PDA

View Full Version : New WWII Pacific War Movie Trailer! Spielberg



Plunkertx
09-08-2006, 03:53 PM
You can see it here:

http://flagsofourfathers.net/flags-of-our-fathers-trailer

There's a nice POV of Corsairs in action!

NekoReaperman
09-08-2006, 04:26 PM
was it just me, or did those corsairs not have gunsites? :-)

Syama
09-08-2006, 04:26 PM
Spielberg? Isn't it Clint Eastwood?

DuxCorvan
09-08-2006, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by NekoReaperman:
was it just me, or did those corsairs not have gunsites? :-)

Late Corsairs didn't have gunsight glass: gunsight crosshair was directly reflected on armoured windscreen. If you trusted in tracers, you could switch sight off.

WOODY01
09-08-2006, 06:14 PM
Spielberg? Isn't it Clint Eastwood?
Both by the looks of it, should be a keeper http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Waldo.Pepper
09-08-2006, 06:27 PM
I wonder about the timing of the movie.

Still, impressive!

I liked the Amtracs, they were very well done.

LStarosta
09-08-2006, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by NekoReaperman:
was it just me, or did those corsairs not have gunsites? :-)

Naval aviators were trained to shoot with their hearts, not their eyes.

-HH- Beebop
09-08-2006, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by Syama:
Spielberg? Isn't it Clint Eastwood?

Spielberg produced, Eastwood directed IIRC.

I'm a bit confused here. The trailer intimates that the flag raisers went home to raise war bonds. I thought most of them died in battle within a few days of the flag raising. If I that is the plot of the film, and I'm right about their deaths, why oh why does Hollywood keep trying to rewrite history? The real story would be just as compelling. Real history usually is.

LStarosta
09-08-2006, 06:48 PM
Careful with your pride now, boys.


Someone's gonna come here and tell us that the U.S. didn't win the Pacific either.

berg417448
09-08-2006, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by -HH- Beebop:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Syama:
Spielberg? Isn't it Clint Eastwood?

Spielberg produced, Eastwood directed IIRC.

I'm a bit confused here. The trailer intimates that the flag raisers went home to raise war bonds. I thought most of them died in battle within a few days of the flag raising. If I that is the plot of the film, and I'm right about their deaths, why oh why does Hollywood keep trying to rewrite history? The real story would be just as compelling. Real history usually is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Three of them survived and were sent home to the war bond tour.


http://phoenix.about.com/cs/famous/a/irahayes01.htm

-HH- Beebop
09-08-2006, 06:53 PM
berg;

Thanks for the clarification. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Flying_Nutcase
09-08-2006, 07:42 PM
From the website:

-----
But the battle itself‚‚ā¨¬¶..was probably the greatest battle ever fought in modern history.
-----

I wish they'd stop with the she-ite. What's that sentence meant to mean anyway? The most important? the bloddiest? The...?

It was certainly an important battle and an extremely bloody one, but "the greatest battle ever fought in modern history"??

leitmotiv
09-08-2006, 07:57 PM
Spieltwit had nothing to do with the films, thank God. Both are directed by Clint. FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS is about the fates of the guys who raised the flag on Mount Suribachi on Iwo Jima. The companion film, LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA, is about the Japanese side of the battle. Both ought to be masterpieces.

p1ngu666
09-08-2006, 08:30 PM
trailer is cool. the letters from iwo jima might be really interesting http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif, different perspective.

tagTaken2
09-08-2006, 09:10 PM
Woah, that's a lot of boats.

Looks good, and two for the price of one.

Though, it's always tough to tell anything from a trailer... they cut it to fit the audience that will see it. You're at a chick flick, you can see a very different preview to an action film.

Enforcer572005
09-08-2006, 09:31 PM
Yeah, three were KIA, and one (the navy corpsman I think) was wounded. The indian fellow is Ira Hayes, who was well played by Tony Curtiss in a movie in the late 50s. He was so torn up by what he endured, including the death of his friend who helped raise the flag, that he just couldnt cope.

He became a serious alcoholic and froze to death on night outside some yrs after the war. I dunno what happened to the others.

It would be more accurate and less exagerated if they termed it the bloodiest battle in USMC history. Okinawa was longer and much bigger, but Iwo had such heavy losses in such a short period of time.

The P-51s and P-47Ns had to have a base closer to Japan though, and Iwo was the only option, not to mention saving shot up B-29s.

Rosenthall and the movie photographer almost missed it by getting in each others way. It was kinda sudden.

MrBlueSky1960
09-09-2006, 02:01 AM
Read this about the man who started the whole thing... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15323361.htm

SeaFireLIV
09-09-2006, 03:20 AM
Originally posted by Flying_Nutcase:
From the website:

-----
But the battle itself‚‚ā¨¬¶..was probably the greatest battle ever fought in modern history.
-----

I wish they'd stop with the she-ite. What's that sentence meant to mean anyway? The most important? the bloddiest? The...?

It was certainly an important battle and an extremely bloody one, but "the greatest battle ever fought in modern history"??

I think it`s just crafty hype. He`s cleverly used `probably` which means he`s given himself a way out. Not belittling the battle, but there were worse more important and bloodier battles in WWII.

leitmotiv
09-09-2006, 03:37 AM
Once the studio advertising people take over---forget it. Read the serious articles about these films, not the hype, and it is easy to see Eastwood went as far as he could go to make them great films about a brutal battle. He is not a simple creature like Spielblatt.

RCAF_Irish_403
09-09-2006, 05:58 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Once the studio advertising people take over---forget it. Read the serious articles about these films, not the hype, and it is easy to see Eastwood went as far as he could go to make them great films about a brutal battle. He is not a simple creature like Spielblatt.

+1

this film looks like a winner

Flying_Nutcase
09-09-2006, 08:25 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I think it`s just crafty hype. He`s cleverly used `probably` which means he`s given himself a way out. Not belittling the battle, but there were worse more important and bloodier battles in WWII.

Perhaps they could have stated a fact, such as "one of the" but as mentioned, once the advertising folk get their teeth in... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Crash_Moses
09-09-2006, 09:09 AM
The film is based on the book FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS by James Bradley. Bradley is the son of one of the flag raisers, John Henry Bradley. If it follows the book (and it should) it will be very accurate.

Bradley wrote it because, despite it being one of the most famous photographs to come out of WWII, nobody really knew much about the men in it. The book details the events leading up to the taking of the photo and follows the lives of the men in it afterwards. I hope the movie does the same.

Bradley also wrote FLYBOYS which chronicled the bombing campaign of Chi-chi Jima by George Bush and his Navy squadron of Avengers.

S! and Semper Fi

BillyTheKid_22
09-09-2006, 09:18 AM
Howdy!!!http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gifLOL!!!