Isiemme liput

Clint Eastwood’s overly sensitive Flags of Our Fathers fails exactly where one would expect – in the softness and naïveté of the combat scenes, which – in order to be a strong counterweight to the monologue with the line “Some of the things I saw done, things I did, they weren’t things to be proud of” – were meant to inspire dread and horror, but they don’t. And then there is the film’s second storyline involving the exposition of a trio of soldiers evolving into the roles of questionable heroes. This storyline – though in pathetic disgrace – would be viable, but its connection to the war storyline doesn’t work – the slow and simplified explanation of an idea that is clear after the first half-hour becomes increasingly unbearable and the ultra-sentimental last twenty minutes are merely a test of just how much you can take. There is a no more accurate synonym for Flags of Our Fathers than *shit*. It’s not a weak film, but rather a dysfunctional and poorly made film. (13.03.2007)

Clint knows how to tell great stories, but this one had too much sentiment and pathos in the final half hour even for my taste. At the same time, I love Eastwood's old-school cinematic language, which unfortunately isn't much favoured in today's hectic times. Still, what I appreciate about the film is that in Eastwood's rendition war hurts, it damn well hurts, not like in the idealized rendition in films with John Wayne, and it was nice to learn the fate of the soldiers from the legendary Iwo Jima photograph, which helped bring the war with Japan to a victorious end at a time when the American government was running out of money and people were losing faith in the meaning of the whole war campaign. Nevertheless, Letters from Iwo Jima was on the whole much better, artistically and more valuable in terms of story. (13.05.2008)

It's as if Clint Eastwood and Paul Haggis worked with an unfinished version of the script. Sometimes there's something missing, sometimes there's too much of something (god, the ending!!!) and mostly it's pretty boring. Fortunately, the landing and the ensuing battle almost match the opening of Saving Private Ryan, but it can't fix the overall impression. A mediocre film and a missed chance for more Oscars. (26.01.2007)

Clint Eastwood is strongly off-topic in the war theme, instead of the dynamic friendship of young boys, he presents us with a tearful story about one significant photo and the completely uninteresting wrangling around it. The relatively significant departure from the war theme itself – that is, the fights, or America good, Germany/Japan bad – can be considered an interesting idea. The financial flows and the distortion of the national economy during wartime are lightly outlined, so the viewer is not only forced to count body. There is action, of course, but it lacks the rawness of Saving Private Ryan. There are novel views from the cockpits of fighter planes that catch attention, a slightly more detailed look at the weapons or tactics of the enemy, and magnificent scenes of the island being bombarded by battleships. The landing scenes are not as impressive, and it’s clear Eastwood is an old man, it’s missing speed. Overall, it is rather an average attempt to look at a military conflict from a slightly different perspective. The idea is good, but somewhat halfway through completion. (11.01.2008)

It's definitely not garbage. Was someone expecting a war-psychological film like Letters from Iwo Jima? I wasn't. If Clint had made Flags the same way he made Letters, twice as many smart-asses would have criticized him for making two of the same movies, just with different people. Flags of Our Fathers has charm in following the fate of "the soldiers from the photo", action and carnage comes second (maybe third), and I don't blame anyone for it. But the truth is that unless you are in the mood for a very "talky" war movie, don't watch Flags. P.S. I just have to put this link here :-) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NdNV9JX-Xi8 (27.06.2009)

I know, I'm not stating any news here, but I just haven't seen all the movies right when they were released. I like Clint Eastwood. Recently, I watched his "Gran Torino" and my jaw dropped. When I was watching "Flags of Our Fathers," my jaw dropped again. This time because of how much the battle scenes resemble those in Steven Spielberg's film "Saving Private Ryan." I wanted to tear apart Eastwood's film, but then I realized I'm not even halfway through yet. You shouldn't give up on Clint too early, because what he lacks in originality in the war scenes, he truly makes up for with the human aspect of the story. And that's the most important thing about "Flags of Our Fathers." Humanity, or maybe inhumanity, the moments when a person becomes a hero without deserving it, and when they face a fall that they might not deserve either. An excellent human story that touched me. If you have Clint in your mind as a patriot, I think here he will show you that he is quite a realist. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/03/diar-milovnika-filmu-c-0001-cista-duse.html (13.02.2013)