Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

The life stories of the six men who raised the flag at the Battle of Iwo Jima, a turning point in World War II. Flags of Our Fathers is another example of how Clint Eastwood struggles as a Director, he puts all those famous people to portray these characters but he doesn't develop them at all, the pacing is horrible and the film as a whole is boring and despite his solid direction half of the film is people screaming to each other, talking to each, talking about the flag and America and some war sequences that drag without the dramatic depth that it requires. Overall one of Eastwood's most overrated and boring films 'American Sniper' was a whole lot better. (0/10)

The story of the flag-raisers of Iwo Jima is a fascinating one. From the perhaps not-so-common knowledge that the picture was actually of the second flag raised on the mountain, to the misrepresentation of those even in the picture, it is a narrative filled with drama and human interest. Director Clint Eastwood is the perfect figure to tackle such a project, and he does so with his usual aplomb (aside from perhaps a few narrative structure hiccups).For a basic plot summary, "Flags Of Our Fathers" tells the story of that famous picture taken of the American flag being hoisted atop Mt. Suribachi during the battle for Iwo Jima. The film many focuses on John "Doc" Bradley (Ryan Phillippe), Rene Gagnon (Jesse Bradford), & Ira Hayes (Adam Beach), three of the flag-raisers who survived the war and were recruited by the military to tell their story and be hailed as heroes to drum up sales for war bonds. Initially, the three men seem quite uncomfortable in this role, and as the story progresses (filled with flashbacks to the Iwo Jima battle itself) we learn why: Not only was the famous picture taken of the "second flag", but there is even an error regarding which men are in the picture. The military pushes the rhetoric over the truth in order to "sell, sell, sell" those war bonds, and the three men must deal with those repercussions.First and foremost, "Flags of our Fathers" is a great movie because it has a great story to tell. Most Americans can identify that iconic flag-raising photo, but many did not know the interesting story behind it. All movies succeed/fail primarily by the strength of the story, and it is in this category where "Flags" shines the brightest. One can see their own parents or grandparents (who may have participated in WW2) through the lens of these characters, and even extrapolate upon themes of military deception or obfuscation of the truth. Fortunately, Eastwood is always very good at keeping things grounded and practical instead of "rah rah" political, so this isn't a preachy film by any means. It lays out the story and lets the viewer make their own conclusions.Supporting that fine story is some great acting all the way around. The three leads are spot-on, while the auxiliary cast features such strong performers as: John Slattery, Barry Pepper, Paul Walker, Robert Patrick, & Neil McDonough. Simply put, acting isn't a problem in this film (!).About the only reason I can't give this picture the full five stars is because of Eastwood's rather odd choice of telling the narrative in such a disjointed fashion. Parts are flashbacks, parts are narrated by a researcher interviewing the aged veterans of Iwo Jima, and even the "real time" action can jump forward or back in time with little to no warning. To me, this led to a rather disjointed experience in trying to follow the overall narrative. It seemed like every time I would get comfortable in what time/place was being presented in the scene, it would jump to another just as quick. Luckily, Eastwood is a good enough director to still "make it work", but his other films usually take a more straightforward, direct approach.Overall, though, "Flags of our Fathers" is a great film filled with wartime action, human interest, and a story that will last down through the generations. It may lack the utter gravitas of the earlier "Saving Private Ryan", but it tells an equally (if not even more) compelling story. The telling of that story may be a bit fractured, but the sum of the parts is quite a moving, emotional experience.

Clint Eastwoods Flags of Our Fathers is a movie that has been all but forgotten, it failed at the box office and is considered mediocre when compared to its companion piece, Letters From Iwo Jima, a film that I've yet to see but as of right now I think this film is absolutely fantastic. This is such an interesting film to watch to see how the public began to perceive the war and the men fighting in it through one photo is just fascinating and gave this film some extra substance. The actual battle of Iwo Jima is incredible such a well done invasion a slow burn that we see from every perspective. I really liked the way that this film cut back to the battle in between scenes of the soldiers being shipped around the country it added to these scenes because it provided context to what they went through on the battlefield and how it continues to effect them. The film has a fantastic way of viewing it soldiers you know just how vulnerable these men are and respect them every step of the way. Your also outraged at how they are treated in certain scenes as if they are forbidden to look like anything else other than heroes meant to smile and wave for the cameras and adds to their plight. The actual raising of the flag scene doesn't come until about half way through the movie but it's just the right time to do it it's been built up perfectly the direction of the scene and the way the score swells up comes together just right. There are some truly intense sequences in this movie that put you in the situation of the soldiers and again adds to the plot line of the soldiers being paraded around the country because like them you know this isn't the way there went to be treated or seen. Despite the fact that you don't agree with the campaign you understand perfectly why they do it, to get bonds in order to win the war and gives you perspective for all characters both solider and civilian. Perhaps my only real flaws with this film are the central characters they give good performances but you can't really tell them apart from any other soldiers and they could have been developed much better. I love Flags of Our Fathers and found it to be extremely undervalued it's got a great way at portraying war both on the battlefield and at home its directed beautifully and has a really great message behind it. 90%/A

The first of director Clint Eastwood's two films detailing the battle for Iwo Jima from the perspective of both armies, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS is a watchable but hardly life-changing movie. The problem is that it follows too closely the pattern of other recent war epics like WE WERE SOLDIERS and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN; the battle scenes are filmed in the same washed-out ways with earth exploding over the camera and soldiers getting shot all over the place. The problem is that it's all been done before, and better, so the film loses some of its impact that would have resulted from alternative ways of shooting or different ways of showing the battle. Saying that, the film is far more interesting when it details the effects of the battle on three survivors who end up touring the USA in a bid to drum up some fund-raising for the war effort. I've never liked Ryan Phillippe very much but the other actors are very good, especially Adam Beach who steals the show as the Native American conscript who ends up becoming a drunk, unable to deal with what he's been through in the name of war.The film is well directed, with a good script and music and excellent photography. The story is wide-ranging and the only thing that seems a little hokey is the quality of the CGI effects which is questionable in places. It tells an interesting story, but the familiarity of that story works against it and, aside from Beach's character, Eastwood fails to drum up any sympathy for his protagonists. They're pretty much interchangeable, they could be anybody out there fighting, and even though the likes of Barry Pepper, Jamie Bell, Paul Walker, Robert Patrick, and Neal McDonough all put in more than adequate turns, there's definitely something missing here. An interesting piece, a serious one with a story that should be told, but not one I plan to come back to.