beautifully cast, wonderfully acted. There's not much more I can say right now, but I urge you most strongly NOT to miss this movie. Eastwood's direction is impeccable; he quietly and unerringly leads us through the developing crisis of the American assault on the island, and the desperate Japanese defence. There are so many fine performances here, so many unforgettable moments. A measure of the quality of Eastwood's direction is that although the dialogue is almost entirely Japanese supported by English sub-titles, by the end of the film I had entirely ceased to be aware of that fact. This is a really wonderful film; please don't miss it.

12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink