Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Clint Eastwood's RED SUN, BLACK SAND

Story

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,056
Location
Home
Hey Bartender -
This seemed more fitting in the WWII area, rather than the Films, but please move it necessary.


Eastwood attacks Japan war myths

Two new movies based on a bloody 1945 battle are stirring up memories and forcing both sides to re-examine their history

Justin McCurry in Tokyo
Sunday May 28, 2006
The (UK) Observer

More than 60 years after it became one of the bloodiest battlefields of the Second World War, Iwo Jima's tragic history retains the power to overwhelm.

As his plane prepared to land on the isolated Japanese island last month, the actor Ken Watanabe found he could not hold back the tears. Accompanying Watanabe, who shot to stardom playing a feudal warlord opposite Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai, was another hard man of Hollywood whose time on Iwo Jima would lead to something of a professional epiphany.

When Clint Eastwood's two films about Iwo Jima, one of the darkest periods of the Pacific War, reach cinemas this year, audiences could be excused for forgetting the man behind them was once the trigger-happy Dirty Harry.

The 75-year-old director has promised Flags Of Our Fathers and Red Sun, Black Sand will attempt to show for the first time the suffering of both sides during 36 days of fighting in early 1945 that turned the island into a flattened wasteland.

On a recent trip to Japan, Eastwood said his time on Iwo Jima had forced him to re-evaluate the one-dimensional portrayal of America's former enemy in so many war films. 'There were good guys on one side. Life isn't like that,' he said.

He describes Red Sun, shot in Japanese and with a largely Japanese cast, as his attempt to understand the country's soldiers. 'I think those soldiers deserve a certain amount of respect,' he said. 'I feel terrible for both sides in that war and in all wars. A lot of innocent people get sacrificed. It's not about winning or losing, but mostly about the interrupted lives of young people. These men deserve to be seen, and heard from.'

Eastwood had to mount a diplomatic offensive before filming could begin. Tokyo's ultra-conservative governor, Shintaro Ishihara, who administers the island, gave Eastwood permission to film only after he agreed he would 'absolutely not' trample on Japanese sensitivities.

Japanese Iwo Jima veterans who met Eastwood say they are confident the films will honour their fallen comrades. 'I asked him to make a human drama, not a war film,' said 83-year-old Kiyoshi Endo, of the Japanese Iwo Jima Veterans' Association. 'I wanted him to show how the soldiers felt when they were fighting and, having read the script, I think he has done that. Who won or lost is not the point.'

The US assault on Iwo Jima began on the morning of 19 February 1945. When fighting ended 36 days later, an estimated 7,000 US troops and more than 21,000 Japanese soldiers were dead. Fewer than 1,000 Japanese survived.

Koji Kitahara, 84, who served aboard a vessel protecting supply ships, said he hoped the film would capture the utter desperation of the Japanese troops. 'I remember countless soldiers in smaller boats coming out to my ship and begging us for food and water,' he said. 'All I could give them were a few cigarettes and some sweet bean jelly I had on me. I was haunted by their appearance and certain that they would die soon.'

While Eastwood promises to avoid the jingoism of John Wayne's 1949 film Sands of Iwo Jima, the first of his two films, Flags Of Our Fathers, promises to be more palatable to American audiences. Based on the 2000 bestselling book of the same name, it focuses on the six US soldiers captured in AP photographer Joe Rosenthal's iconic and controversial photograph, as they raised the Stars and Stripes at the summit of Mt Suribachi.

But if Iwo Jima was one of the US marines' hardest-won victories, it came at a price: nearly a third of all marines killed in the war died on the island.

These days Iwo Jima, 700 miles south of Tokyo, is populated by only a few hundred Japanese soldiers, the families of the dead having successfully lobbied against building on what they regard as sacred ground. For veterans like Kitahara, Red Sun's release in December promises to evoke painful memories. For younger Japanese, it will be their first exposure to one of the bloodiest episodes in their country's modern history.

Just as it was for Watanabe. 'As we went through this film, we realised that until now we haven't really looked at Japan's past. We kind of looked away from it,' he said. 'But we have to look at it and accept the fact that this is what our fathers and grandfathers have done. Accepting the reality is the first step.'
 

Lincsong

I'll Lock Up
Messages
6,907
Location
Shining City on a Hill
Clint Eastwood is also a veteran of the Korean War.

I would like to read and hear more about these films before I place judgement. This wouldn't be the first film to look at both sides of the war. Tora Tora Tora portrayed the attack on Pearl Harbor from both sides and is an excellent film. What was that film Eastwood made back in the early '90s about the washed up cowboy? Unforgiven? I hated that film but he won some Oscars. His films lately have not really moved me to go to the theaters. I'll take a wait and see.
 

Clyde R.

One of the Regulars
Messages
164
Location
USA
The only thing that disturbs me is the movement of revisionism in history that says the war was a tragedy for all involved, and that nobody really won. I say, to the millions of Chinese forced to live under brutal Japanese occupation, and to many other allied peoples, the war against Japan wa certainly just and had plenty of winners. The Japanese soldiers were amazingly brave and dedicated to their country and Emperor. They were also amazingly brutal and committed despicable crimes against prisoners and helpless civillians on such a scale that to minimize or ignore that is really to play loose with the facts. Unlike Germany, Japan has never accepted responsibility for the war or the crimes committed in the name of His Imperial Majesty. Many in Japan have gotten so used to playing the victims of nuclear warfare that the fact that Japan started a war of expansion and conquest in the 1930s is ignored. Honest. Really...that's the way it has been handled in Japan for decades. The Germans know what they did...the Japanese don't seem to remember.

I'll probably watch both films. It just saddens me that political correctness has gone so far that we have to make two movies about Iwo Jima now...one for us and one for the "Japanese Experience." To trivialize what our men died for on that island by making some mock existential "like, there are no winners in war, man" statement is just a bit much. Maybe they should have made two Band of Brothers series...one for us and the other to tell it from the "German perspective."
 

shamus

Suspended
Messages
801
Location
LA, CA
Clyde R. said:
It just saddens me that political correctness has gone so far that we have to make two movies about Iwo Jima now...one for us and one for the "Japanese Experience."

Clint is not making both films because of "political correctness" Where did you hear that?

He's making both films because like everything in life, there are two sides to every story.
 

dr greg

One Too Many
whose history

It's true that Japan has virtually wiped the facts about its wartime crimes from the books, there anyway, it just isn't taught in schools at all from what I gather. So you can't blame the current generation really for knowing nothing at all about it. But the whole question of history is important, because it is now an elective subject in this country, right down to what you call grade school, leading to university graduates saying to me about a theatre project..."hey dude, like you're the old guy here, did anything interesting happen in the 40's?", and a journalist (with a degree), interviewing me about my book, asking "how do you know so much about WW2, were you alive then?"
History is now only taught to those who are interested..and they are very few...there's lots of proverbs about this, but you all know them.
 

Zemke Fan

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,690
Location
On Hiatus. Really. Or Not.
Clint Eastwood...

... rarely disappoints these days. I found Million Dollar Baby to be one helluva picture. Deserved the awards and accolades. And Clint, is amazing at 75. He gives the old-fart contingent (me) hope and inspiration that our creative peaks may still lie ahead. ;)
 

Feraud

Bartender
Messages
17,190
Location
Hardlucksville, NY
shamus said:
Clint is not making both films because of "political correctness" Where did you hear that?

He's making both films because like everything in life, there are two sides to every story.
Yes there are two sides to every story. Why should Eastwood juxtapose the Marine experience at Iwo Jima based on a recent book with a "companion film" based on...."wanting to tell everyone's story"? Maybe a Japanese filmmaker could better capture the Japanese soldier's experiences in WWII.
Clint is making Red Sun, Black Sand according to political correcness. According to this quote in the original article political correctness is alive and well.

Story said:
Eastwood had to mount a diplomatic offensive before filming could begin. Tokyo's ultra-conservative governor, Shintaro Ishihara, who administers the island, gave Eastwood permission to film only after he agreed he would 'absolutely not' trample on Japanese sensitivities.
If this "absolutely not" attitude does not define political correctness then I do not know what does! This attitude does not lend itself very well to creating "art" nor accurate History.

Of course we have not seen the films yet. I will reserve ultimate judgement until then. Reading the first article makes me wonder why an accomplished actor/director like him feels the need to kow-tow to a foreign government in his quest for "art"...
I do hope Eastwood hits another winner. I have not enjoyed his work since Unforgiven. His recent films have been lackluster, imho.
 

Zemke Fan

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,690
Location
On Hiatus. Really. Or Not.
I respectfully, disagree, Feraud.

Feraud said:
I do hope Eastwood hits another winner. I have not enjoyed his work since Unforgiven. His recent films have been lackluster, imho.
Although Eastwood has made some so-so movies since Unforgiven, his directing in Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby was top-notch (in both films) and I thought his acting in MDB was also worthy of the Best Actor nomination that he received...

BUT, back on topic here. I'm just going to have to wait and see the movies and read the scripts before I pass judgment on whether or not Eastwood has fallen prey to the Political Correctness that seems to water down so many things these days. I agree with what you and others have said before -- and I applaud you all for keeping things civil -- the Japanese government/people have failed to adequately acknowledge and atone for their WWII aggression. Yes, it's 61 years since the end of the conflict, and the world has changed a thousand times over... but the facts remain the facts.

ZF
 

Clyde R.

One of the Regulars
Messages
164
Location
USA
Shamus...what Feraud said.

Seriously, I personally respect Clint's work, especially as a director, and I can certainly understand wanting to tell both sides of a story. I guess what bothered me was Clint's statement about it not being about winning or losing, but rather young men's lives interrupted. I think it is a cliche to call WWII the last good war, or the "Good War" as Studs Terkel did(notice it was in quotes for his book) but WWII WAS such an obviously necessary evil in fighting nazism and fascism and Japanese militarism that to paint it with the same brush as all other 20th century wars and strip it of any ideals, meaning, etc. is dangerous in my opinion.

I have a good friend who fought the Japanese at Okinawa in 1945 as a US Marine. Perhaps only the GIs and Marines who fought the Japanese can truly appreciate how barbaric and frightening they could be in battle. Torture of wounded Americans was common- it is even mentioned in the book "Flags of Our Fathers." I find it hard to swallow that the Japanese were just young guys like our Marines, any more than the apologists for the German SS who maintain the mantra "we were just following orders." If Clint had to agree to respect Japanese sensitivities, I just hope the TRUTH is not lost in the interest of telling their side of the story.
 

Vladimir Berkov

One Too Many
Messages
1,291
Location
Austin, TX
Whatever the reason for its creation, if the film turns out to be good I look forward to watching it.

American films have done a disservice to WWII Japanese soldiers ever since Pearl Harbor. In recent years, films like Saving Private Ryan and the series Band of Brothers has done a lot to examine the war in Europe from a more authentic and less biased perspective. Perhaps it is time to do the same for the war in the Pacific? Perhaps Eastwood will do as good a job as Speilberg, who knows.
 

Lincsong

I'll Lock Up
Messages
6,907
Location
Shining City on a Hill
Vladimir Berkov said:
Whatever the reason for its creation, if the film turns out to be good I look forward to watching it.

American films have done a disservice to WWII Japanese soldiers ever since Pearl Harbor. In recent years, films like Saving Private Ryan and the series Band of Brothers has done a lot to examine the war in Europe from a more authentic and less biased perspective. Perhaps it is time to do the same for the war in the Pacific? Perhaps Eastwood will do as good a job as Speilberg, who knows.

I'll have to respectfully disagree here. There can be no disservice given to Japanese soldiers during WWII. They were barbaric, plain and simple. Saving Private Ryan was a '90s version of Best Years of Our Lives. They both we're against the standard wartime faire.

This discussion about seeing both sides of a war and a picture that attempts not to trample on the other sides "sensitivities" brings to mind the Lee Marvin film Hell in the Pacific. That along with Tora Tora Tora was also a film that looked at both sides perspectives. However, with the current climate of political correctness in Hollywood where nothing "racially stereotypical" can be said I don't think that these films are going to be accurate. However as I mentioned earlier, Eastwood was a veteran of the Korean Conflict. I'm not sure if he saw battle, but I do believe that he was over there. If he puts his own memories and thoughts of battle and wartime into the making and directing of these films then these may be interesting films.

It is also intersting to note that Clint Eastwood's wife is also one-fourth Japanese-American.
 

Maj.Nick Danger

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,469
Location
Behind the 8 ball,..
Sounds very interesting.

Two films instead of one long epic. Almost as if he decided in mid-film to make not one but two films about the subject, as the story should be told from the soldier's perspectives.
The average Japanese soldier was, after all, just as human as any other. In their minds, they were only doing their duty, which was to fight for their country and emperor, and to die fighting if need be. Their devotion and determination I think, is still barely comprehensible to us in the west. The holdouts that were isolated at war's end for instance. How could anyone refuse to surrender for 10, 20, even 30 years after?!
I think it would be fascinating to see, and perhaps better understand at least a little bit from their viewpoint.
 

Vladimir Berkov

One Too Many
Messages
1,291
Location
Austin, TX
Lincsong said:
I'll have to respectfully disagree here. There can be no disservice given to Japanese soldiers during WWII. They were barbaric, plain and simple. Saving Private Ryan was a '90s version of Best Years of Our Lives. They both we're against the standard wartime faire.

I think it is an overstatement to say that Japanese soldiers were "barbaric." The problem was that the Japanese operated based on a code of warfare vastly different than the Western code the Americans were used to.

For example, the bad treatment the Japanese gave to American prisoners of war made perfect sense in their eyes. Japanese saw surrender as an intensely shameful and dishonorable act. Americans saw it much differently of course.
 

Feraud

Bartender
Messages
17,190
Location
Hardlucksville, NY
Excuse me while I play devil's advocate here a little bit...;)

I think it is an overstatement to say that Japanese soldiers were "barbaric." The problem was that the Japanese operated based on a code of warfare vastly different than the Western code the Americans were used to.
I think in certain applications it can be argued as an overstatement to use the word "barbaric". This case could be an exception.
Some say hindsight is 20/20 vision. With this vision in mind, how else could we possibly describe the conditions of prisoners of war and the cruel treatment of the Japanese solider by their own officers in WWII? The words "vastly different" are not an excuse! Aren't we taught we are not so different? We all love our counties, family, work hard, etc.? Cultural differences do not excuse cruel and barbaric actions no matter what country we are talking about. It is o.k. to say it and move forward.

In this day and age of "understanding" and "compassion", have we become so milquetoast that we cannot even say something is wrong? Should every discussion between differing cultures conclude that because we are soooo different ( I do not always believe that btw) said nationality (except the U.S.) is excused from any type of judgement?

I hope this film will be a much needed history lesson to the Japanese and everyone else who were not taught their past. I do think certain countries need an understanding of their part in history. It seems so unfair to excuse people from understanding their past because they were "not taught it". That is a lame excuse in this Internet Age! Those who do not remember their History.. and all that. ;)

Let me add an important note. We are discussing events that took place 60 years ago. The coutry of Japan has changed so much in that time. My experiences with Japanese folk have been much like any other nationality. This is not a Jingoistic rant about enemies! :)
 

Lincsong

I'll Lock Up
Messages
6,907
Location
Shining City on a Hill
Barbaric is an understatement

If we are going to say we must look through the Japanese eyes to understand something that we say is barbaric but they see as normal then we can say that Joseph Mengele's experiments weren't barbaric, because in his eyes he thought they were necessary. We can't say that Francisco Franco's acts in Morocco in 1910 were barbaric because in his eyes that was the only way to deal with Moslems.[huh]

Of course we can say that Japan was barbaric during the period 1931-1945. We can even go further back to 1910 and their actions in Korea. Japan was a modern nation by 1931. It wasn't some Asian backwater. The Japanese were every bit as barbaric and interested in racial superiority as the Nazi's. When the Japanese invaded the Phillippines, Indonesia, Malaya the first people to be put into burlap sacks and bayonetted, (can't waste a good bullet on a killing) were not caucasians, but people of mixed race. The caucasians were rounded up and placed in wretched camps, were the women were routinely raped, and if/when they gave birth the baby was immediately killed in front of the mother. These are actual stories told to me by people who experienced the horrors of Japanese soldiers. To say that we are doing disservice to them by calling them barbaric, to me , sounds a little like a person with a guilty/superiority complex towards Asiatics.:eek:
 

Story

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,056
Location
Home
Vladimir Berkov said:
I think it is an overstatement to say that Japanese soldiers were "barbaric." The problem was that the Japanese operated based on a code of warfare vastly different than the Western code the Americans were used to.

Overstatement?

I would suggest you educate yourself further on the subject.


On December 14, 1945, Japanese soldiers forced 150 American prisoners of war at a compound on Palawan into an air-raid shelter. Then they doused them with gasoline and threw in a match.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/bataan/peopleevents/e_atrocities.html

``In Manchuria . . . Unit 731 . . . did experiments on human beings. . . . Some were infected with disease: cholera, typhoid, anthrax, plague, syphilis. Others were cut up alive to see what happened in successive stages of hemorrhagic fever. Others had their blood siphoned off and replaced by horse blood. Others were shot, burned with flamethrowers, blown up with shrapnel and left to develop gas gangrene, bombarded with lethal doses of X rays, whirled to death in giant centrifuges, subjected to high pressure in sealed chambers until their eyes popped from their sockets, electrocuted, dehydrated, frozen, boiled alive.''

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1995/08/06/RV35197.DTL

Hong Kong, Christmas Day 1941

Intoxicated with the spirit of victory, the Japanese troops showed no mercy to their victims. At Eucliff, fifty-three prisoners were shot, bayoneted, some beheaded and their bodies rolled down the cliff. On Christmas morning, around 200 drunken Japanese approached St. Stephen's College, now a sanctuary for ninety-six wounded soldiers. Barring the front door was the head medic, Dr. George Black. 'You can't come in here' he called out, 'this is a hospital'. With deliberate aim, one of the soldiers raised his rifle and shot the doctor through the head. As the drunken mob surged into the hospital ward, the body of Dr Black was repeatedly bayoneted as he lay at the door. In the ward, a massacre of unprecedented ferocity took place. The Japanese ripped the bandages off the wounded patients and plunged their bayonets into the amputated arms and legs before finishing them off with a bullet. In half an hour fifty-six wounded soldiers had been massacred while the nursing staff looked on helplessly. The female nurses were then led away, to a fate one can only imagine. The patients and staff who had survived the slaughter were then forced to carry the bodies and bloodied mattresses to the grounds outside where a huge funeral pyre was prepared and lit from the college desks and cupboards which had been smashed up for firewood.

http://members.iinet.net.au/~gduncan/massacres_pacific.html
 

Vladimir Berkov

One Too Many
Messages
1,291
Location
Austin, TX
There is a vast difference between the occurence of some attrocities and a general standard of behavior on the part of soldiers. For instance, you can look at the war in Western Europe or on the Eastern Front and pick out any number of atrocities. But that is not indicative of how the average regular soldier behavied or did during the war.
 

shamus

Suspended
Messages
801
Location
LA, CA
Feraud said:
Clint is making Red Sun, Black Sand according to political correcness. According to this quote in the original article political correctness is alive and well.

If this "absolutely not" attitude does not define political correctness then I do not know what does! This attitude does not lend itself very well to creating "art" nor accurate History.
.

Your whole point of "Political Correctness" stems from the article talking about Eastwood trying to not to offend sensitive area's to the Japanese People in order for him to film on Imo Jima. I believe the Red Sun was actually filmed where Flags was... Not on Imo Jima and Not on Japanese soil.

If this is your point, then wouldn't the whole reason he's making Red Sun is to be politically correct? But the article doesn't say that does it. He's not making a mulit million dollar film to be PC. He's making it to show, there are two sides to every story.

As to the whole barbaric thing, every nation who has fought a war is barbaric. And there are stories on all sides. Some are recent, some are in the past, but ALL have them.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,269
Messages
3,077,657
Members
54,221
Latest member
magyara
Top