Letters From Iwo Jima Finally Gets A Bad Review

Comments

even though its a bad review, the metacritic percentage is 50% and yet its fresh at rotten tomatoes, she can't make out her mind on it & full of bias against the film. that writer has a history of hating anything that Eastwood comes up with.

from all the review i read (A LOT of it) i'v come to a conclusion that Letters is a good bordering to great movie, excellent yet flawed & our Nino is teriffic in it but not enough to boost him for an Oscar.

Oh well actually I don't care if she'll hate this movie or not as long as she's not against Nino! lol
The problem is how people are already biased against the film without even watching it. In this review, she talks abt the other wars that Japan is involved in. I think many forget that the film is only abt Iwojima. It's not abt Nanking, not abt anywhere else... so I wonder why they think Eastwood have to display the atrocities that happens there to Iwojima (where there are only soldiers). It is easy to call the Japanese troops and even the people as "evil" and "inhuman beasts" for them... it's apparently wrong to think that they are also humans. The fact that they have to mention that showing that the soldiers love their family and stuff is simply Clint's effort to "humanise" the Japanese soldiers just made me laugh. I think even the worst criminals have someone or something they love and it is not for us to judge whether he has the right to do so. Do they mean that the Japanese soldiers are supposed to hate on their family and kill them all?
Also... many people who get offended ... because the americans are bad guys in this film? because it "doesn't go according to history"? I think these people are sometimes delusional. At the end of the day, Iwojima is simply a movie. If they want History, they should read books or watch documentaries. The whole of Iwojima squeezed into a 2hr+ film is just not enough. Reading the IMDB sometimes juz killed my braincells.
End of rant. =P

yup, she's not against Nino....from what I recall from the bad reviews generally don't comment on the performance. I think there's one that's not impressed with Ken and another saying Ken is the only impressive one.. critique, its very subjective ne~

rin! *glomp*

imdb does that. I tend to just skip along the trolls, yet some of the posters do have a point (esp. coming level headed ones). Plus we get to learn history from totally unqualified proffessors **hehehe**

Post a comment

Already a Vox member? Sign in