Dir: Richard Fleisher. Kinji Fukasaku. Toshio Masuda
Cast: Martin Balsam. Jason Robards. Multiple Stars.
(All clickable links are in red)
When 9/11 happened, many, including US President George Bush Junior, said that it was Pearl Harbor of the 21st century. The comparison may only have been for the devastating surprise attack on December 7, 1941. However, emerging facts also compared the situation of being caught napping only due to the various strands of information not being collated together. IN 1941, there was no CIA, and there was not even a centralised intelligence organisation. In 2001, multiple intelligence agencies got some strands of information about” something big”. Still, they could not get the correct picture and prevent the attack.
Remember, Pearl Harbor was not only a rallying cry but also a war cry, as Americans believed that their cause was righteous. The Pearl Harbor attack came about as a counter to the American oil embargo on Japan due to the Japanese invasion and depredations in China in 1937. Some even argue that the actual start of World War 2 should be taken as 1937.
Making a film on such a complex topic, especially what was technically a “defeat”, wasn’t something the studios were keen on. The sheer scale of the events leading up to the attack was something no one in his right mind would have wanted to attempt. Yet agreement was reached with none other than Akira Kurosawa, the Japanese Master. He shot some scenes, and then the whole thing went downhill as his work was prolonged. He was replaced with two Japanese directors who stuck to the script and did a competent job.
The film is simple. Well – it’s not that simple, but it is told in a straight linear fashion. The diplomatic negotiations. The military events on both the American and Japanese sides. The key characters and their thought processes. The multiple mistakes coming out of a “peacetime thought process’. The American military was ineffectively equipped and trained. At the same time, the Japanese personnel were experienced combat-proven and constantly modified their plans. The actual plan was to sail under complete radio silence from Tokyo Bay to the waters off the coast of Hawaii. The breaking of the Japanese diplomatic code. The actual attack on the Harbor. Its aftermath.
The Naval officers who were supposed to protect Pearl Harbor , were all caught completely off guard.
All these are told in a straightforward, almost dry fashion. Since there are no major “stars”, the focus is on the events that happened and not the “stars”, thus leading to exceptional historical accuracy. The “making of” extra in the DVD makes it clear that the events leading up to the making of the film would have also made a good drama due to its immensely complex nature.
The title of the film translates as Tiger Tiger Tiger. A code word meaning that the attack had achieved total tactical surprise.
Admiral Yamamoto, the plan’s architect, was asked about his chances of success. He predicted – precisely as it turned out – “I will run wild for six months. After that, anybody’s guess”. The Japanese “Empire” reached its maximum by June 1942. After that, the long, hard American slog to come closer and closer to the Japanese Homelands began. At a massive cost in men and material. Yamamoto also correctly predicted, “We have awakened a sleeping giant”; he was familiar with American Industrial might as he had lived in the US.
Back to the film. The film hardly has any “made up” “masala” incidents. Almost all the incidents are accurate, including the most famous one of a female instructor’s plane being overtaken by the Japanese first strike force. All the planes were neatly lined up at the airfields to “avoid sabotage” but presented beautiful targets for the Japanese attackers.
The special effects are all old-fashioned. Models, matte photography and so on.
The film is for free viewing on YouTube
Tail Piece: DO NOT watch the 2001 movie Pearl Harbor. It is just an overblown formulaic “Love Triangle” in which the December 7 attacks happen for 20 – 30 minutes. The VFX are spectacular, but that’s about it! It reminded me of the 1964 Hindi movie Sangam, where one person in the triangle dies, leaving the other guy and the woman to carry on. But the “dead” man comes back from the dead! That’s the plot of Sangam, and it is the same plot in Pearl Harbor!
Real History – 5 out of 5
Script – 5 out of 5
Equipment and Kit – 5 out of 5
Direction – 5 out of 5
Photography – 5 out of 5
Total – 5 out of 5
I love this movie! One of the finest made in the absence of digital technology that is as advanced as today.
Ashok
Well said. The spectacular “model-based” effects are but a means to an end – telling the story as it is. Today’s digital effects tend to spoil the story telling and have become an end in itself rather than a means to an end.
KVR